Labor's international student backflip a 'farce', as economist claims Albanese government 'selling migration and work rights'
The Albanese government announced on Tuesday a 'sustainable' increase of 25,000 additional international student places for 2026, bringing the National Planning Level to 295,000.
Mr van Onselen branded the government's announcement 'ridiculous' and argued the 'farce' would contribute to a decline in university standards.
'Australia has the highest concentration of international students in the world… the government needs to get the numbers down,' he told SkyNews.com.au.
'We've diluted teaching standards massively, there's cheating scandals and soft marking.
'The integrity's been shot, the government should be focusing on a far smaller number of high skilled, high quality students. We're scraping the bottom of the barrel. (The government) should be going for the best of the best.'
The MacroBusiness economist claimed 'enrolments are at a all time high' not because of the standard of Australian degrees, but because of Australia's work rights and potential access to permanent residency.
'We're not selling education, we're selling migration and work rights,' he said.
'If you took away Australia's work rights and permanent residency, none of them would come. Perhaps a small number would come to learn, but most are coming to work and gain permanent residency.'
A joint statement put out by Education Minister Jason Clare and Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke said all international education providers will receive at least their current allocation next year, with the Australian Tertiary Education Commission to oversee future growth in international student numbers from 2027.
'International education is an incredibly important export industry for Australia, but we need to manage its growth so it's sustainable,' Mr Clare said.
'International education doesn't just make us money, it makes us friends.'
Mr Clare said the Albanese government was increasing international student intake in a way which supported 'students, universities and the national interest'.
Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke said Labor was maintaining the 'integrity of the migration system' while supporting a 'strong international education sector'.
'We are making sure student visa processing supports genuine education outcomes and our strategic priorities - including increasing provision of student accommodation,' he said.
In March, Mr van Onselen wrote some domestic students had been 'forced' to help non-English-speaking students complete their courses through group assessments.
'Some tutorials have even been conducted in foreign languages, degrading the experience for local students,' he said, telling SkyNews.com.au some students have claimed to have been subjected to tutorials delivered entirely in Mandarin.
The economist also pointed to a 2024 Guardian article which revealed Australian academics were being pressured to pass hundreds of students suspected of plagiarism and other forms of cheating to maintain revenue streams.
He claimed the government's media release on Tuesday was loaded with 'political spin' and was 'loose with the truth' about the 2026 planning level increase being eight per cent below the post-COVID peak.
The eight per cent figure related to the flow of international students, which Mr van Onselen said was below the 'tidal wave' of commencements after Australia's borders reopened at the end of the pandemic.
As a share of population, international students have doubled since 2012 when they made up 1.5 per cent.
'What it means is the numbers are going to keep growing, the total stock of international students is going to rise,'Mr van Onselen said.
According to the Department of Education, in the year-to-date to April there were more than 794,000 international student enrolments, which Mr van Onselen said was up 105,000 since the pre-COVID peak.
'It's a disaster and hasn't boosted productivity,' he said.
'We've had 20 years of massive migration, no one can say this has made the economy or standard or living better, it's made it worse.
'They talk tough before the election and now with their stomping mandate they've gone back to their big Australia approach.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Herald Sun
3 hours ago
- Herald Sun
Revealed: Where to find Victoria's best lifestyle suburbs
Victoria's best lifestyle suburbs have been revealed, from beachside bargains to up-and-coming Melbourne pockets. And with some of the best areas for families to get the right mix of transport, schools, childcare and beach or park access currently below their price peak, there's a rare chance to bag a bargain in an idyllic spot. Areas such as Armstrong Creek in Greater Geelong and Winchelsea on the Surf Coast topped the list. RELATED: Downsizers flock to beach suburbs as Baby Boomers gain access to superannuation Newport: AFL dynasty's renovated family home seeks $2m+ Revealed: Australia's 50 supercharged suburbs for price growth With median house prices in the low-to-mid $600,000s, the Geelong suburb and town with a population of 2400-plus are cheaper today compared to a few years ago. Newtown, also in Geelong, as well as nearby Barwon Heads and Torquay also made the list — but come with seven-figure median house prices. In Melbourne, south eastern suburbs were highly-ranked alongside inner city Port Melbourne and Williamstown, as well as Newport in the west, all with typical house values above $1m. The research was commissioned by MCG Quantity Surveyors using data from real estate analytics company SuburbTrends. MCG Quantity Surveyors director Mike Mortlock said the report aimed to uncover Australian suburbs with the best long-term growth potential and lifestyle offerings, based on factors such as access to amenities such as childcare, schools, beaches and open space,and 10-year median price growth. 