Gender-based violence legislation: Part 1, Definitions and requirements for all higher education providers, staff and students

Andrew NortonLeave a comment

Legislation on ‘gender-based violence’ in higher education is back in Parliament. Its principal purpose is to provide a legal foundation for a National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence. This will be a legislative instrument made after the legislation is passed, but the minister has released its expected contents.

The code is scheduled to start on 1 January 2026 for universities and 1 January 2027 for other providers.

This post looks at the definition of gender-based violence, extension of the policy beyond higher education providers, and policies that will affect all staff and students. A second post looks at procedures for victims and perpetrators of sexual harassment or assault. A third post looks at reporting and penalties for higher education providers (apologies, but this is all much briefer than the 75-page original; 45 pages in the bill and 30 in the code).

Update 20/10/2025: The enacted legislation is here. The enacted code is here.

What is gender-based violence?

According to the bill, ‘gender‑based violence means any form of physical or non‑physical violence, harassment, abuse or threats, based on gender, that results in, or is likely to result in, harm, coercion, control, fear or deprivation of liberty or autonomy’: section 5 (legislative references, unless otherwise specified, are to the Universities Accord (National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender‑based Violence) Bill 2025).

Read More »

University funding systems and what graduates see as important in a job

Andrew NortonLeave a comment

For a side-project I’ve recently engaged with the subject of whether higher education funding systems shape the educational and career choices of students and graduates.

On one theory, where fees are charged students focus more on courses and jobs with high pay. Courses that satisfy intrinsic interests but do not offer good salary prospects would be less popular in countries with fees or after fee increases. Focus-group research on the views of students in European countries provides some support for this view (I have not cross-checked this against enrolments).

Under fee systems, depending on loan arrangements, taking courses with good job prospects may be necessary to reduce the risk of default on student debt repayments.

On another theory, also with some evidence from the European focus-group research, students in fee-paying countries may be more interested in courses that lead to personal financial rewards than courses that serve some broader public purpose. There are echoes of this argument in the local complaint that Australian higher education in the ‘neoliberal’ fee-charging era has lost sight of the ‘public good’.

I’ve discussed the role of interests in course choices before. In this post I look at the attitudes of graduates. My data source is survey evidence from the International Social Survey Programme. Unfortunately Australia only occasionally participates in these multi-nation comparative studies, but the ISSP’s 2015 work orientation questionnaire has Australian data.

What Australian graduates see as important in a job

In the ISSP respondents are asked what job attributes they personally see as important.

A job being interesting is the single-most desirable attribute of a job for Australian graduates. This is consistent with interests being the dominant factor in course choice.

The ISSP question has two other-regarding options, being useful to society and helping other people. I presume helping others is a hands-on form of being useful, such as a teacher or nurse, while a policymaker, engineer or executive can produce useful-to-society structures and systems without directly helping specific individuals.

Perhaps because being useful to society is more general it is rated above helping others, and is the third mostly highly rated attribute overall.

Only 10% of graduates rate a high income as very important, the lowest of any attribute and the overall importance of money is the second-lowest of the options given. Money is nice to have but other job attributes are more important.

Read More »

Graduate income fluctuations and HELP repayment

Andrew Norton2 Comments

Last week I raised concerns about the new HELP repayment system increasing the number of HELP debtors who face very long repayment times or lifetimes of student debt.

The calculations in that post assumed that people maintained their relative income position through their careers – for example that someone who earned the median income at age 25 would still do so at age 35, 45 etc. We know, however, that relative income fluctuates. Family commitments drive movements in and out of full-time work. Careers go better or worse than expected.

Without solving the problems involved in estimating how these changes affect HELP repayments, this post outlines findings on graduate income mobility and labour force status changes.

Movements between income quintiles

The chart below uses data from a Productivity Commission report on economic mobility. It shows changes in relative income, between five economic quintiles, over a decade since degree completion. The data source is HILDA.

