Universities Accord (Opening the Doors of Opportunity) Bill 2026
Mr LEESER (Berowra) (17:08): I rise to speak on the amendments that have come back to the House now in relation to the Universities Accord (Opening the Doors of Opportunity) Bill 2026. Let me just say this first, because there may be some confusion among those who are watching about the procedure. They might be asking why the government is disagreeing with one of its own amendments, amendment (36), and then remaking it in exactly the same terms.
The issue here isn't the policy; the issue is in relation to the technical constitutional rule that money bills cannot originate in the Senate and the respective positions that the two houses of parliament take on whether or not amendment (36) is caught by that rule. The procedural back and forth here is about an important constitutional principle, but it doesn't change the substance of the debate.
It also doesn't change the coalition's policy position on the bill. I hope that clarifies some of the unusual procedural aspects. Let me then turn to the substance of the bill.
The bill is now a much better bill as a result of the coalition's amendments, and there are a few things I wish to say. First, after today, Australia will have two new universities listed in the Higher Education Support Act: Alphacrucis University College and the Australian University of Theology. They are both very fine institutions, and both will now be listed as table B universities under the Higher Education Support Act.
It's a wonderful achievement; I congratulate both universities, and I thank the government for the support of those amendments. Second, the coalition has secured a regional funding guarantee. This is an amendment that means that, when it comes to university funding, regional means regional.
We've closed the loopholes that would have allowed regional money to go to inner-city campuses. Regional funding is squarely designed and intended to offset the higher costs of delivery in the regions. The coalition understands that.
It's in our DNA, and we'll always stand up for the regions. Our amendments mean that metro universities can't set up a regional hub consisting of a laptop and a local administrator to 'administer' courses and then collect regional funding that was never intended for them. It's a guarantee that's critically important to regional delivery for higher education, it materially improves the bill, and I thank the government for adopting our amendments.
Third, despite the objections of the Greens—which were quite profound if Senator Faruqi's comments in the other place are taken at face value—we've locked in the power to cap international students and allocate international student places based on our national interest. These powers will help underpin the coalition's migration plan, which is designed to reduce numbers and raise standards.
It's an important mechanism that the coalition considers will support the changes that we need to see in our national immigration policy. On those bases, this bill will pass with coalition support. But let me also say this: there are many missed opportunities here for the Labor Party, which they will need to explain to the Australian people.
Let me start with the coalition's changes to the overenrolment provisions. What we put on the table was a suite of changes to significantly expand student choice, to save millions in taxpayer money and to remove perverse incentives that penalise providers if they improve their student retention rates. The government voted against that, opting instead for milk-water changes proposed by the Greens.
At a time when spending is out of control and driving up inflation and interest rates, Australians will pay more money to educate the same number of students, and, because of Labor's position on these issues, students will have less of a say in where they go to uni. That's for Labor to explain. The coalition moved amendments to ensure that there would be support for students from regional areas regardless of where they study, and, indeed, if a regional student studied at a regional university, the benefits would stack.
The government voted against that. They voted against the students from regional areas. That, again, is a matter for them to explain.
The coalition moved amendments to support independent providers and put them on a level playing field with other universities in relation to international students. The bill as drafted said that listed table A and table B universities deserved to be consulted about international students but that the independent providers—businesses who aren't taxpayer funded and who rely on international education for their livelihood—did not deserve to be consulted.
We said, 'Put them on a level playing field.' Labor voted against that. Again, that's for them to explain. The coalition moved amendments to completely remove the minister's power to unilaterally intervene in campuses.
Labor voted against that—again, for them to explain. The coalition moved amendments to require transparency in terms requested by the sector. Labor rejected that.
Again, it's a matter for them to explain. We moved amendments to adopt a single national definition of antisemitism, require providers to deal with festering antisemitism on campus and amend the National Tertiary Education Objective to actually mention teaching, learning and research, among other things, rather than simply referring to vague and ideological matters, such as 'social development' and 'sustainability'.
On the point of antisemitism, it pains me that the government will not legislate its own policy. Again, Labor voted against those changes. This is a much better bill as a result of the coalition's amendments.
But Labor has nailed its colours to the wall on exactly who and what it doesn't support, and it will be accountable to the Australian people. Question agreed to. Message from the Governor-General recommending appropriation for the proposed amendment announced.