'They're attributes that help markets outperform over the long haul – we know buyers will pay a premium to have them,' Mr Mortlock said. According to PropTrack, Armstrong Creek is now tens of thousands of dollars cheaper than when its median house price hit $728,000 in 2022. And Winchelsea's typical house price hit a five-year peak of $720,000 just 12 months ago. Despite the chance for a bargain, Melbourne-based buyers' advocate and Property Investment Professionals of Australia board member, Cate Bakos, cautioned buyers thinking of relocating and commuting to Melbourne would add hours of travel time to their week. But places like Newtown and Geelong West could be ideal for people wanting to work from home while enjoying lifestyle benefits and proximity to a train station, Ms Bakos noted. 'Geelong as a city, it's diverse – it's got a good economy, and there's lots going on there, it's food and wine scene and its weekender appeal is growing,' she added. Armstrong Real Estate director Megan Rovers, who also co-hosts the property industry podcast Built For This, said working from home allowed many buyers in the region 'to have the best of both worlds' while commuting to Melbourne for part of the week. 'They can have the house with the backyard to enjoy and the lifestyle to enjoy on the weekend,' she said. Ms Rovers said a wide range of buyers were attracted to Armstrong Creek for its schools, shopping centres and access the beach, nearby train stations to travel to Geelong or Melbourne and the Geelong Ring Road. 'What we find is first-time buyers are buying because it's affordable, downsizers are coming and following families,' Ms Rovers said. 'So if there's a family that are choosing because of the schools or the lifestyle that it offers, then the grandparents or parents will come and try and live close by.' Closer to Melbourne, Newport has a $1.205m median house price and Williamstown $1.52m. Real Estate Institute of Victoria director and Compton Green Inner West director Adrian Butera said Newport featured the 33ha Newport Lakes Reserve and two train lines running through its station. He said while Newport was not as highly-regarded as some of Melbourne's other inner western suburbs, plenty of buyers were now starting to cotton on. 'If you pull out a calculator and pull out the per square metre rate of Newport versus, say, Yarraville or Williamstown, Newport is so beautifully positioned yet is reasonably affordable,' Mr Butera said. 'In perspective, you get more bang for your buck in Newport than you do most other suburbs in the inner west.' White Fox associate director Cheyne Fox said Port Melbourne's parks, schools, shops, restaurants, friendly community and nearness to Melbourne's CBD meant many locals looked to upsize or downsize within the suburb. Ms Fox said the 'slightly softer' market was now allowing buyers to purchase homes in the suburb they might not have been able to afford three to four years ago. 'So whereas something might have been sitting on $3m or just above a few years ago, it's now dipping down to $2.6m, $2.7m and it's making it more achievable for those people,' she said. 'And I'm seeing some savvy purchases who are aware of that fact snapping up some really good properties at very reasonable prices given what they were a few years back.' Port Melbourne's median house price is $1.55m, according to PropTrack. VICTORIA'S TOP LIFESTYLE AREAS Armstrong Creek, Barwon Heads: median house prices from $653,250 to $1.49m Winchelsea: median house price $600,000 Newtown: median house price $1.085m Cheltenham, Highett: median house prices from $1.19m to $1.425m Mentone: median house price $1.325m Newport: median house price $1.205m Port Melbourne: median house price $1.55m Beaumaris: median house price $2.05m Torquay: median house price $1.175m Williamstown: median house price $1.52m Areas listed are regional statistical area level 3s, as defined by the Australian Bureau of Statistics. They are home to between 30,000 to 130,000 residents each. Source: MCG Top Suburb Lifestyle Index July 2025, MCG Quantity Surveyors, SuburbTrends, and PropTrack. Additional reporting by Aidan Devine Sign up to the Herald Sun Weekly Real Estate Update. Click here to get the latest Victorian property market news delivered direct to your inbox. MORE: Expert reveals blast risk for new 15,000-home Melbourne suburb Melbourne tipped to lead 2026 property boom | KPMG Young Melb family's clever move pays off
Sydney Morning Herald
4 hours ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
Albanese can make roundtable work for him, no matter where he sits on it
