Higher education is an important policy area and while it has never possessed the electoral salience of school education, it can certainly arouse passion. This is apparent from the reaction to the Federal Government's proposed changes in higher education, where some of the consequences are fairly predictable, others less so.
An unregulated fee regime will result in an increase in course costs and, taken with a change in the formula for meeting HECS obligations, will mean substantially larger debts for students after their periods of study.
The prestigious Group of Eight institutions can be expected to exploit their reputational positions to charge top dollar, while those lower in the pecking order will face some challenges in determining the fee structure which reflects their market location. The ability of the top institutions to maximise revenue will only widen the gap between them and the rest, and even if this were not an intended outcome, it will surely not cause many sleepless nights for members of the Abbott Government.
The designers and defenders of HECS have long reminded critics that initial fears about debt-aversion on the part of potential students were never realised. With much bigger debt on the horizon, this feature of the system will be sorely tested. Economic logic suggests that at some point, potential students will be deterred by the prospect of what will seem like lifelong debt with its implications for family, relationships and home ownership.
How exactly does a 17-year-old decide whether selecting the degree from the prestige university over the same course at a newer institution justifies an extra decade of debt?
It seems unavoidable that many from the lower socio-economic ranks, unable to rely on any financial assistance from parents, will see no choice but to either opt out completely or plump for the cheapest option. It will take a very imaginative, targeted and generous scholarship scheme to work around that problem. One anomaly will be to open up places at prestige universities to affluent lesser-qualified applicants who previously would have missed out to a poorer but better qualified applicant now deterred by the higher fee levels.
It is difficult to predict whether these changes will affect higher education participation rates overall. But again, while this would be of concern to those who link an educated workforce with national growth and productivity, such a view is less than unanimous on the conservative side where some would contend that too many young