Halve arts degree costs by reversing the Job-ready Graduates fee hikes — back it or block it?
This Greens bill would roll back the 2020 "Job-ready Graduates" fee increases for fields like arts, law, commerce, communications and society and culture, cutting the maximum student contribution back to pre-2021 levels. Supporters say it would roughly halve the cost of an arts degree, currently around $56,000, and ease debt that hits low-income students hardest.
Labor and the Coalition both criticised the current scheme but opposed the bill, arguing it would strip about $1.3 billion a year from universities without replacing the money. The Senate rejected it at the second reading, 11 votes to 30.
🗳 A public mood-check, not a scientific poll. Vote to reveal how the chamber voted.
For · Greens (Mehreen Faruqi)Says the fee hikes have pushed arts degrees to $56,000 and driven low-income enrolments in humanities, law and commerce down nearly 20% since 2020. Argues reversing them would cost about $1 billion a year — affordable for a government that funds submarines and lets gas exporters off — and that Labor, which called the scheme "punitive" in opposition, could pass it today.
For (with reservations) · David Pocock (Ind)Backs the core aim, saying the scheme is a failed policy that has left students facing debts of $70,000–$90,000 and worsened intergenerational inequality. He disagrees with parts of the bill and wishes others had proposed amendments rather than just criticising it.
Against · Government (Labor)Says the bill would reduce university funding and could hurt courses, staffing, research and smaller regional providers. Points to its own record — cutting $16 billion in student debt, capping indexation, paid prac and a new Tertiary Education Commission — and argues reform should be delivered methodically through the universities accord, not this bill.
Against · Coalition (Matt O'Sullivan)Argues the bill would strip about $1.3 billion a year from universities with no way to replace it, risking up to 8,400 jobs. Says it selectively cuts some fees while keeping the scheme's cheaper rates for nursing, teaching and agriculture, creating a new arbitrary fee structure, and calls it grandstanding rather than genuine reform.