For those who doubt the effect of these changes, go and ask the populations of our AUKUS partners, Britain and the United States, how their health and retirement systems are going. The motivation behind the Accord was the labour movement's resolve to never repeat the errors that had contributed to the swift downfall of the Whitlam government: chiefly the lack of co-ordination between the unions and the party, and the failure to understand the implications of rampant wage claims made as the economy was suffering a shock from oil prices. In other words, the movement had to learn from its mistakes. In the 80 years since the end of World War II, the Labor Party has been elected to office from opposition only four times. Two of those governments – one headed by Gough Whitlam, the other by Kevin Rudd (twice) and Julia Gillard – went down the chute after just two terms. Both experienced sustained periods of internal chaos and failed to live up to their promise. The Hawke-Keating government is the standout success in the entire history of the ALP. It's still early days for the Albanese government, which is now in what was for the Whitlam and Rudd-Gillard outfits the death zone of a second term, but its early defenestration looks unlikely. A record lower house majority and a slide in the fortunes of the Liberals and the Greens offer the prospect of a sustained incumbency. The Albanese government is writing its own electoral script. The common experience of new governments from the early 1980s was that they were elected with a substantial majority that was reduced at the next election. Under Albanese, it has worked the other way around, with Labor just getting over the line in 2022 and then securing a landslide second time up. Right now, it is governing from an incredibly strong position. How could the government blow it? By not seizing the opportunity it's been given by the 8,553,231 Australians who voted for it. Those voters, who represented 55.2 per cent of the national electorate, want the country's problems fixed by the government. The extent of those problems has been demonstrated by the evolution of the roundtable, which began six months ago as an idea for a forum to find ways to kickstart productivity growth. It was not to be a summit that would produce a binding communique. Instead, it would be looser and smaller, with invitees asked to come with ideas, a spirit of consensus and a sense of shared responsibility. But as the lead-up to the roundtable has proceeded and the ambit proposals from stakeholders have dribbled out, it became more difficult to limit its remit to productivity. Fair enough, too, because the economic challenges are interconnected and go beyond that. Loading Quickly, to the government's discomfort, a focus on tax emerged. In any event, in a period when the care economy – a sector in which productivity is naturally difficult to measure – is big and guaranteed to grow, and artificial intelligence is poised to revolutionise most aspects of work, what will become of the existing concept of productivity? It follows that if a meeting convened by the national government has economic reform in its title, it needs to generate substantial results. The smartest thing the government can do will be to see the roundtable as an opportunity to expand its policy options, regardless of whether the industry groups or any other stakeholders play a spoiler role or not. If it tries to 'manage' the outcome, it will be shooting itself in the foot and letting down the people who gave it power. Chalmers, as a former staffer of Wayne Swan, treasurer in the Rudd and Gillard governments, will recall what happened to the 2010 Henry review of the tax system commissioned by the Rudd government. The review made 138 recommendations, only three of which the government took up. It was a political and policy disaster. And having studied Paul Keating's political career, Chalmers also knows about the ambitious and far-reaching tax changes Keating introduced in the Hawke government's second term. At the 1984 election, Labor pledged to hold a tax summit if re-elected. After the summit in 1985, Keating cut the marginal tax rate from 60 to 49 per cent and introduced a tax on capital gains and fringe benefits, along with a range of other changes to such things as wholesale sales tax and the company tax rate. Several measures, especially the fringe benefits tax, faced serious pushback from vested interests. The government had no direct mandate for those outcomes, but it pushed ahead and got them through. It was rewarded by voters for its courage, winning in 1987, 1990 and 1993. The roundtable could turn out to be a bust, as some critics have predicted, but that shouldn't matter. If it founders on the rock of self-interested pandering or head-in-the-sand behaviour, Albanese should say it was worth a try, thank the participants for coming, and then get on with doing big things anyway. There is an appetite for this in the community, especially among younger voters, who are getting the rough end of the economic pineapple. Loading A report this week found that house prices are 14 times the annual average wage. To let this continue would be unconscionable and a social catastrophe. The prime minister and treasurer are breathing rare air. They will never get a chance like this again. Then again, who's to say they actually share any historically significant, politically risky ideas for the economy? Postscript: What of my massive career-defining national scoop in 1983? Four paragraphs appeared in a late edition on a left-hand page deep inside the paper, with no byline. On the following Monday morning, I got a call from a senior colleague on the chief of staff's desk, a decent bloke: 'Mate, the other papers have got some of the details of this Labor-unions agreement that they're voting on today. Have you seen it?'
