Labor’s student cap plan lashed as ‘convoluted’

Labor has been warned its plan to set a ‘hard cap’ on domestic university student numbers may not result in a rise in disadvantaged students and could incentivise providers to take fewer enrolments.

The University of NSW in Sydney.

Labor has been warned its plan to set a “hard cap” on domestic student numbers at the nation’s universities may not result in a rise in disadvantaged students and could incentivise providers to take fewer enrolments, amid a swing towards increased government intervention in the sector.

Higher education expert Andrew Norton cautioned that the proposal to limit the number of ­students to receive a course subsidy and a HECS-HELP loan at each university, contradicted Labor’s push for 80 per cent of Australians to have a tertiary qualification by 2050.

Education Minister Jason Clare on Friday released details of the funding shake-up that will allow the government to set a limit on the number of commonwealth-funded places, which will replace the current free-for-all “demand-driven” system.

Mr Clare said the changes to university funding would support growth in the sector, increase the proportion of Australians with a tertiary qualification and offer more disadvantaged students a “crack” at university.

Under the landmark plan, universities will negotiate a target for student enrolments from the total number of capped places and will not be permitted to overstep their limit, except when enrolling Indigenous students.

The reforms, to be overseen by the soon-to-be-established Australian Tertiary Education Commission, will also introduce measures to guarantee a funded place to Indigenous, disadvantaged, regional and under-represented students, though not necessarily at their chosen university.

If all the university places at universities close enough to an equity student have been filled, the new statutory body will be able to increase the provider’s limit.

Professor Norton said he held concerns about the proposal from the landmark Universities Accord review, saying Labor was adopting the panel’s recommendations without considering the “quality”.

“I don’t think it’s a good idea to have a hard cap like they’re proposing,” he said.

“The example of the equity students – so-called ‘managed demand-driven funding’ – doesn’t really make sense, because if universities just have the flexibility to take additional students, you wouldn’t necessarily have to go through this convoluted process in the (consultation) paper, of giving them an offer for a course they didn’t even apply for.

“Or, potentially going back to ATEC for additional funding, which would be a convoluted bureaucratic process, so it’s just pointlessly inflexible.”

Professor Norton said the reforms, which have been unpacked in two jargon-laden consultation papers, marked a return to the measures introduced by former education minister Brendan Nelson in the 2000s, which saw tertiary enrolments decline.

“Under this system it’ll incentivise universities to not have any additional students beyond their cap, which will mean that some students will miss out, who would be accepted under a more flexible system,” he said.

“And that is probably more likely to be the equity students than others … And so really, those two goals of increasing the number of equity students and capping are in tension with each other.”

The announcement comes just weeks after Labor revealed it would implement a cap on ­international student numbers, amid a trend of increasing government intervention in higher education.

Universities Australia CEO Luke Sheehy said the proposed changes were “significant structural reforms”, and the new funding model should have a “needs-based approach” at its core to train the skilled workforce.

Australian Technology Network of Universities executive director Ant Bagshaw said he welcomed the government’s efforts to consult the industry on the reforms.