Julia Gillard and the Innovation Minister, Kim Carr, are performing their version of the dance of the seven veils for Australia's universities, vocation trainers and students. The slow unveiling of the Government' principles for higher education reform in three speeches over seven days has captivated expectant audiences, and garnered extensive and largely positive media coverage in the midst of so much bad economic news.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The Education Minister kicked off her response to the Bradley review into higher education mid-last week when she addressed the need for structural reform of the sector at the Universities Australia conference in Canberra. The next day, she discussed the importance of improving vocational education and training as Carr continued to ruminate over the implications of the Cutler report on innovation and Professor Denise Bradley's recommendations on research.
Today the issue of educational equity will get a serious working over by Gillard at an education conference in Sydney. But one "veil" - the one hiding just how much money will be available for higher education reform - is still firmly in place and looks likely to remain so until budget night in May.
The sector had been hoping to pin down the Government on some aspects of its response to the Bradley Review over the past week, and to gain some sense of where the Government is headed. Instead it has been presented with a series of broad statements which have been heavy on the feel-good factor yet contain little detail.
The review, released in December, called for fairer access for poorer, rural and regional students to higher education. Professor Bradley also recommended a $7 billion expansion of higher education and research, boosting the proportion of 25- to 34-year-olds with at least a bachelor's degree from 29 per cent to 40 per cent by 2020, and a new funding mechanism based on student vouchers or "learning entitlements".
A spokeswoman for Gillard says the minister had made a conscious decision to outline the Government's response to the Bradley review in a series of speeches - rather than in one announcement - to the sector.
Early last month Gillard flagged that while she would respond to the review this month, any funding announcements would be considered and revealed as part of the budget in May.
But the sector had hoped to gain at least some sense of how much money was likely to be made available.
In Sydney on Thursday, Gillard told education and industry chiefs at the Big Skills conference of her happiness in being able to switch between educational sectors - tackling issues and talking at a universities conference one day and a vocational education and training conference the next.
"[These are] two great opportunities with the leaders of two great systems of education, equal in value, driven by separate missions, but with a common purpose of preparing Australia for a new age of human capital development," she says.
Professor Glenn Withers, the chief executive of Universities Australia, says while he shared the enthusiasm in the rooms where Gillard spoke last week that education reform was finally being discussed, he remained fearful of what would finally be achieved when no one was talking money.
Withers knows the inner workings of government. He headed three government inquiries in the Hawke-Keating years, worked as a deputy secretary in the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet and has been an adviser to state governments, the Australian Business Council and the OECD.
He says a grand battle is taking place in Canberra over how much money should be given to universities. He says the reasons why the Government is holding back on any funding announcement is easy to determine - the incredible load of economic issues besetting the Rudd Government.
"The Government always said the higher education response depended on the budget context. The only problem is they are saying it a lot more now," Withers laughs. "The environment is changing dramatically. I think we are lucky that we have champions for transformations in [the Prime Minister] Rudd, [Treasurer Wayne] Swan, Carr and especially Gillard."
Withers says he wants to believe that Gillard is calmly and deliberately staking out the land she wants the Government to occupy. This way an unstoppable momentum of expectation is built up for real change in the sector which cannot be denied by Treasury and Finance hardheads.
Another possible reason the figures are being held back, Withers says, is because the financial state of the budget is changing so rapidly that the details are still being worked out.
He says the sector should remain fearful and push hard for a good funding result, despite the goodwill of the past seven days.
"In May we will be disappointed if the money is dribbled out and deferred," he says. "We have had 12 years or more of neglect. The Government should know universities are the solution not the problem."
The Opposition's education spokesman, Christopher Pyne, has criticised the delay, highlighting what he calls a weakness in the Government's selling mission. He says the Coalition supports the direction of the Bradley review in principle, but the response from the Rudd Government lacks any substance or detailed costings.
"Ms Gillard spent most of 2007 criticising the previous government and promising massive reforms to the higher education sector," Pyne said.
"Now, after commissioning the Bradley review a year ago, Ms Gillard has said budgetary constraints will affect the immediacy of our response.
"The village idiot could tell you that there are budgetary constraints - Labor has spent $22 billion in cash handouts over four months.
"Ms Gillard's Government has plunged the budget into deficit and the country into debt, while the cupboard is bare for universities.
"If Julia Gillard doesn't have the time to work out how she will pay for her own review's recommendations, she must give up one of her portfolios. Australian students, parents, academics and businesses deserve better than a part-time Education Minister."
The University of Wollongong vice-chancellor, Professor Gerard Sutton, unlike many of his peers, was circumspect in public praise after Gillard's unveiling of structural reform last week. A veteran of the higher education scene, he knows the elusive higher education bucket of money remains out of sight.
