On Wednesday, while deputy Prime Minister Julia Gillard was in India defending Australia’s dodgy colleges, foreign students were in Melbourne doing some campaigning of their own.
They gathered outside Parliament House, unfurled banners with the words “Fair Fares” and demanded transport concessions for all international and postgraduate students.
Under Victorian legislation, domestic students are eligible for concession fares on public transport, but full-fee-paying international students are not. Victoria and NSW are the only states denying international students transport concessions.
Concession recipients fall into two categories. The first, according to a letter from Premier John Brumby to the Graduate Students Association, is “students in genuine financial need”. Pensioners, unemployed people and those with health care cards are included here.
The second, as the Minister for Transport, Lynne Kosky, explained in a 2007 speech to the Legislative Assembly, is people who “are likely in the future to contribute to the generation of a ‘knowledge economy’ and the creation of a skilled workforce in Australia”. This means domestic students who “represent an investment” for Victoria. The theory is that after graduating, domestic students make a long-term contribution to the Australian economy, offsetting the cost of their subsidised fares.
The Victorian Government argues that international students fall into neither of these categories. If foreign students can afford full fees, then they can’t be in “genuine financial need”. (According to the terms of their study visas, international students must also be able to meet their own expenses.) And because they’re only temporary residents, they aren’t going to make a significant, long-term contribution to the Australian economy. This means they don’t represent a sound investment for the state.
Both these assumptions are flawed. First, although international students pay full fees, many still struggle financially. Recruitment agents in their home countries sometimes lie to them about living costs in Australia and landlords overcharge them rent on arrival. The Fair Work Ombudsman has warned foreign students are “vulnerable to exploitation” in the workplace, too. A few plucky souls, such as Indian student Patrick Sahni, have even taken their employers to court for under-paying wages. At least some of these international students are in “genuine financial need”. The students may have pledged to meet their own expenses, but their visa’s terms didn’t mention anything about discrimination or targeted exploitation.
Secondly, international students make a significant contribution to Victoria’s economy and culture. Education exports in Victoria are estimated at $4.9 billion. International students buy local goods and services and pay the same taxes as everyone else. Their presence increases the state’s cultural diversity and strengthens Australia’s ties with other countries. A 2008 report found that “nearly two-thirds of international students plan to stay in Australia after graduating”. Surely some of these students, many of whom will be granted permanent residency, could be considered “likely in the future to contribute” to our country and economy?
The Australian Bureau of Statistics estimates international education income reached $12.5 billion in 2007, making the sector our largest services export. In the scheme of things, giving foreign students concession cards is, well, a very small concession indeed. It might even save us money on expensive lobbying efforts overseas.
Greg Foyster is a Melbourne writer. He attended the “Fair Fares” rally on September 2 at Parliament House.
Dear Mr Foyster
Thank you so much for formulating your arguement on evidence and not just what will grab the biggest headline.
It always concerned me when i would hear the protesting international students saying that they were unable to get concession. I couldn’t work out why? Thankfully I think you have explained it to me.
Am I right in thinking that no student in Victoria who has paid for their course up front has a concession card? Am I also right that the conditions of student visas is that they can afford to support themselves? Now your arguement seems to be that some students are being sold a lemon by the agents of these schools in their country of origin. If this is so then the correction must be in the licensing and monitoring of these agents and more thourough explanations of the reality for students when they apply for their visas.
I’m not sure but is your arguement that all upfront fee paying students should get concessions or only international students. Should concessions be based not on need. Are we going to deny Australian citizens and apply different rules to people in regards to their racre or country of origin?
That doesn’t seem right to me.
Once again thank you for formulating an arguement that doesn’t stoop to anecdotal evidence although I wonder what you meant by discrimination? Is it discrimination to have to follow the same rules as everybody else? Or why the Victorian government is responsible for targeted exploitationin a foreign country?
The students may have pledged to meet their own expenses, but their visa’s terms didn’t mention anything about discrimination or targeted exploitation.
The problems appear to be that students are promised a fantasy.
Please some answers to this problem that aren’t just oiling the squeaky wheel please
Thanks for your comment Heathdon. Sorry for the delayed reply – the article didn’t receive any comments for a few days so I stopped checking.
To answer your first question: yes, Victorian students who pay course fees up-front can use concession cards. A Metlink call centre operator informed me that full-fee-paying domestic students are eligible for transport concessions. As mentioned in the article, their international counterparts are not.
And yes, I do indeed believe some students are being sold a lemon. Your suggestion of increased licensing and monitoring of overseas education agents makes a lot of sense, though may prove to be a logistical nightmare.
My main argument is that international students and domestic students should be treated the same. Either they should all get transport concessions (because as students they represent an investment for the state), or they should all be means-tested (to establish which students have a genuine need). The point is that both groups should be treated equally. At the moment that is not happening.
You are right to query the my use of the word ‘discrimination’. The term is often misused. But I believe in this case the word is warranted because many international students are treated differently from domestic students. Not only by their employers, which the Fair Work Ombudsman has acknowledged, but also by the government, which subjects them to special laws and conditions. One of those conditions is the denial of concession on public transport.
The Victorian Government might not be directly responsible for the exploitation of international students, but it does have a duty of care to these people. And in my opinion, it’s failing them.
I hope that answers some of your queries. If you’d like more information on this issue, you can email me and I’ll send you some documents I collected for the article. Alternatively, you can talk to the Concession Card Coalition. See http://www.gsa.unimelb.edu.au/concession_card/The_Concession_Card_Coalition.shtml for contact details.
Cheers,
Greg.
Greg
Sorry for the late reply, I was on leave.
The original space was because the article was on Friday and I replied on Monday.
How about ensuring that an interpreter from the immigration department has spoken to each applicant for a student visa and before approval has ensured that they both know what to expect and can afford it.
I imagine that somebody has to approve whether, as Ms Kosky(theres your answer, I fear) described, people qualify for the “adding future value” clause and it would be interesting to see how many applications from international student had been declined. Also who makes these decisions?
“many international students are treated differently from domestic students. Not only by their employers, which the Fair Work Ombudsman has acknowledged”
Sorry I didnt catch that one. Do you have a link? Is it backed up by facts or is it another Victorian PR government washover? These problems may have been headed off again if they Mr Brumby and his mob had referred journalists to the facts like they had months earlier, unfortunately they saw a headline. The NSW government did this and the agitators have concentrated their efforts on the easier target.
In finishing before your article I believed that international students should have the access to the concessions, now after you pointing out that it is a term of their visa that they can cover excpenses then I must say that sometimes in life you just cannot afford what you want. Sometimes you just have to go without. As Mr fraser said “life wasn’t meant to be easy”