Australian sector braces for ‘more control’ in looming strategy

Australian universities expect a continuation of Canberra’s command-and-control approach to the sector after its decision to update its 23-month-old draft international education strategy, telegraphed in its response to a 30-month-old parliamentary report.

The government has committed to finalising the draft International Education and Skills Strategic Framework, which was released for discussion back in May 2024. It outlined mechanisms to cap foreign admissions as part of a shift to a “managed system” for international enrolments.

The plan to update the framework has been highlighted in the government’s response to an October 2023 report from the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade. It offered 29 recommendations to promote international education, improve student welfare, enhance regulation and prevent bad behaviour.

Observers have questioned why the government has bothered responding to the parliamentary committee now, given the multitude of regulatory changes enacted since. They include replacing ministerial direction 107 (MD107) with MD111 and then MD115, resetting international enrolment quotas at every university and college, hiking fees for student and post-study work visas, and passing a new integrity bill.

While the government approved 13 of the parliamentary committee’s 29 recommendations, and agreed “in principle” to another 11, the response document mainly summarises things that have already been done.

Sources say the government is belatedly clearing the decks ahead of the release of an updated strategy championed by the assistant minister for international education, Julian Hill, who served on the parliamentary committee before his elevation to the ministry. Hill has repeatedly warned of ongoing integrity problems and insisted that the sector must focus on quality rather than growth.

Rishen Shekhar, former pro vice-chancellor of the University of South Australia, warned that the forthcoming strategy could backfire unless educators were consulted about its contents. “We’re hearing…that it is about more regulation and more control,” said Shekhar, a board member with the International Education Association of Australia (IEAA). 

“We welcome that, but we want to make sure it’s done in collaboration with the sector. Come and talk to us…and we’ll make sure we get the outcomes that they’re after.”

The response document outlines several new initiatives related to educational agents. But it shrugs off the headline recommendation for a “Team Australia” programme to boost promotion and diversification of Australia’s education exports.

IEAA chief executive Phil Honeywood said Canberra had paid “lip service” to the “unfinished business” highlighted by the parliamentary committee. He said that despite railing at universities and colleges to diversify their student source countries, the government had offered no “meaningful” support.

Honeywood said trade agency Austrade had “put massive money into tourism campaigns” while receiving little funding to promote Australian education more widely. “Africa and Latin America have really been left to wither as meaningful recruitment targets,” he said. “We’ve seen China, our number one market, drop off significantly with nothing there to replace it.”

The response document also shrugs off recommendations to boost the availability of student housing. “I’m surprised the government doesn’t seem interested in encouraging more take-up of homestay accommodation options,” said consultant Claire Field. “[They] are good for students, helping integrate them into the wider community, and helpful for Australians dealing with cost-of-living pressures.”

Field said it was “surprising” that the response document had been released so long after the committee reported, “but it’s good to see it out there”.

john.ross@timeshighereducation.com