Labor’s policy fix to tighten temporary migration can’t come soon enough for a government that’s facing both a substantive policy and political challenge from record numbers of foreign students.
There are strong, vocal constituencies for continuing the massive number of foreign students entering Australia — and sound policy reasons too. But the surge, coinciding with the culmination of decades of failure on housing policy, is causing acute problems in the housing market and offers golden opportunities for the Coalition and even more right-wing politicians such as Pauline Hanson to attack immigration.
The government’s budget prediction of net overseas migration of 400,000 for 2022-23 — falling to 315,000 this year — looks likely to be a significant underestimate, with credible predictions from experts such as Abul Rizvi that the figure is more like half a million over the past 12 months. A key reason is the rapid increase in foreign student numbers to record levels, with more than 660,000 in Australia in August, despite the government committing to curb entry for applicants of low-quality private (the terms are virtually synonymous) vocational education institutions, which function less like educational institutions and more like visa scamming opportunities.
Business loves temporary migrants, especially foreign students, who provide a low-skilled but easily exploitable source of labour. Universities also love them, given they provide billions in revenue, as do governments of both sides, which have cut and cut public funding to higher education per student.
Indeed the government loves foreign students so much that it is considering imposing a tax on foreign students proposed by the Universities Accord Review Panel.
This would be an extraordinary decision: having driven universities to rely heavily on revenue from foreign students by cutting public funding, the federal government would effectively punish that decision by taxing that revenue — either cutting total funding or forcing universities to pursue even more foreign students to make up the shortfall.
Meanwhile, the national rental vacancy rate and the number of rental listings reached historic lows in September while rents continued to record double-digit annual rises, despite some slowing.
There are no short-term supply levers to address the rental crisis, and even the medium- and long-term levers — increasing social housing funding and removing restrictions on higher-density property development — are unlikely to make a marked impact. In fact, the crisis will only get worse in coming quarters, with building approvals at their lowest levels in a decade. Senior officials of the Reserve Bank told Parliament’s economics committee last week that we have yet to see the peak in rental CPI, a key contributor to overall inflation.
In fact it would be absurd for that not to be the case given the surge in foreign students coinciding with the persistent decline in housing approvals since their peak in early 2021.
Opposition Leader Peter Dutton has made clear his intention to campaign on an anti-immigration platform, peddling a conspiracy theory that Labor has a secret plan for a “big Australia”. As the man more responsible than anyone else for losing control of Australia’s borders under the previous government, he should know that demand-driven visa categories ostensibly intended to help other parts of the economy are easily gamed, or become de facto migration avenues. But that sort of nuance will be ignored in the Coalition’s rhetoric about housing and infrastructure being inadequate to meet the demands of Labor’s migration policies.
Hanson, predictably, has returned to one of her favourite topics, arguing that governments of both sides and big business like high immigration but it doesn’t benefit ordinary Australians.
The case for short- and long-term benefits of high levels of foreign university students is relatively clear — especially if regulators are able to curb the egregious exploitation of them by business. And they shouldn’t shoulder the blame for the rental crisis — especially given, as Cameron Murray has noted, student accommodation doesn’t figure in estimates of dwellings.
But a first step must surely be to go beyond improving regulation of the scandal-plagued private vocational education sector — instead burning it to the ground and rebuilding it under ultra-strict requirements for integrity and quality.
In an interim report the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade recommended earlier this month that the government “take firm action to address persistent and deep-seated integrity issues in the private vocational education and training sector”. These include much tougher requirements on private operators (such as a fit and proper person test and a requirement that they be an existing domestic training provider), that new provider applications be halted for a year, a ban on foreign students taking well-known dodgy courses and bans on any provider under investigation from accepting students.
The private vocational education sector accounts for only a few tens of thousands of foreign students but is the low-hanging fruit for curbing an area that provides little benefit to Australia. There’s a strong case for simply shutting down the sector outright and only reaccrediting private providers under the absolute strictest regimes.
