Universities Accord (Opening the Doors of Opportunity) Bill 2026

Ms CHANEY (Curtin) (10:14): by leave—I move amendments (1) to (10), as circulated in my name, together: (1) Schedule 1, item 2, page 5 (after line 20), after subsection 30-5(8), insert: Publication of reasons for determination or variation (8A) The Minister must ensure that, within 14 days after the day on which the Minister makes or varies a *total allocation pool determination, a written statement setting out the Minister's reasons for making or varying the determination is published on the Department's website or on the ATEC's website.

(2) Schedule 1, item 17, page 30 (line 30) to page 31 (line 4), omit the item, substitute: 17 Paragraph 36-10(1)(a) Repeal the paragraph, substitute: (a) if the unit is the first unit that the person has undertaken that forms part of a particular *course of study being undertaken with the provider—that course of study is one: (i) for which the provider has been allocated one or more Commonwealth supported places for the year in which the person is undertaking the unit; or (ii) that is a *demand driven higher education course; and (3) Schedule 1, page 31 (after line 4), after item 17, insert: 17A After subsection 36-10(1) Insert: Changes in status of course of study after enrolment in unit have no effect (1A) Subsection (1B) applies if: (a) the condition in paragraph (1)(a) is satisfied in relation to a person and a unit of study at the time when the person enrols in the unit; and (b) at some time after the person enrols in the unit of study, the unit ceases (for whatever reason) to form part of a *course of study: (i) for which the provider has been allocated one or more Commonwealth supported places for the year in which the person is undertaking the unit; or (ii) that is a *demand driven higher education course.

(1B) To avoid doubt, in a case where this subsection applies, nothing in paragraph (1)(a) prohibits a higher education provider from advising the person that the person is a *Commonwealth supported student in relation to the unit. (4) Schedule 1, item 22, page 31 (line 22) to page 32 (line 2), omit the item, substitute: 22 Section 36-65 Repeal the section. (5) Schedule 1, item 24, page 32 (after line 23), at the end of section 37-1, add: Minister to table report (5) The Minister must cause a copy of the report of the evaluation to be tabled in each House of the Parliament within 15 sitting days of that House after the Minister receives the report.

(6) Schedule 1, item 59, page 48 (after line 27), at the end of section 39-75, add: Minister to table report (5) The Minister must cause a copy of the report of the evaluation to be tabled in each House of the Parliament within 15 sitting days of that House after the Minister receives the report. (7) Schedule 2, item 15, page 57 (after line 14), after subsection 46B(4), insert: Publication of reasons for determination or variation (4A) The Minister must ensure that, within 14 days after the day on which the Minister makes or varies an international allocation pool determination, a written statement setting out the Minister's reasons for making or varying the determination is published on the Department's website or on the ATEC's website.

(8) Schedule 2, item 15, page 59 (after line 23), at the end of section 46E, add: (3) However, the Minister must not give directions in relation to: (a) a higher education provider; or (b) a class or classes of higher education providers. (9) Schedule 2, item 15, page 60 (after line 27), at the end of Part 4A, add: 46G Evaluation of operation of this Part (1) The Minister must cause an independent evaluation to be conducted of the operation of this Part.

(2) Without limiting subsection (1), the evaluation must include consideration of the exercise of powers and performance of functions by the ATEC under this Part. Timing of evaluation (3) The persons conducting the evaluation must commence the evaluation before 1 January 2031. Minister to be given report of evaluation (4) The persons conducting the evaluation must give the Minister a written report of the evaluation.

Minister to table report (5) The Minister must cause a copy of the report of the evaluation to be tabled in each House of the Parliament within 15 sitting days of that House after the Minister receives the report. (10) Schedule 2, item 17, page 61 (lines 1 to 3), omit the item. I support the intent of the Universities Accord (Opening the Doors of Opportunity) Bill 2026 bill to expand opportunity and access to higher education.

I support the principles of managed growth, needs based funding and proper stewardship of the international student sector, but I believe there are a series of improvements that can be made to this bill. The first set of amendments aims to protect students from having their places withdrawn. Amendments (2) and (3) have the effect of ensuring that, once a student is given a Commonwealth supported place, or CSP, it cannot be taken away through any power given by this bill to the minister or to ATEC.

This protection already exists in the Higher Education Support Act, but this bill creates significant ambiguity around this protection. For example, if the minister designated a course under proposed section 30-30 of this bill and then allocated an insufficient number of places, some students could potentially lose their CSP. This amendment addresses that ambiguity.

Universities should, of course, be able to withdraw places for students on disciplinary or academic grounds, but we don't want a system where second- and third-year students are losing their places because of bureaucratic decisions made in Canberra. The second set of amendments increases oversight of ministerial decisions. This bill gives the minister power to determine the overall number of domestic and international students.

These decisions are crucial for Australia's higher education system. Reasons for these decisions should be published to support scrutiny and oversight and ensure decisions are made in the public interest. Amendments (1) and (7) would have the effect of ensuring the minister must publish reasons for two important decisions—the total number of domestic student places and the total number of international student places.

The bill also overhauls the higher education funding model, introducing new systems for managed growth, needs based funding and international student allocations. The bill rightly introduces independent evaluations of the managed growth and needs based funding systems, but these are not made public. Amendments (5) and (6) would ensure that the independent evaluations of the new managed growth and needs based funding systems would be made public.

While the bill includes requirements for independent evaluations of the new managed growth and needs based funding systems, it doesn't require an evaluation of the new international student allocation system. Amendment (9) would establish an identical independent evaluation process for the international student allocation system. Considering how politicised this topic can become and how significant it is for our economy and education system, this evaluation should be a no-brainer.

The next set of amendments seeks to preserve the autonomy of universities and higher education providers. As this bill does centralise power to the minister and to ATEC, it's vital to ensure universities are still allowed to compete, specialise and thrive. This bill gives the minister the power to set conditions on each higher education provider that must be met for the provider to receive Commonwealth funding.

This unqualified, unrestricted power is clear overreach. A minister could set undefined, highly political conditions on individual universities. This is also duplicative of ATEC's role, which is to negotiate mission based compacts with each higher education provider.

Amendments (4) and (8) would remove this power. I note the government's amendments do put some limited safeguards around this power, which I'm glad to see, but I still believe that that power should be removed. The bill also gives the minister the power to set provider-specific directions to ATEC when it's considering international student allocations.

This allows for highly political directions in an area that is highly politicised. A minister could hypothetically direct ATEC to allocate zero international student places specifically to the University of Western Australia. It's the role of the independent ATEC to allocate international student places.

It should not be the role of the minister. Amendment (10) would remove this power, bringing the international student allocation system in line with the domestic student allocation system, where the minister is not able to make provider-specific directions to ATEC. I appreciate there may be some positive applications of this power, but at a minimum the power should be appropriately safeguarded.

I acknowledge that my team has had constructive conversations with the minister's office, and I accept that the government will not support these amendments while the Senate committee inquiry is ongoing. But I call on the minister and the government to consider these amendments alongside the committee's report and enact some of those improvements in the Senate, if not in this place.