"Minister Julia Gillard has laid out a clear and defined structure in which universities will have to operate into the future," he said.
"I am grateful that she has been so clear and defined, as best as she can. It will be an unfolding story until the May budget when the full realisation of the structure becomes known." GIVE AND TAKE Professor Bradley wanted:
1 Forty per cent of 25- to-34-year-olds to have a bachelor degree by 2020.
2 That providers should be free to enrol as many eligible students as they wish in eligible higher education courses and receive corresponding government subsidies.
3 The Federal Government to negotiate with the states and territories to expand the national regulatory and quality assurance agency to cover the entire tertiary sector (including vocational education and training and higher education); the Federal Government assume full responsibility for the regulation of tertiary education and training by 2010.
4 Bradley says the separate vocational education and training sector and university sector needed major reform. She urged a more holistic approach to planning and provision. A continuum of tertiary skills provision primarily funded by a single level of government and nationally regulated rather than two sectors configured as at present.
5 The Australian Government to negotiate with the states and territories to introduce a tertiary entitlement funding model across higher education and vocational education.The Government's response:
1 The Rudd Government pushed this out to 2025, saying the need for an extra 300,000 students is urgent because Australia has slipped behind other OECD countries.
2 The Government wants to deregulate student places from 2012. Universities will be able to decide how many students they admit to each course, with funding following the student rather than the university. The Government will give extra loading to certain courses.
3 A federal and state ministerial council will be formed to move towards national regulation, but no date set.
4 The Government flagged a new body, the Australian Qualifications Framework Council, would build links between university and vocational training sectors. It would allow people to move seamlessly between universities and vocational trainers for cradle-to-grave education. The Government, however, said that states would continue to own and fund TAFEs.
5 The Government will also consider extending demand-driven funding to TAFEs, similar to the scheme it will introduce for universities, and has asked Skills Australia to investigate.So far, so good: what the universities think
UNIVERSITY OF NEW ENGLAND
Vice-chancellor, Alan Pettigrew:
The Government's five-year extension of the time frame for reaching its 40 per cent graduate target is a logical recognition of the work required to reach that OECD-competitive target. The minister has announced a move towards student entitlement and has provided clarity as to how it should work.
AUSTRALIAN CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY
Vice-chancellor, Professor Greg Craven:
Ms Gillard's response is a vindication of Bradley and a repudiation of institutional entitlement in favour of broadly based sectoral quality.
CHARLES STURT UNIVERSITY
Vice-chancellor, Professor Ian Goulter:
Higher education is no longer at a crossroads, but at a turning point in regards to the decision to embrace a student demand-driven higher education system. Charles Sturt University has always been driven by student demand in meeting the needs and aspirations of its inland and regional communities. It has consistently been over-enrolled in order to meet inland and regional demand for its on-campus courses, as well as national demand for its extensive range of distance and digital courses. The Government should avoid subsidising regional universities.
UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY SYDNEY
Vice-chancellor, Professor Ross Milbourne:
The key announcements around participation rates, funding and the regulatory environment delivers the first plank for the much-needed structural reform. We have long argued that a demand-driven system must be underpinned by appropriate quality assurances. Such a move is necessary in an environment where we must broaden the base of university qualifications to meet the skills needs of the future.
UNIVERSITY OF NEWCASTLE
Vice-chancellor, Professor Nicholas Saunders:
We welcome several of the principles outlined by the minister. There are resource implications which haven't been addressed. I think the Government has allowed itself to be a little more closely involved than advocated by Bradley. But by and large we are very happy.
UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY
Vice-chancellor, Dr Michael Spence:
We welcome the student-centred focus. Longer time frames for achieving certain goals are more realistic. It will allow universities to plan more.
UNIVERSITY OF NSW
Vice-chancellor, Professor Fred Hilmer:
Judgments will have to be reserved until the sector can see what the Government can provide. The longer time frames and staged introductions are something we have argued for.
MACQUARIE UNIVERSITY
Vice-chancellor, Professor Steven Schwartz:
The focus firmly on student demand and choice is a big step in the right direction ? but without full knowledge of the funding mechanisms it is hard to see how federal money or student enrolments will boost competition. The minister's stated ambition to see 40 per cent of young adult Australians gaining a bachelor's qualification by 2025 is welcomed - social mobility is the hallmark of a just society. Helping talented students to reach their potential is the fairest and most acceptable way to encourage such mobility.
SOUTHERN CROSS UNIVERSITY
Vice-chancellor, Professor Paul Clark:
Very positive about all the principles outlined. Those who want to grow, will grow.
UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN SYDNEY
Vice-chancellor, Professor Janice Reid:
No comment.