Sarah Henderson
I move the amendment on sheet 3045:
(1) Clause 2, page 2 (table item 9), omit the table item, substitute:
This concerns the Commonwealth prac payment. It's an amendment which requires the government to table the eligibility and means test requirements for the Commonwealth prac payment before any new grant payment can commence. This amendment is very important because in the bill there is literally no detail about how this payment is going to be delivered. For many stakeholders and higher education providers from whom we heard during the bill inquiry, there is a lot of concern about the nature of this payment because it's not being administered through Centrelink. It's actually being administered via some grant bucket. While we support the prac payment for teaching, nursing, midwifery and social work students, which will apply from 1 July 2025, we are very concerned, and we share the concerns of higher education providers about the way in which this has been proposed and will be administered.
The bill does not include critical information such as the eligibility criteria or the means test requirements, and we believe this reflects the government's rushed and chaotic approach to policymaking in the education portfolio. The higher education expert Professor Andrew Norton told our Senate inquiry into the bill:
Apart from the Prac Payment's insecure legal foundations, the decision to base the program on a legislative instrument rather than legislation means less debate about how the Prac Payment will work … The government says that the Prac Payment will be means tested, but neither this bill nor the government's public statements explain … what 'means' will disqualify students or cause their payments to be reduced.
The Regional Universities Network also raised very similar concerns, saying:
… should universities be the administering body for Commonwealth Prac Payments, then inconsistencies may arise at a national level between the individual institutions within the sector (and potentially even between the faculties of the same provider), in terms of the outcomes of administrating student eligibility and verification, the timeframes for processing payments, and dispute resolution processes.
Despite this payment being announced and the minister speaking about the benefits of this payment, this will be delivered not via Centrelink but through a grant bucket for which there is no actual obligation in the legislation to deliver this funding. You would think that, if the government were serious about delivering this payment, it would actually make a clear provision in the legislation requiring the government to do so.
While this is also not in this bill, the government has confirmed during budget estimates that eligible students will face a means test that will require them to be eligible for an income support payment and meet a need-to-work requirement. We're also concerned that there's been no consultation with state and territory governments or industry to share the costs of this measure, as the minister originally declared would happen, despite the fact that they will be the beneficiaries of the incoming teachers, nurses, midwives, social workers and the like. As I say, this amendment requires the government to table the eligibility and means test requirements, because this parliament has a right to ensure that, when the government says it will do something, that will actually happen. So we proposed this amendment as a moderate measure to give the parliament confidence that the government is on track to deliver this payment. We just can't take the minister's word when so much about this payment is actually not in the bill.
Tabling the guidelines will also provide transparency ahead of the payment commencing to ensure that students and the higher education providers which will be assessing student applications understand the requirements before the payment begins. Without clear eligibility guidelines, students will continue to remain in the dark about this payment. If the minister were able to table those guidelines now, that would be terrific. We would celebrate that, because understanding how this will apply in practice is very important, and it's just not appropriate that we're seeing, time and time again, that the government is not putting the nuts and bolts of legislation in the bill itself, limiting the oversight of the parliament. So we would welcome the minister tabling these requirements and guidelines, and, in the absence of his doing so, we would urge the Senate to support this amendment.
Anthony Chisholm
Thanks, Senator Henderson. The government will not be supporting this amendment. Eligibility for Commonwealth prac payments will be targeted to students on income support and students who typically need to work to support themselves while studying. These students typically face the greatest financial pressure during placements. Eligibility criteria will be finalised in consultation with stakeholders following passage of legislation and well before the commencement date on 1 July next year. The guidelines are disallowable instruments. They can be considered by members of parliament once tabled. This is standard practice for a measure like this.
Sarah Henderson
Minister, could you please provide the Senate with more information about who will be eligible for these Commonwealth prac payments? How many students will receive this payment?
Anthony Chisholm
That's obviously what is being worked through and being consulted on at the moment. Those guidelines will be tabled well in advance of the 1 July 2025 commencement date.
Sarah Henderson
Are you able to indicate the proportion of students studying teaching, nursing, midwifery and social work who will receive a prac payment? It just seems that the government is trying to work this out on the run. This has been in the pipeline now for many months. It was a recommendation of the University Accord Panel, and it's very surprising that the government doesn't seem to have any idea of how this payment will be administered and how many students will benefit. So, could you provide the information on the proportion of students who'll receive this payment? Also, what will be the total value of the payments made to each of those four categories of students?
Anthony Chisholm
The dollar figure per week is $319.50. That's the same for all those people who are eligible. The department has estimated the following number of students for the prac payment, by discipline, by the end of the forward estimates, based on the latest available data at the time, which was 2022 verified: nursing, 24,000 students per year; midwifery, 2,000 students; teacher education, 35,000 students; and social work, 7,000 students. However, obviously the final numbers of students are likely to vary from the above, as it's not possible to predict changes in enrolments and take-up, which are driven by student choice.
Sarah Henderson
So, what will be the total anticipated amount over the forward estimates that will be paid under this measure?
