Mr PRICE (11:32 AM) —I have always been proud of the fact that I come from Western Sydney. I am one of a number of members in this parliament from that great region. It is a region where one in 10 Australians live and where one in four people in New South Wales live; it has 20 per cent of the state's labour force, 90 per cent of whom have to travel outside of the region, and it has 25 per cent of the state's GDP. It is the third largest economic region in Australia, with a GDP of $55 billion.

We are unapologetic in Western Sydney in saying that we are not second-class citizens, that we want our fair share and that we want our fair share of jobs. So a bill like the Innovation and Education Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2001 is of fundamental importance to the people of Western Sydney, particularly to the young people. In relation to Sydney's unemployment, we have 78 per cent of Sydney's unemployment and we have 58 per cent of Sydney's jobs. If you look at the information and technology area, you will see that 20 out of every 100 jobs in the rest of Sydney are high tech, information industry based. In Western Sydney that number is merely four.

I suppose what has been most distressing about this government's action is that, whatever limited opportunities there are in Western Sydney, they are being cut back. I know we are dealing with nonresearch places, but look at what this government has done to the University of Western Sydney in the cutback of research places. There has been a decline Australia wide of 3,336. It means that we have been savaged. The University of Western Sydney has had a reduction of 50 per cent in its research places. You may think I have that wrong, but we have had a 50 per cent cutback. That is the second highest cutback, both in percentage terms and in numerical terms.

We do aspire to have young people from Western Sydney going on to do research. In fact, the Hawkesbury campus, a very old, traditionally agriculturally based campus, has had a long history in research. But this relatively new university, the second largest in terms of numbers in Sydney, has had a cutback of 50 per cent in its research places. That is tragic. In addition to that, the number of places has not been maintained. We all know that, when this government came to office, it decided to savage the universities of Australia. At the University of Western Sydney there are currently 24,693 students. Had the government maintained the funding, there would have been an additional 3,608 students. In other words, we would have had 28,301 students. What is the minister putting back into the University of Western Sydney under this legislation? A measly 40 places, in lieu of 3,608. Just fighting to get that university took some time, and it is disappointing to stand in this place and see the University of Western Sydney and the people it seeks to serve being singled out for savage, vicious treatment.

Maybe older universities, like the university of East Sydney—more commonly known as Sydney University—and the University of New South Wales, are better able to accommodate these cutbacks. But when you have a new university going through all the growing pains that these institutions go through, these cuts come doubly hard. As I said to you about this region, Mr Deputy Speaker, the one thing we are not blessed with is a lot of regional institutions. If you were to shift Western Sydney further west, clearly we would be a state in our own right and we would have a whole range of infrastructure. Therefore, our educational institutions are so important to us.

What are we talking about in terms of education? It is really about improving the life chances of our young people. In talking about universities we should not diminish the role of primary schools, which are tremendously important in laying down those educational foundations, and the role of high schools in further developing the foundations and giving students options about whether they are going to head off to university or further vocational training. I do not diminish the importance of those institutions. In Western Sydney we have some very fine examples of private schools and also public schools. But, generally speaking, it is the case that the education system is not delivering the opportunities for success that students deserve. After all, the role and responsibility of an educational institution, whether it is a primary school, a high school, a TAFE or a university, is clearly to develop the potential of those young people. Instead of saying that too many students are failing school, I say that schools are failing too many students.

Not for one moment do I underestimate the challenges associated with teaching in Western Sydney, but that ought not be an excuse for failure or for a second-best outcome. That is unacceptable to me and unacceptable to the parents and I believe it is unacceptable to the students. Unfortunately, rather than raising the bar and developing an expectation that all students will succeed, schools too often reinforce an expectation that students will not do well. I believe we ought to measure the success of these institutions not by how the brightest student succeeds at a primary school, a high school, a TAFE or a university but by how the least bright student does.

We owe a duty of care and responsibility to each and every student. But these days, because it is the way of things, people have to be prepared to invest in their future. That is why HECS was developed. It was developed as a way of expanding the number of places available at universities when we abolished the bicameral system in higher education, but we said that there had to be a contribution. We on this side often say that going into debt is often a turn-off to working-class people. But I would argue very strongly that we need to change that culture and that attitude to one where it is perfectly appropriate for people to invest in themselves and their life chances by taking on debt at university under HECS or in postgraduate non-research places under this new PELS scheme. Mr Deputy Speaker, although it is a fact that people may not be able to look forward to having one job for 20 or 30 years, as you and I may have expected, and people will go through a number of changes, I think that initial investment, that initial taking on of debt, is very worth while.

