4.6.14 MPI: Higher Education

Mr HAWKE (Mitchell) (15:49): I want to thank the member for Hotham for her question in question time. It was a brilliant question—a brilliant question about who brought in HECS in Australia. I think it was fascinating to remind the House that it was the Keating administration who first came up with the notion that it was fair, very fair, for a student to contribute to the cost of their education. It is a fair principle. It is a principle that we should seek to reinforce in Australian education today, and this government is seeking to reinforce it. The only thing that could have made the member for Hotham's presentation a little better would have been a glass of chardonnay, because it was chardonnay socialism at its best. This is not about poor students. This is not about people on the breadline. This is about reinforcing the privileges of those upper middle-class kids at uni who are being paid for by poor students who do not go universities. That is what this is about. People who go to universities are subsidised by the rest of our community. They are subsidised by people who never have a prospect of entering university and who, on average, have much lower incomes. We know that, when you get an education degree, it is an economic asset; it stays with you for the rest of your life. It is only fair that you make a contribution to that.

The fact is that this government is expanding this scheme. We are not just expanding the cost incurred by a student; we are expanding access. The MPI that has come up today is really from the D team. There is no shadow minister. Nobody of really any note moved this motion. It is the D team. Maybe it is the F team.

Opposition members interjecting—

Mr HAWKE: The interjections are from the F team. Those opposite say that this measure is unfair when the government is expanding access for the first time under the HECS to diploma, advanced diploma and associated degrees—a notion that any Labor government should have been proud of. It is a notion that the Hawke government would have been proud to put forward. It is a notion that the Keating government would have been happy to put forward. But we have this new chardonnay socialism from those over there. These members from the inner city suburbs of Melbourne really need to get out more. They need to leave the inner city of Melbourne and get out more and find a real student, a real struggling student. This is the same Labor Party that supported compulsory unionism for students. It supported high fees for students, making them pay out of their pockets, regardless of the equity issues, compulsory union fees. They were happy to take $1,000. When I went to Sydney university they were happy to take money from me for their compulsory student unionism even though I came from Western Sydney and did not have a high income.

But when we say people should make a contribution to their own education, they claim there is something wrong with that. Well, it was Paul Keating's notion. It was a worthy notion and one that this government is expanding because we need to ensure greater equality of access to universities. We need to make sure we have universities of the highest standard in the world. We do not have a university in the top 30; we need to get one. Deregulating the sector is nothing to be afraid of; it is a worthy concept and it is a worthy set of programs to put forward.

When you hear this lame set of arguments from the D team opposite, you really get the sense that this is a revolution without a cause. With the Minister for Education, I had the chance to be in Sydney to see the predictable Green Left Resistance, with their soulless eyes, addictively chanting. They do not even know what they are chanting. 'What are we chanting? Well, we are revolutionaries so let's have a revolution!'—a revolution of revolutionaries. They are like the Zapatistas in Mexico—revolution for revolution's sake. They do not even know what it is about. They do not understand that you do have to pay for things in life, that there is no such thing as a free education.

The member for Rankin is absolutely wrong to come in here and suggest education is free in this country and that somehow he is going to do something to alleviate the need to pay fees. People have to get a signal early in life that you have to make a contribution to your own education. It is only right and proper. A university degree is an economic asset that will stay with you all of your life. On average, people who have one will earn $1 million more than others. This is chardonnay socialism at its worst. This is not on behalf of poor people, this is not on behalf of socially disadvantaged people. It is on behalf of the inner suburbs of Melbourne, the chardonnay socialists in the Labor Party. They are disconnected from their trade union background, they are disconnected from the ordinary worker, they are disconnected from their base—and I say long may it remain so. Keep fighting for those inner city spivs in Melbourne and Sydney, stick up for them hard! It is only right and proper that people make a contribution to their education. It is a principle established by both Labor and Liberal governments. Really, this motion today is absolutely pathetic. (Time expired)