Quintile 5, the highest, shows strong stability. More than 80% of graduates in quintile 5 were still there or in quintile 4 a decade later. The high starting point and following stability may be due to people already doing well in their careers acquiring postgraduate qualifications.

The other quintiles all show significant movement in relative income. Upward movement is expected as we know graduate incomes increase in the years after course completion. Almost half of graduates in the lowest quintile in year one are in the top two quintiles a decade later.

Bu there is also some stability at the lower end. In the two lowest quintiles, 1 and 2, over a quarter remain in those quintiles a decade later. In quintile 3 we see a similar share falling back to quintiles 1 and 2. While some of this is career stagnation, ten years out takes into the ages when women start leaving full-time work to meet family responsibilities.

Read More »

Will the new HELP repayment system make high EMTR problems better or worse?

Andrew NortonLeave a comment

The new HELP repayment system being legislated this week will move from repaying a % of total income to a % of income above the repayment threshold, a marginal system. In introducing the bill to Parliament, education minister Jason Clare quoted Bruce Chapman on a marginal system: ‘it’s much gentler and much fairer than previously—we should have done it years ago.’

While the new marginal repayment system may be gentler and fairer, it could create more widespread disincentives to working additional hours than the current total income system.

The problem with total income systems

The Universities Accord Final Report, which guides the government’s higher education agenda, criticised the total income repayment as unfair and a deterrent to work.

The underlying problem is that a multi-rate total income repayment system creates multiple threshold ‘cliffs’, income points at which earning $1 more triggers a big increase in student debt repayment. The most extreme cliffs are the lower income levels. Under the current system a debtor whose income reaches the $56,156 first threshold faces an increase in repayments from $0 to $561.56, plus 30 cents of income tax.  By earning more the student debtor reduces their take-home pay. Repayment cliffs exist, at less extreme levels, at all 18 income thresholds in the current student debt repayment system.

A total income repayment system produces some very high effective marginal tax rates (EMTR). An EMTR is jargon for how much of an extra dollar earned is lost to income tax, withdrawal of benefits, and in this case HELP repayments. EMTRs are a big issue in Australia’s welfare state, which makes widespread use of means tests – of which the HELP repayment thresholds are a version.

Read More »

The new HELP repayment system and lifetimes of student debt

Andrew NortonLeave a comment

The prime minister says that a degree should not come with a lifetime of debt. For that goal, the government’s HELP legislation introduced last week is contradictory. It will cut all debt owed as of 1 June 2025 by 20%, which will shorten repayment times for current debtors. But it will also cut annual debt repayments for 99% of debtors, which will lengthen compulsory repayment times for many and push others into the PM’s lifetime of debt.

In the analysis below, female debtors owing $25,000 or more with incomes in the lowest 40% of graduate earnings face an increased risk of a lifetime of student debt. However, what percentage of female debtors actually face a lifetime of debt will depend on initial debt levels and how much their incomes vary through their careers. Voluntary repayments can also affect repayment times.

How the repayment system will change

My previous post on the initial threshold summarised how the repayment system will change. The key elements are that 1) repayment exempt incomes will include everyone on $67,000 or less compared to less than $56,156 now and 2) a marginal rather than total income repayment system will reduce what most debtors repay, particularly at lower income levels.

The chart below shows how this will affect HELP debtors at different annual income levels. Based on 2022-23 ATO data I estimate that 99% of debtors repaying under current thresholds will repay less per year than under the current system. The other 1%, all high income earners, will repay the same amount per year as now.

Read More »

International students and the rental market

Andrew Norton5 Comments

The housing section of the RBA’s report last week on international students and the economy had higher education media dismissing the contribution of students to rent increases as a ‘furphy’. I agree that international students are at most one factor amongst many in post-COVID accommodation market problems. That said, the RBA may understate the scale of international education’s contribution to rental demand.

Student Experience Survey results

The RBA used the Student Experience Survey to try to work out the proportion of students in the private rental market where they compete with others for accommodation. The question the SES asks is below.