I suppose a number of things have been unfair. Firstly, there is a bit of intergenerational injustice in this because, in a sense, you need to prepare parents and families that this is the way of the world, and in this case there was little preparation. When Labor introduced HECS, we did not do it to improve consolidated revenue or to get rid of the $9.6 billion deficit we were left; we did it with the view that every dollar would go in to expand the system. That is not the case today. Unfortunately, HECS payments are being syphoned off into consolidated revenue. I find it a most alarming development that the level of student debt— or the loans that they are required to take out to undertake courses—now places Australia, as the honourable member for Braddon pointed out, second to the United States. I think that is getting too close to the Americanisation of the system.

Another thing I want to point out is that, in some community consultations I was involved in, a number of people have raised with me the age of independence. The very first committee that I ever chaired looked at student financial assistance. I have always been indebted to Bob Charles, the deputy chairman at the time, because we looked at quite a few controversial things but were able to bring down a unanimous report— which was signed up to by, for example, the Leader of the National Party, the Minister for Veterans' Affairs and the Assistant Minister for Defence—to gradually reduce the age of independence from 25 each year, and I am pleased to say that this was happening under the Labor government. Of course, this has been totally reversed by the Howard government, and I think it is grossly unfair and a most unfortunate change.

People from Western Sydney resent bitterly being considered second-class citizens or, indeed, having people try to dictate what is in their best interests or what is good for them. The airport debate is a pretty good example of that, where inner city federal members on both sides of parliament, whilst knowing full well that a second airport will not reduce any noise effect in their electorates, believe that we should share in the noise.

I am pleased to say that the Western Sydney Economic and Development Board have prepared a report for us—and it has been endorsed by federal members in Western Sydney and federal ALP candidates—that looks at developing a technology, education and learning corridor on these 1,700 hectares. The 1,700-hectare site is the single largest remaining government site in Sydney. Whilst it is an excellent report, we are looking at further working it up and consulting with stakeholders in the region. This is not my estimate, but the board have suggested that up to 100,000 jobs could be developed directly as a result of proceeding down this path.

I am not a job snob. I value each and every job that is available to people in my electorate. As I pointed out to you earlier, Mr Deputy Speaker, and as Jim Bosnjak, the chairman of the board, has pointed out, there is a real fault line developing in Sydney between the high-tech information based jobs that are available in other parts of Sydney and those available in Western Sydney. I believe this exciting development would significantly redress that imbalance. Unlike other technology park proposals that have been around for some time, this is not just about developing high-tech industry; it is also about having education being provided on site. I imagine there may be outposts of one or a number of universities on this technology, education and learning corridor.

In relation to any residential development, we have an ideal opportunity here to provide leading edge, environmentally sustainable accommodation. It could involve things like solar energy—perhaps that is not so new anymore—grey water recycling and energy efficient housing. Maybe we could even have some permaculture subdivisions. Isn't this the great Australian irony? Permaculture was developed in Australia but no subdivision in Australia is done under permaculture principles. In fact, it took California to pick up this Australian idea and implement it. Can I be so bold and go so far as to suggest that maybe we could have a good look at that. I want to reiterate that this undertaking would require vital and direct private enterprise involvement not only in terms of the industries that might relocate there but actually in terms of getting private enterprise into the driver's seat in developing the proposal.

I do not want to take up too much more time of the House. I indicate that I totally support the shadow minister's amendment. People in Western Sydney have a passion about education. It is so important to us, but more particularly it is so important to the richest resource that we have in Western Sydney—that is, our young people. Anything that improves their educational opportunities improves their life chances. These are great Australians who in this new century and in this new millennium have the potential to make an outstanding contribution to the further development of this country. I yearn for a government that really sees the investment in young people as being worth while, whether they are in primary school, high school, TAFE or university, and that really is prepared to say that public investment in research and in postgraduate education not only is good for the individuals but also is absolutely in the national interest. I support the amendment.