I do wonder if the Albanese government is really aware of just how much (rightly or wrongly) the perception that they have lost control of borders is starting to take root. This is a very powerful issue that they would be well advised to take notice of, as they could lose several outer suburban seats on this issue alone. Heck, the headline figure of 500 000 plus per Anum give Dutton much raw ammunition; and combine this with a common perception that heaps of students are here mainly as a back door immigration route.
Sure, the LNP and Dutton’s fingerprints are all over previous policy failures, but that will count for little in the public mind once the next election draws closer. It seems very clear that the LNP are going to go all Trumpy over immigration, and subtleties and nuances will be totally lost.
On top of that, it should be obvious from even just a few minutes reflection that as the architects of current immigration policy, the LNP won’t actually reduce numbers, they’ll just find some asylum seekers to dogwhistle. So not only will the negative consequences of high immigration go unfixed, they’ll be made even worse by emboldening bigoted ****s and tipping previously quite reasonable people into the same spectrum.
It is all going to end very badly, and highly likely that none of the people who deserve blame will wear a single consequence.
Agreed Craig. The fact that the current problem is largely down to the LNP, and that a heap of blame for the immigration-overload mess can be sheeted home to Dutton personally is irrelevant. (Dutton is not a pollie who is bothered by facts.) Large chunks of our polity are poorly informed and will simply blame Labor for the housing crisis and failing/inadequate infrastructure. Labor needs to get on the front foot. Every few days a different member of the front bench needs to point out that Dutton and the LNP are responsible for the immigration shambles and then tell us what they are doing to fix the system and reduce overall numbers. Clare O’Neil looks to be a brilliantly effective attack dog on this subject. She needs to sink the slipper hard and often.
It’s almost mind-blowing that after the climate inaction, the lack of integrity, the disrespect for women, Robodebt, the rorts and incompetence etc, we could end up with another LNP government so soon, but yes, it could happen. Dutton could end up in the Lodge. (If Trump ended up in the Whitehouse as well, it would be time to turn prepper.) Labor needs to get it’s collective finger out, and quickly, or we’re all in strife.
Which is not at all unreasonable, given Labor looked at a burning problem they knew existed long before they ever got close to Government, and decided to back in a tanker and pour petrol on it.
Nobody will take Labor seriously attacking the LNP on this issue – regardless of how much responsibility they bear (and it is a lot) – so long as the ALP continues to actively make the whole situation worse. And rightfully so.
Fair comment dr. Albo and friends needs to swap the petrol for fire fighting foam.
The electorate is not bothered by facts.
ALP are badly informed on demographics as the LNP, especially when former &/or faux Labor types promote greenwashing of immigration and population; proxy white Australia policy (see The Voice, Brexit & Trump).
Hansonite racism and xenophobia from Monster Dutton. He will never be PM, there are not enough winnable suburban and regional seats listening to his toxic dogwhistles.
Wouldn’t be counting on that. Remember Voice vote.
How has the government lost control of borders? Especially following a generation of Tantonesque dog whistling and demands for more border security, immigration restrictions and population control for a variety of confected reasons, while deflecting from fossil fuels, top end of town and LNP (were in power?),
Like the Voice and Atlas Network, used as an electoral campaign dog whistle to attack the ALP, indigenous, the centre and immigrants vs. ageing white Australia; eugenics, nice….
This nation is a dumpster fire.
Yes, but think of the shareholder value that’s been generated for that brief moment in time !
Like the heat from burning the floorboards.
No, MB has got to Crikey via an ‘academic economist’ and channeling the US fossil fuel & Koch/Atlas linked Tanton Network?
The article is overloaded with nativist right wing talking points (accepted as fact), no grounded data analysis/presentation (relying on others’), ignores the impact still, of Covid border closures, guesswork from headline data while avoiding analysis of the grassroots (reflecting our FIRE media) then using it as a dog whistle to deflect from other issues?