The RBA’s conclusion that about half of international students are in the private rental market is based on the result below, which is for undergraduates. Taking a broad definition of undergraduate that was about 40% of international students in 2023. But assuming it is broadly representative, there is still one number that I have persistently struggled to understand in this survey, which is the high percentage of international students who say they live with their parents – 19% in 2023. Can that be right?

Read More »

The history and politics of the first student debt repayment threshold

Andrew NortonLeave a comment

The government’s HELP legislation, cutting student debts by 20% and introducing a new repayment system, was introduced into Parliament yesterday. While I have criticisms of the 20% cut, it will be implemented and once done cannot be reversed. The changes to the repayment system will pass now but can, and probably should, be changed at a later date.

In this post I briefly explain how the repayment system will change and then discuss the choice of the first threshold.

The current and proposed student debt repayment systems

Under the current system, repayments start at an annual income of $56,156, at which point student debtors repay 1% of their total income. From there the percentage of income repaid increases incrementally to reach 10% of income at $164,712.

Under the new system repayments start at when income exceeds $67,000. At this point a marginal rate of 15% of income above $67,000 applies up to $124,999, where a marginal rate of 17% applies for income of $125,000 or more. Unexpectedly the bill restores part of the old system with an annual repayment cap of 10% of total income. This avoids some high income earners paying more than now.

The new thresholds will be indexed to growth in average weekly earnings. The current thresholds are indexed to CPI.

The logic of the first threshold

As the chart below shows, in the black dotted line, the first repayment threshold has changed over time. The long-term policy/political tension is between the idea that graduates should enjoy some financial advantage before repaying their student debt and the idea that student debt should be repaid except in cases of financial hardship. The policy pendulum is currently shifting from the latter to the former.

Read More »

Despite an increase in applications for the 2024 academic year, school leaver interest in higher education remained below mid-2010s levels

Andrew NortonLeave a comment

University applications statistics for 2022 to 2024 were finally released late last week, giving us another data source on demand for higher education.

This post focuses on recent school leavers. The chart below shows that applications for this group were up in 2024 on 2023, but that the slump in applications since the late 2010s remained evident – other than the spike for academic year 2021, which is only apparent for teenagers who finished school prior to 2020. This is consistent with people deciding to sit out the COVID recession at university.

That COVID spike meant that in 2021 an unusually large share – 35% – of the 19 and under applicant group were not people who had finished school the year before. This share was 32.5% in each of 2023 and 2024, higher than any year 2012 to 2020, when it averaged 28.4%. This could mean that we are seeing more young people delaying higher education. This data source does not, however, distinguish between people who delayed applying until one or two years after finishing school, and people who enrolled but reapplied to change university and/or course.

Read More »

The Prac Payment that will go to Services Australia and the ATO, as well as students

Andrew Norton1 Comment

Last year I was critical of how I thought the Commonwealth Prac Payments were going to work. These were to provide Austudy level payments, currently equivalent to $331.65 a week, for nursing, midwifery, social work and teacher education students while undertaking compulsory work placements. The payment starts on 1 July 2025 for students on income support and some working students.

Rather late in the day, the legal paperwork for its higher education version was completed last week. The vocational education diploma of nursing version paperwork was already available. The higher education version is administered by universities and funded through the ‘other grants’ provisions of the Higher Education Support Act 2003. The VET Prac Payment is administered by the Department of Employment and Workplace Relations, although the funding is authorised under the Social Security Act 1991.

Things I was concerned about that have not happened

Some of my Prac Payment concerns from last year were not realised in the policy as enacted. The Prac Payment has a means test but it is based solely on the student’s income, not family income. However family income has an indirect effect through eligibility for income support.

A policy goal is reduce the number of students who defer or withdraw from their course due to placement obligations, but students won’t need to prove that they are considering either of those things.

But in the Australian way of public policy, the Prac Payment is an underwhelming half-measure. The payment is low and will be further reduced by tax and by social security income tests. Many students won’t be eligible at all.

Read More »