Expert views on key election issues

Higher education

Simon Marginson is Professor of Higher Education at the University’s Centre for the Study of Higher Education and a global leader in tertiary education analysis.

Voice: What are the core challenges for higher education and the operation of tertiary education institutions in Australia?

Simon Marginson: Too much control and not enough resources. Public funding of both teaching and research is insufficient to meet national needs: in the past nine months government has reduced its forward commitments by $3.8 billion. The new system for regulating standards and accreditation, under TEQSA (Tertiary Education Quality Standards Agency), is yet to stabilise and there is potential for unnecessary and expensive interference in the normal workings of institutions. Vocational Education is seriously under-funded and has been neglected by successive governments. The States cannot adequately support it and the Commonwealth government should assume full responsibility.

Voice: What are the main strengths of our tertiary education system?

Simon Marginson: Standards and access. The word ‘university’ means something in Australia. All designated universities on the public schedule are research-orientated and half of them are ranked in the top 500 in the world. All offer teaching programs that are very good by world standards. We provide fine opportunities in many regional centres and the demand-driven system offers all qualified students a place. We welcome a large number of international students, especially from Asia, who have done much to enrich our education system and economy.

Voice: How is Australia faring with tertiary education, relative say to the OECD nations with whom we can most usefully compare ourselves?

Simon Marginson: In the face of continuing resource decline, Australia like the UK will have difficulty sustaining high quality teaching and research in all institutions. We maintain parity with much of Western Europe but are being passed by the dynamic nations of East Asia (China, South Korea, Taiwan) and Singapore which are investing more vigorously in new tertiary infrastructure and scientific research. We are also being out-performed in many areas by our nearest comparator, Canada.

Immigration and border protection

Melissa Phillips is a Doctoral candidate in the School of Social and Political Sciences. She writes on immigration and intercultural issues.

Voice: Is the attention given to ‘illegal boat arrivals’ justified?

Melissa Phillips: The issue of onshore asylum-seekers has pre-occupied the Australian psyche and asylum-seekers who arrive directly by boat take up disproportionate attention when compared with other groups of refugees.

Voice: What are the strengths and weaknesses of detention and offshore processing?

Melissa Phillips: Detention is acceptable as a short-term means to verify the identity of people and carry out health/character checks. The most criticised aspect of Australia’s detention process is its mandatory, non-reviewable nature. Offshore processing is expensive, has (along with detention) proven to cause adverse mental health consequences for individuals and can be perceived as Australia shirking its obligations towards refugees.

Voice: How does Australia compare with other affluent countries in accepting refugees?

Melissa Philips: Australia is highly regarded for its refugee resettlement program and especially its program of settlement services. It is one of the top-three resettlement countries globally but there is scope for Australia to increase its annual refugee resettlement quota. Detention and offshore processing risk jeopardising Australia’s reputation as a country with regard for the rights and protection of refugees.

Health

Rob Moodie is Professor of Population Health at the University of Melbourne.

Voice: What will be the key health challenges in Australia for the next 10 to 20 years?

Rob Moodie: The biggest fundamental issue in health in Australia is cost. Demand overwhelms the capacity for supply, especially in the areas of hospital services and medications, where cost rises of 30 per cent have occurred over the past six years.

We want more and more healthcare; we either have to tax more, shift to private or become more realistic about what we really need. There is a lot of money going into things that shouldn’t be done in the first place. We currently spend $130 billion annually on health, which is 9.2 per cent of GDP and this is predicted to increase with to the USA where they spend 12 per cent of GDP and get a worse outcome. The cost increases are due to increasingly expensive technology and the high cost of medicines. We spend $1billion each year more than we need to on medicines and we need to get much better at negotiating with drug companies.

Equity is another big issue. Poorer people get less of the healthcare pie. We run the risk of running a two-speed health system to match the two-speed economy. Public health needs to be supported to ensure disadvantaged people can access good healthcare.

Voice: What are the most prevalent diseases troubling Australians?

RM: Non-communicable diseases such as diabetes, cancer, cardio-vascular and respiratory disease, are taking over from infectious diseases in terms of prevalence. Tackling the latter will always be important, which is why we must keep working to maintain adequate vaccination rates, but there are way more people who have their feet taken off from diabetes than there are from land mines. We need preventative public health education progams, as well as strong support through regulation and legislation to fight the industrial vectors that work against health: the cigarette and junk food companies, or big tobacco, big alcohol, big soda and big snack, as they’re known.

Mental illnesses like anxiety and depression are steadily increasing as well. They create a heavy burden on life because while they don’t necessarily kill you, they make you feel terrible and we need to work harder at preventing them.

Transport and infrastructure

Carolyn Whitzman is professor of Urban Planning in the Faculty of Architecture, Building and Planning.

Voice: What are the main challenges facing Australia’s major cities?

Carolyn Whitzman: Australian cities are the main generators of jobs and wealth in Australia: over 75 per cent of Australians live in its major cities, and almost 80 per cent of the Australian economy is generated in cities. Despite being one of the most urbanised nations in the world Australia has lagged behind most other countries in national urban policy. Moreover, urban policy has been highly politicised, with urban investments by Labor governments since Whitlam contrasting with almost complete roll-back of urban investment during Coalition governments. So the main challenge will be whether any focused national research and investment in cities remains after the election.

Within Australian cities, there are three major issues affecting economic productivity, health and liveability and environmental viability. 

First, Australian housing is among the least affordable in the world. Median house prices were three times median wages in the 1980s and are now over seven times median wages. There is a Coles/Woolworth’s type of duopoly of two sub-standard housing choices: three plus bedroom detached houses in outer suburban sprawl, with poor access to public transport, jobs, and social services (which is not affordable housing and is certainly not affordable living); and small apartments, half of which are sold to international investors, in the central city.

Second, the infrastructure gap is widening in most Australian cities, including Melbourne. Lack of adequate local public schools, health care, and transport mean fewer jobs as well as individual and household stress.

Third, these affordable housing, job and infrastructure stresses are not evenly distributed across cities, but are especially acute in outer suburban growth areas. The socio-spatial divide in access to jobs and services is worsening, and we face the spectre of income-segregated cities and worsening social and economic opportunities for the majority of Australians.

Voice: Is there anything that federal governments ought to consider to lessen the housing affordability crises in the big cities?

CW: Absolutely. First off, the lowest 20 per cent of households cannot be served by the current housing market. A new social housing investment fund needs federal support now that the National Affordable Housing Agreement is ending its life. The Urban Coalition (comprising peak building, planning and environment conservation organisations) has called for a new urban infrastructure fund, to be supported both by federal government and private investors. This fund would support investments in public transport, social housing and community facilities. 

Secondly, housing affordability for moderate income households can be improved through mechanisms, such as using government land for affordable housing, and a strong push on state governments to support affordable housing targets and inclusionary zoning in metropolitan planning strategies, emphasising growth near public transport hubs. Federal taxation policies, such as stamp duty and negative gearing, need to be reviewed as well.