The Age
4 hours ago
- The Age
Albanese can make roundtable work for him, no matter where he sits on it
For those who doubt the effect of these changes, go and ask the populations of our AUKUS partners, Britain and the United States, how their health and retirement systems are going. The motivation behind the Accord was the labour movement's resolve to never repeat the errors that had contributed to the swift downfall of the Whitlam government: chiefly the lack of co-ordination between the unions and the party, and the failure to understand the implications of rampant wage claims made as the economy was suffering a shock from oil prices. In other words, the movement had to learn from its mistakes. In the 80 years since the end of World War II, the Labor Party has been elected to office from opposition only four times. Two of those governments – one headed by Gough Whitlam, the other by Kevin Rudd (twice) and Julia Gillard – went down the chute after just two terms. Both experienced sustained periods of internal chaos and failed to live up to their promise. The Hawke-Keating government is the standout success in the entire history of the ALP. It's still early days for the Albanese government, which is now in what was for the Whitlam and Rudd-Gillard outfits the death zone of a second term, but its early defenestration looks unlikely. A record lower house majority and a slide in the fortunes of the Liberals and the Greens offer the prospect of a sustained incumbency. The Albanese government is writing its own electoral script. The common experience of new governments from the early 1980s was that they were elected with a substantial majority that was reduced at the next election. Under Albanese, it has worked the other way around, with Labor just getting over the line in 2022 and then securing a landslide second time up. Right now, it is governing from an incredibly strong position. How could the government blow it? By not seizing the opportunity it's been given by the 8,553,231 Australians who voted for it. Those voters, who represented 55.2 per cent of the national electorate, want the country's problems fixed by the government. The extent of those problems has been demonstrated by the evolution of the roundtable, which began six months ago as an idea for a forum to find ways to kickstart productivity growth. It was not to be a summit that would produce a binding communique. Instead, it would be looser and smaller, with invitees asked to come with ideas, a spirit of consensus and a sense of shared responsibility. But as the lead-up to the roundtable has proceeded and the ambit proposals from stakeholders have dribbled out, it became more difficult to limit its remit to productivity. Fair enough, too, because the economic challenges are interconnected and go beyond that. Loading Quickly, to the government's discomfort, a focus on tax emerged. In any event, in a period when the care economy – a sector in which productivity is naturally difficult to measure – is big and guaranteed to grow, and artificial intelligence is poised to revolutionise most aspects of work, what will become of the existing concept of productivity? It follows that if a meeting convened by the national government has economic reform in its title, it needs to generate substantial results. The smartest thing the government can do will be to see the roundtable as an opportunity to expand its policy options, regardless of whether the industry groups or any other stakeholders play a spoiler role or not. If it tries to 'manage' the outcome, it will be shooting itself in the foot and letting down the people who gave it power. Chalmers, as a former staffer of Wayne Swan, treasurer in the Rudd and Gillard governments, will recall what happened to the 2010 Henry review of the tax system commissioned by the Rudd government. The review made 138 recommendations, only three of which the government took up. It was a political and policy disaster. And having studied Paul Keating's political career, Chalmers also knows about the ambitious and far-reaching tax changes Keating introduced in the Hawke government's second term. At the 1984 election, Labor pledged to hold a tax summit if re-elected. After the summit in 1985, Keating cut the marginal tax rate from 60 to 49 per cent and introduced a tax on capital gains and fringe benefits, along with a range of other changes to such things as wholesale sales tax and the company tax rate. Several measures, especially the fringe benefits tax, faced serious pushback from vested interests. The government had no direct mandate for those outcomes, but it pushed ahead and got them through. It was rewarded by voters for its courage, winning in 1987, 1990 and 1993. The roundtable could turn out to be a bust, as some critics have predicted, but that shouldn't matter. If it founders on the rock of self-interested pandering or head-in-the-sand behaviour, Albanese should say it was worth a try, thank the participants for coming, and then get on with doing big things anyway. There is an appetite for this in the community, especially among younger voters, who are getting the rough end of the economic pineapple. Loading A report this week found that house prices are 14 times the annual average wage. To let this continue would be unconscionable and a social catastrophe. The prime minister and treasurer are breathing rare air. They will never get a chance like this again. Then again, who's to say they actually share any historically significant, politically risky ideas for the economy? Postscript: What of my massive career-defining national scoop in 1983? Four paragraphs appeared in a late edition on a left-hand page deep inside the paper, with no byline. On the following Monday morning, I got a call from a senior colleague on the chief of staff's desk, a decent bloke: 'Mate, the other papers have got some of the details of this Labor-unions agreement that they're voting on today. Have you seen it?'