Anthony Chisholm
The anticipation is about 68,000 students per year who would be eligible.
Sarah Henderson
Are you able to provide the Senate with any more information in relation to the 68,000—how that was calculated?—because I don't believe this information has been made public before, as well as any other information you can provide. Also, could you indicate how these students will be means tested? Will they be required to hand over their income statements? Will they be required to hand over Centrelink statements or any other private information? And how will that occur? Will the universities be given the responsibility of asking for that information in order to means test them? I mean, quite genuinely, this is a very unusual scheme, where the government is asking third-party institutions to means test students under circumstances where that could give rise to all sorts of quite significant privacy issues. So, could you explain how people's personal information is going to be handled?
Anthony Chisholm
The 68,000 figure is what's been estimated by the department. I'm very confident that we've covered that at estimates on previous occasions, after the announcement was made. The negotiations and consultation with stakeholders are ongoing. Obviously working with the universities to implement this is important, because they are the ones that have the direct relationship with students. Obviously the privacy concerns are at the forefront of those discussions. As I mentioned, the guidelines will be disallowable instruments and will be tabled before that 1 July start date next year.
Sarah Henderson
Minister, given the universities may need to ask of students private information, will any further legislation be required in relation to the protection of those students' privacy? This gives rise to some quite significant legal issues, I put to you, and it is of concern—and my concerns have not been alleviated—that students are being required, or may be required, to hand that personal information over when there doesn't appear to be any cognisance, let alone provisions, in this bill which protects the privacy of thousands of students attending university.
Anthony Chisholm
The Department of Education have considered this matter. Their advice is that universities already collect a range of personal and sensitive information about students. They also consider that the relevant legislation is clear about provider obligations relating to the protection of personal information.
Sarah Henderson
Minister, I appreciate that they collect information in accordance with their legislative obligations. I suggest to you that the collection of private information for the purposes of means testing students doesn't come within the existing legislation. Can you give this Senate confidence that requests by universities for this information will comply with the law?
Anthony Chisholm
It would ultimately be voluntary for the student to hand over any information. It wouldn't be compulsory for them to do it as part of the scheme.
Sarah Henderson
Where is that requirement that students can do so voluntarily? By reason of the obligation being a voluntary obligation, doesn't that put students in a very invidious situation where, if they are being required to hand over personal information under circumstances where there's not a legislative basis for the universities to ask for that information—doesn't it put students in a very invidious position where, in order to get the payment, they might be facilitating the provision of private information which may otherwise be in breach of the law?
Anthony Chisholm
I go back to my previous point. Implications for students in providing this level of personal information to their providers were considered by the department, noting universities already collect and hold a range of personal and sensitive information about students. Division 179, 'Protection of personal information', of the Higher Education Support Act 2003 is clear about higher education provider obligations and procedures relating to the protection of personal information.
Sarah Henderson
Minister, I well understand the provisions of the Higher Education Support Act in relation to the obligations of universities, but this is something very new. You're asking universities to ask for personal information for a very different purpose, not in relation to the student's enrolment and the student studying at university. I don't have any confidence that the government has got this right or that the government has appropriately thought through the privacy implications for students. I also raise very serious concerns that this puts universities in a very difficult position. Can you confirm whether these payments are subject to taxation?
Anthony Chisholm
Yes, they are.
Sarah Henderson
Will the tax be withheld before the payment is made to the student?
Anthony Chisholm
No, it won't be withheld.
Sarah Henderson
Universities are not being asked to withhold tax before a payment is made, so there will be taxation consequences for the receipt of the payment. If this payment is made and the taxation consequences are not dealt with at the time of the payment being made, isn't there a risk that students could end up with a taxation debt because they haven't actually had any taxation deducted from the payment?
Anthony Chisholm
It's a bit hard to speculate. Obviously individuals' tax arrangements are a matter for them.
Sarah Henderson
But you understand the point that I'm making. The point is that if the taxation issues are not dealt with at the time of making the payment, which ordinarily of course is the obligation in an employee-employer relationship, then that could lead to taxation consequences. I'm just not sure, and I'm concerned that that hasn't properly been thought through. If a student has to be receiving Centrelink and undertaking paid work for at least 15 hours per week, which I understand is the case, won't this mean that they are more likely to pay tax, and therefore won't this give rise to a situation where they are more exposed to the prospect of having to pay tax?
Anthony Chisholm
I'm not going to get in the process of giving tax advice to people in various scenarios, but what I will say is that I'm very confident that this will be outlined in the program guidelines, and it will be made clear to people when they apply for the payment as well.
Sarah Henderson
Minister, do you have a copy of the guidelines that you can table now? That would be really helpful.
Anthony Chisholm
No, sorry, I don't.
Long debate text truncated.
Summary
Date and time: 7:53 PM on 2024-11-26
Senator Pocock's vote: Abstained
Total number of "aye" votes: 27
Total number of "no" votes: 29
Total number of abstentions: 20
Related bill: Universities Accord (Student Support and Other Measures) Bill 2024
Adapted from information made available by theyvoteforyou.org.au