Running protection for our wealth holders &/or LNP, the 5mill+ boomer generation vs. 5 mill+ millennials who are thrown under a bus, but undefined ‘immigration’ (inflated by the NOM), inc. international student churn, and subsequent population growth is used as a dog whistle; ignores the permanent elephant in the room ie. baby boomer bubble and permanent population, far more significant than temporary resident churn over, supporting budgets for more retirees.
4/10
I have said time and time again that the accommodation crisis will play into the hands of the worse political opportunists out there. And now it’s starting to happen. Big suprise. How does everyone think that Trump got elected?
Is it a crisis? For Trump it wasn’t a housing crisis, but dog whistling and megaphoning towards asylum seekers, immigrants, students etc. targeting older white and less educated voters, making all sorts of false claims transmitted by RW MSM and word of mouth e.g. social media and comments sections.
With ca. 110k student dwellings (per Murray’s article) and ca. 660k foreign students (per the number cited above), the simple numbers say they clearly shoulder some of the “blame”. Especially since they’d be more likely occupying the lower cost end of the housing market – stories of foreign students driving around in $200k cars and buying multimillion dollar houses are great for headlines but they’re not representative of the majority.
Some overseas students live in purpose-built student accommodation, but many also live in rented share houses. I can say this anecdotally from personal knowledge, but I’d like to see figures on it.
Domestic students have also been known to live in rented share houses, I can also say anecdotally from personal knowledge.
I was answering the assertion that overseas students don’t contribute to the rental crisis.
Apologies for the misinterpretation.
Nailed it, there is little if any data at postcode level and like FIRE media, the article uses headline guesswork, which is also used to dog whistle…
Accommodation is a massive sector, off campus inc. CBD purpose built, flying under the radar are homestays, helps to pay mortgages and unis, Tafe and colleges regularly advertise to local communities, as many boomers have spare rooms and enjoy hosting.
Just on housing, it’s left to NGOs to assess occupancy rates indirectly via water/electricity usage because the FIRE sector and councils will not?
Got a source for those ‘stories’ and all that nativist agitprop? As opposed to back of a fag packet analysis &/or guesswork, masking beliefs?
Anecdotal…..sentiments are not a valid population sample.
Got a source for those ‘stories’ and all that agitprop, as opposed to back of a cigarette packet analysis &/or guesswork, masking beliefs?
Yes. As I literally wrote in the comment you replied to (which, obviously as usual, you didn’t actually read), 660k students is quoted in Keane’s article above, and 110k student dwellings are cited in Murray’s article.
If you have better data, by all means cite it.
False equivalence or relationship, or simply confusing based on a single factor, ie. international students 660k <-> 110k purpose built dwellings; not valid because other housing options have been neither cited nor accounted for?
Therefore, not grounded analysis, whatever the numbers are, not accounting for multiple related housing types and factors…. but the subliminal need to disappear all these nasty ‘foreign’ students….
There’s 550k of students’ accommodation needs that need to be accounted for.
Unless there is some convincing evidence a significant volume of other housing options exist, that are solely available to foreign students, then they are competing in the same rental market as everyone else, and thus contributing to the rental shortage.
This point seemed so plainly obvious I didn’t think it needed to be explicitly stated.
“There are strong, vocal constituencies for continuing the massive number of foreign students entering Australia — and sound policy reasons too.”
No, there aren’t. Most of these o/seas students won’t work in their field of study or expertise. Many of them just want to access the Australian labour market. There has to be better reasons to immigrate here, even temporarily, and study given the apparent and implicit lack of skills level and skills base present in the said category of students. Numbers should be drastically cut to areas of crucial need and high skill, training and expertise. Not hairdressing, beauticians, nail artists, chefs, kitchen hands or even those in traditional trades and industries. Local companies are reluctant to employ overseas graduates in any case and they end up working in state and federal public service agencies or in the finance and insurance sectors if they are likely. Many, if the don’t go back and manage to get to stay here, will end up driving taxis, ubers, working in petrol stations, IT/telephone/retail outlets or the various exigencies and vagaries of the hospitality industry.