Senator CROSSIN (5:12 PM) —I rise this afternoon to provide a contribution to the debate on this matter of public importance. Let us take a step back in time to June 2001, when the Department of Employment, Science and Training commissioned consultants Ray Adams and Associates to do some research for them and put together the latest report into higher education—which was going to be a 2001 report.

Our understanding is that any formatting, editing, indexing or completion of that report occurred by April 2002; yet the scenario rolling out before us seems akin to Minister Ruddock's handling of people who want to queue jump when they are trying to get entry into this country—that is, a minister who is not quite sure of his dates and a department that is prepared to write letters to protect its own actions in this matter. We have a claim by the department that the editing of this report had only begun in 2002. The consultants tell us that by April 2002 most of the formatting and editing had been completed. Who is correct? Who is telling the truth in this instance?

During the estimates process on 5 June, Senator Carr was informed that the final draft of this report had been sent to the minister in the first quarter of this year. But on 23 June the minister told us that he had not been formally briefed on the report. Once again, we will have to slowly dig deeper and find out exactly who is correct. Was the department right in saying on 5 June that the final draft went to the minister, or is the minister right in saying that he had not exactly been formally briefed on this by 23 June?

We have here shadows and mirrors, ducking and weaving. We know that at the bottom of all of this is the suppression of research and information that totally undermines the changes this government is planning to make in higher education. This is information which is unfavourable to the government's proposed changes in higher education, so the government now decides to politically doctor the research provided by well-known national and international researchers—that is, if the research and information you get does not suit you, just blank it out.

Senator Sherry —Cover it up.

Senator CROSSIN —That is right, Senator Sherry—or just ensure that the report is never going to be released. Do not let the public know that there is an alternative view on the draconian measures you are proposing in higher education. We know that the plan before us in respect of the results of the Crossroads review is that students will be asked to pay more HECS. Universities will be given the right to charge whatever HECS fees they like—in some cases up to 30 per cent more than the current HECS fees.

This research shows us that the changes and proposed changes to HECS since 1996, when this government came to power, have discouraged students from entering higher education. This research shows us that some 9,000 fewer school leavers have applied for university entrance per year. Some 17,000 fewer mature applicants have joined the education sector through entry into higher education. The research also shows us that dropping the HECS repayment threshold from $28,495 to $20,701 has caused particular harm and deterred people from combining work and part-time study. The research has to show you that. We have known for a long time that there have been fewer people wanting to get into higher education because of the prohibitive costs they would incur in meeting a HECS debt or because the repayment threshold is so low. That is one of the reasons why this government has decided to increase the HECS threshold: it has finally realised that dropping it from $28,000 to $20,000 back in 1996 was the wrong thing to do. Unfortunately it has taken the government seven years to realise that.

This government claims that these reports were not released because it had some reservations about the usefulness of the data. Senator Alston claimed today that the data were removed because they did not have a valid place in the report. No; the real answer is that they do not have a valid place in your arguments for the reform package that you are currently trying to put before the Australian public. Why would you want to release a report with data in it that shows exactly the opposite of what you are trying to achieve? You are trying to convince the public that increasing HECS payments will be a good thing for students and will provide better access for students to the higher education system at a time when your own research shows quite the opposite: that the increase in HECS since 1996 has deterred people from taking up higher education.

What we have here is politicisation of the Public Service. We have a senior public servant who has misled us during the estimates process, or a minister who has not been told the entire truth, or a minister who has been told the truth but has decided to play around with dates and figures to suit his own agenda because this research does not complement the package this government has before the parliament and before the Australian people. So, when you do not have research that suits your agenda, hide it; white it out; do not publish it; do not put it on the web site until there is public pressure to do so or, as this minister would have us believe, public interest in doing so.

Yesterday we had tabled in the House of Representatives a letter from the department trying to protect it in terms of how it has mishandled this report and giving 1,001 reasons why it has not been reported. We know the real reason for that: this government has politicised the Public Service. It has decided that research that does not back up its claims and does not back up its grand plan for higher education will not be released, will not be made public. This government is ensuring that research which it has commissioned with public dollars will not see the light of day while it continues to mislead the general public about what its plans for higher education are intended to achieve—that is, increased costs for students despite the fact that its own research shows that, if that is the case, fewer people will take up an offer to undertake higher education. (Time expired)