SENATOR TEAGUE -What research projects are being funded with this $3m?

MR HICKEY -I preface my answer by saying briefly that there a number of technical issues dealing with the manner in which funds for Commonwealth higher education institutions are appropriated as against funds for higher education institutions in the States and the Northern Territory. By far the larger amount, almost $3 billion, is provided through special appropriations. Commonwealth institutions are not so covered by the special appropriations and are dealt with through the annual appropriation figures. A number of adjustments are always made between the special appropriation item and the annual appropriation item to correct decisions taken during the year. The decision that is referred to in the explanation in respect of the Australian National University was taken following the Government's announcement of new research funding arrangements in the Prime Minister's science and technology statement late last year. One of the elements of that decision was to place research funding arrangements on the same rolling triennial basis as the rest of the higher education funding arrangements, and as a consequence a transfer was made formally from a separate research funding item either into the special appropriations or into the individual appropriation items of each of these institutions. The funds are referred to in this paragraph, therefore, are those that are now called Australian Research Council grants that have been won by academic staff at the ANU. They would have been announced as part of the announcement of the normal ARC grants.

SENATOR TEAGUE -I understand; thank you for reminding me about the specific Commonwealth institutions. With regard to the adjustments necessary for the higher education contribution scheme and the financial relationship between the Commonwealth and some Commonwealth institutions, is that similarly an item here but of a nature similar to HECS adjustments to the State's higher education institutions?

MR HICKEY -Yes, indeed. We still operate within a nationally determined funding envelope, and that funding envelope makes certain assumptions about the rate at which HECS payments, for example, may be made up-front by students rather than them opting to pay through the taxation system, and these represent the same adjustments as are being made to the grants of every institution to take into account the actual payments rather than the estimated payments.

SENATOR TEAGUE -Is there much variation between higher education institutions in their experience of these adjustments?

MR HICKEY -Yes, there is. The original assumptions that were made about the proportion of students that might pay up-front in some cases have proven to be conservative, in other cases optimistic, and we think it relates mainly to the mix of students as between full-time and part-time. Those institutions with substantial part-time enrolments have tended to receive on average a higher proportion of up-front payments than those institutions with predominant enrolments of full-time under-graduate students.

SENATOR TEAGUE -I will not persist with a lot of questions about HECS. Perhaps they can be summarised in this way: the higher education Act requiries NBEET to provide to the Minister a report on the operation of HECS in February and August each year. The February report, to be tabled by the Minister within a certain number of sitting days, has not yet come before Parliament. Will it this session, because the February report, even thought it is now May, will no doubt satisfy a lot of the questions I have about the operation of HECS up until February?

MR HICKEY -The tabling arrangements are not something that I am aware of in detail, but certainly we could let you know about the foreshadowed date. I am advised that that report will be tabled tomorrow.

SENATOR TEAGUE -A lot of things are done the day after Estimates committee hearings. The things that come out the day following an Estimates committee hearing are fascinating. I will read it with great interest. I have a question about the University of Canberra. I was delighted to accept the invitation of the principal and the university to attend its inauguration. Perhaps you were there, too, Mr Hickey, but my question is addressed to the Minister. Why was there no Minister of this Government present at the inauguaration of this important university? I am assured that all of them were invited. No apology was given, and no-one was seen to be representing any of the Ministers in the portfolio of DEET.

SENATOR BOLKUS -I would find the premise of your question one that we would have to investigate before we provided an answer.

SENATOR TEAGUE -I would be very glad if you could get an answer from Mr Dawkins in particular.

SENATOR BOLKUS -I am sure he is the only Minister I could get an answer from in respect of this portfolio.

SENATOR TEAGUE -I understand that Mr Baldwin has some responsibilities for higher education.

SENATOR BOLKUS -And Mr Baldwin.

SENATOR TEAGUE -I would like him to be asked as well.

SENATOR BOLKUS -It is a pity that it was not tonight.

SENATOR TEAGUE -They missed out on a very good inauguration. An item relates to the Australian Maritime College. I am not entirely clear what the capital amount of $700,000 is for.

MR HICKEY -As part of the Government's decision on the waterfront reform package, certain moneys were made available for training purposes, a proportion of which has been allocated to the AMC to undertake minor works, renovations and refurbishing arrangements to provide training courses associated with the reform arrangements for the new skilling requirements on the waterfront. It is to provide a basic training infrastructure to support the reform package.