By Marina Cameron
On May 28, the chair of the government's review of higher education, Roderick West, stated publicly that the Liberals' cuts to funding had affected higher education quality through staff cuts, less student-staff contact hours, fewer courses and larger classes. West expressed concern over the possibility of further cuts.
On May 31 the Business/Higher Education Round Table called for a "significant" increase in university funding. In a submission to the review, the round table stated that while the best local undergraduates were world class, the "average graduate lacked sufficient abilities to apply knowledge in decision-making and problem solving", high-level motivation and entrepreneurial flair.
In other words, business is concerned that the cuts are affecting the delivery of the skilled personnel it needs.
The solution, according to the round table? "Business and universities need to work together to ensure that graduates — regardless of course undertaken — have high-order skills in the areas of oral communications, have well developed inter-personal skills, are numerically and economically literate and have a grounding in the study of Asian culture and values." And who said that education was not being tailored to business needs?
The question is: where is the money going to come from? A number of universities are winding up for a fundraising drive aimed at donations from alumni and former students.
According to a report in the Australian on June 5, the University of Sydney is planning a private hospital and a Hungry Jacks on campus; the University of NSW is looking at creating its own credit card; and Murdoch University is planning a Mobil service station, shopping centre, movie theatre and retirement village on campus.
Other universities are allowing companies to sponsor centres, lecture theatres, research institutes, courses and even departmental chairs — and providing brand-name buildings, courses and positions, and seats on advisory boards, in return.
The major source of projected income, however, is students. Commonwealth funding to higher education has decreased from 90% of all university income in 1981 to 60%, and is expected to decrease to 50% soon. Income derived from students fees has increased from zero to 24% over the same period.
Even West's modest criticism of education cuts drew a stinging response from the Financial Review. The paper editorialised in favour of the cuts, and the increases to the Higher Education Contribution Scheme last year, as "tentative but positive steps", and argued that the government should "swing the axe freely" at education.
The editorial lashed "selfish" interest groups like students and staff for opposing the cuts, and the government for "lacking the stomach" to go another round with these groups in the May budget.
Cuts announced in 1996 will be coming into force for the next three years. Extra funding has to come from somewhere, and the drive to increase student charges is accelerating.
The universities of Sydney and WA are backing a voucher system — in which the emphasis of government funding shifts towards "supporting" students in purchasing vouchers which they spend at the university of their choice. Several ALP frontbenchers have publicly supported a similar proposal, as has the senior academic member of the West review, Lauchlan Chipman.
Vouchers were part of the Liberals' Fightback 1993 election policy package, which was overwhelmingly rejected by voters. However, according to a poll published in the Australian on May 10, 57% of people are in favour of a voucher system and only 20% against.
Respondents were answering a very vague question about the system, but this does display a certain amount of acceptance of the idea that students should pay for "using" education, and that the competition fostered by a voucher system will benefit education quality and "choice".
But Resistance national coordinator Sean Healy argues, "Privatisation is not about choice or quality. It is about business getting more benefits for less money, and making ordinary people pay the price. The only way to guarantee real quality education, access and equity, is to make education totally free."