Colombo Plan II an intriguing idea that deserves more clarity

THE Coalition's initiative is being taken seriously.

A CLEVER move, to throw open Coalition policy on study abroad, invite expert advice on development of the "new Colombo Plan", and do so in a public way.

The number and calibre of those taking part in last month's policy round table - leaders from universities, the corporate world and student groups - confirm that the new Colombo Plan is taken seriously, even if some outside the Liberal Party are hesitant about the name.

The atmospherics were canny, too. The policy round table was staged at Parliament House, Canberra, helping to create the impression of orderly preparation by a government-in-waiting. And by pure chance this exercise in policy formation unfolded the day after Labor's leadership farce.

The round table was hosted by Liberal Party think tank the Menzies Research Centre. Its newish executive director, Don Markwell, has a long academic pedigree, having served most recently as the global boss of the Rhodes scholarships. He presided over the round table with a collegial tone, and it's possible that participants, especially those from higher education, will be more comfortable talking policy with his centre than with a political party.

Opposition foreign affairs spokeswoman Julie Bishop certainly has study abroad credentials but Tony Abbott raised a few eyebrows among Asianists at the round table with his suggestion that student exchange might help turn the region into "the beacon of prosperity - and, over time, freedom and liberalism - that we would like it to be."

Just a nuance, maybe, the main thing being the Opposition Leader's presence as would-be prime minister, reaffirming the importance of a policy given pride of place in his budget reply speech last year. It is being sold as "a signature initiative".

True, the new Colombo Plan as yet offers no detail, no costing. Bishop has not made any clearer Abbott's vague formula that it will be "funded from existing resources".

It will be easier to judge the credibility of the plan once the outlines of a model emerge from the Menzies centre and, assuming the Coalition is elected, once offshore pilot programs are launched in 2014-15.

Money, personnel, expertise, implementation and logistics: all will be important but they are easily frittered away or misdirected if political will is lacking. The necessary leadership is political in the broad sense, not bureaucratic in a narrow sense. It requires flesh to be put on the bones of what Bishop describes as a partnership between government, business and higher education. It requires persuasion and persistence.

There are students who do not take up overseas opportunities already on offer, universities whose zeal for global citizenship wilts if study abroad looks like costing them fee income, companies that pay no more than lip service to Asia skills in their workforce, and governments in the region that espouse internationalisation but make the necessary visas all but unobtainable.

Up against obstacles such as these, a plan such as the new Colombo can easily find its rhetoric racing ahead of reality.

Pilot programs (Indonesia and one other country, perhaps Singapore or Hong Kong, have been suggested) should bring into sharper focus some of the challenges and opportunities.

For example, is it essential for study abroad to bring academic credit at home? The red tape, here and overseas, may be considerable. Is it better to focus effort and negotiation on internships if these are likely to prove more attractive to students than credit? And is this an opening for Australia's universities to begin to think seriously about how they internationalise the curriculum at home?