Further moves to privatise education in Australia
By Will Marshall
17 June 1998
The West Report into university financing and policy, released
in April, proposes to accelerate the privatisation of Australian
tertiary education.
In 1996, soon after it came to office, the Howard Liberal government
slashed more than $600 million, or the equivalent of 30,000 student
places, from the tertiary education budget - the largest cuts
in history. As well, universities were permitted to allocate up
to 25 per cent of their places to students paying full upfront
fees. The funding cuts resulted in thousands of academics' jobs
being shed, courses closed, and students being forced to take
out much larger loans to finance their own education under the
Higher Education Contribution Scheme (HECS).
The chairman of the Federal Government-appointed inquiry, Roderick
West, claimed its central aim was to let student choice determine
the shape of higher education.
But in reality its purpose is to legitimise the charging of
up front fees and the implementation of a voucher system. Far
from offering more "choice", the type of education a
student obtains will depend entirely upon the amount he or she
can afford to pay.
Moreover, the Report advocates the closer integration of Australian
universities into the corporate world. It proposes that curricula
be more directly shaped by the immediate needs of industry, and
that the universities themselves be run along corporate lines.
Students will be treated as "customers", with the universities
providing a "service".
The composition of the West committee is instructive. Its members
include Industry Commissioner, Gary Banks; Professor Lee Kwong
Dow, who recently collaborated with the Victorian Liberal government
to introduce a McDonald's course into the final two years of high
school, Clem Doherty, a retired management consultant and Dr Doreen
Clark, a businesswoman who headed the Royal Australian Chemical
Institute.
The West committee commissioned a Tokyo-based investment bank,
Global Alliance, to carry out an industry analysis to be applied
to the running of universities. The bank assessed production costs,
balance ledgers, productivity incentives and corporate planning.
It gave recommendations for cost reductions, marketing strategies
and stated that universities needed to "specialise".
According to the West Report, this means a far greater differentiation
in the options provided by universities, including a "low
cost delivery option."
In the current higher education funding framework, students
attending private universities finance the full cost of their
course. The public universities are government funded. One of
the West Report's major recommendations is to completely change
this state of affairs. It proposes that students are allocated
a voucher, known as a "lifelong learning entitlement",
to be used at whatever tertiary institution they attend - public
or private. Public universities will no longer be provided with
automatic funding, and thus will be forced into a never-ending
chase for dollars in the form of full fee-paying students and
corporate sponsorship.
To obtain their share of declining funds, universities will
have to compete with their rivals to attract students. Obviously,
the larger institutions will have the advantage - with access
to more cash, able to borrow on their assets. Sydney University,
for example, has $2.6 billion in assets, compared with the meagre
$86 million owned by Ballarat University, in regional Victoria.
Smaller, regional universities will become increasingly cash-strapped,
forced to rely on business sponsorship to supplement their already
inadequate resources. The result will be an ever-decreasing number
of courses - with those not directly related to industry the first
to be sacrificed.
Students will become simply the means to another educational
dollar. Already, one of the smaller universities (the Victoria
University of Technology), has pointed out that under the new
arrangements, it would be commercially unviable. It could only
survive by becoming a "niche provider" of a small number
of courses.
The development of critical thought and a broad intellectual
culture will become more and more of a liability from the standpoint
of attracting corporate sponsorship.
Vouchers originated with the free-market economist, Milton
Friedman, who, in 1954, proposed taxpayer-supported vouchers for
US high schools. His conception, which is similar to that advocated
in the West Report, was that the government would provide a basic
education grant, in the form of a voucher for each student.
For students, the voucher will purchase a minimal education.
Those parents unable to supplement it with their own finances,
will see their children condemned to a low grade, low quality
and under staffed institution.
The Federal Education Minister Dr David Kemp has welcomed the
West Report, claiming, however, that he has no intention of introducing
a voucher system. This is belied by the fact that he proposed
a voucher system in 1993, and has already installed a quasi voucher
system in public high schools, where the quality of education
provided by an unsupplemented voucher is becoming particularly
visible.
In January 1997, the Federal government enacted the States
Grants Act, which funds the expansion of private education by
cutting funding to public schools. Every time a student leaves
the public system, the government cuts $1700 from public school
funds. Since the costs of educating any student are made up of
fixed items such as equipment, books, staff, buildings, etc, when
a student leaves, those costs still remain. The predictable result
has been the establishment of 38 new private schools, and a decline
in the number of public schools by 59, in just one year.
Funding cuts to public schools have reached epidemic proportions.
A recent report by the auditor-general in the state of Victoria,
where funding cuts have hit hardest, called on the state government
to change its funding priorities to simply ensure that "minimum
health and safety standards are maintained". Eighty per cent
of the schools surveyed had been forced to supplement the government
funds they received with fund-raising activities to attend to
urgent maintenance.
Schools are now being publicly ranked, leading to a vicious
cycle for schools in poorer working class areas of low rankings,
declining enrolments, further funding cuts and eventual closure.
The West Report recommends a similar process for tertiary institutions.
In order to receive government funds, each university will be
required to provide information so that students can make "informed
choices among competing institutions and courses." Inevitably,
rankings will result.
While at present there are only four private universities,
the measures advocated by the West Report will see a vast expansion
of private tertiary education at the expense of public institutions.
Increasingly, a decent education will be available only to
a tiny wealthy elite. Already, for example, publicly funded students
enrolling in an arts degree at the prestigious Melbourne University
require a Tertiary Entrance Ranking score of 86.85. Full fee-paying
students only need a score of 79
The "freedom of choice" promoted by West is a complete
misnomer. What vouchers actually offer is freedom to exclude.
Students from working class families will simply not be able to
afford entrance to universities requiring supplementary funding,
or courses costing tens of thousands of dollars.
See Also:
Further cuts to hospitals,
schools, childcare
'Surplus' Budget in Australia deepens social assault
[14 May 1998]
25 years since the Henderson
inquiry
Poverty and inequality worsen in Australia
[8 April 1998]
New moves to privatise education
in Britain
[20 May 1998]
High schools or holding
pens?
The attack on education in America and the threat to democratic
rights
[20 March 1998]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |