AZURIN, Ms Jane, Director, Qualifications Recognition Policy Section, International Partnerships Branch, International Division, Department of Education, Skills and Employment [by video link]

CAVENAGH, Ms Jennifer, Director, International Law: Advising and Treaties» Section, Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade [by video link]

SANDERCOCK, Ms Karen, First Assistant Secretary, International Division, Department of Education, Skills and Employment [by video link]

Committee met at 11:21

CHAIR ( Mr Sharma ): I declare open this public hearing of the Joint Standing Committee on «Treaties . These are public proceedings, although the committee may agree to a request to have evidence heard in camera or may determine that certain evidence should be heard in camera. I remind all witnesses that, in giving evidence to the committee, they are protected by parliamentary privilege. It is unlawful for anyone to threaten or disadvantage a witness on account of evidence given to a committee, and such action may be treated as a contempt of parliament. It is also a contempt to give false or misleading evidence to a committee.

In accordance with the committee's resolution of 29 July 2019, this hearing will be recorded and broadcast on the parliament's website and the transcript of proceedings will be published on the parliament's website. Those appearing today are advised that filming and recorded are permitted during the hearing. I remind members of the media who may be listening of the need to fairly and accurately report the proceedings of the committee. A transcript of today's proceedings may not be available in time to meet the deadline for questions on notice. Therefore, could you please keep track of any questions on notice so that you're able to respond in the time required to ensure that the committee can meet its reporting deadlines.

The committee will now take evidence on the proposed Global Convention on the Recognition of Qualifications concerning Higher Education. Although this committee does not require you to give evidence under oath, I should advise you that this hearing is a legal proceeding of the parliament and therefore has the same standing as proceedings of the respective houses. The giving of false or misleading evidence is a serious matter and may be regarded as a contempt of parliament. The evidence given today will be recorded by Hansard and attracts parliamentary privilege. I now invite you, Ms Sandercock, to give a brief opening statement before we proceed to discussion.

Ms Sandercock : Thank you very much, Chair, and I welcome the opportunity to discuss the merits of Australia becoming a party to the new Global Convention on the Recognition of Qualifications concerning Higher Education. The convention is the first international treaty in higher education with global scope. The preliminary draft text was delivered in 2017 by a committee of international experts that Australia chaired, followed by a two-year intergovernmental consultation period facilitated by UNESCO headquarters. The global convention was subsequently adopted unanimously in 2019 by UNESCO member states. The global convention builds on and fully complements the regional qualifications recognition conventions already in operation, including the Tokyo convention in the Asia-Pacific and the Lisbon recognition convention in Europe. Australia is a party to both these conventions.

Fair and transparent qualifications recognition is a fundamental enabler of student, graduate and skilled worker mobility. Like the regional conventions, the new global convention recognises that we live in an interconnected world where education increasingly transcends international borders. Australia's education sector plays a major role in supporting improved access to and participation in quality lifelong learning for students and workers from all over the world.

At its core, the global convention obligates parties to recognise an individual's overseas qualification for access to higher education in a fair, transparent, timely and non-discriminatory manner based on best practices. In practical terms, this is about fair recognition of higher education qualifications but also qualifications that provide access to education, such as senior secondary school-leaving certificates, and, in our cross-sectoral system, vocational education and training qualifications. It is a two-way street where the scope of the convention includes both the recognition of Australian qualifications by other parties and the recognition of overseas qualifications in Australia, supporting that two-way mobility. A graduate of the Australian system, whether they be an Australian or international student, should be able to realise the full value of their Australian qualification through a fair assessment, no matter where they go in the world. The global convention supports an individual's right to recognition through a framework of international cooperation, focused on increasing transparency, information provision and sharing, to build trust and facilitate well-informed decisions by the parties.

Again, in practical terms, a party would provide information about their education system, including its qualifications and education providers, its quality assurance arrangements and recognition systems, to students, education providers, overseas governments, employers and other organisations who assess overseas qualifications, to support well-informed decisions. Australia is already doing all of this to support graduates of the Australian education system abroad and those of overseas education systems in Australia.

The Australian government, through this department, serves as the national information centre to provide official information and policy advice as part of Australia's obligations under the regional recognition conventions. The department provides a range of guidance and policy advisory services to recognition decision-makers within Australia, and the department also supports international partners with enhancing the quality and transparency of education and recognition systems, particularly in the Asia-Pacific This includes engaging with partners on the development and implementation of national qualifications frameworks or systems.

While the global convention is similar to regional conventions, there are some important differences. The global convention provides a framework for interregional cooperation, providing opportunities for Australia to engage with new and emerging country partners to support sustainable growth of our international education sector. That sector delivers significant social, cultural and economic benefits domestically, with a value of $27½ billion in 2020-2021. The global convention also places a spotlight on the future landscape of education that more explicitly emphasises fair recognition of qualifications achieved through non-traditional modes such as online learning. The global pandemic has amplified the significance of this, where a rapid worldwide shift to online learning has taken place, enabling teaching and learning to continue in a safe way.

One of the key ambitions in the global convention is the recognition of transnational qualifications, including existing forms of delivery such as international joint degrees, offshore and online education, twinning programs and, indeed, those that are yet to be developed. This is provided that the quality of these programs can be assured as comparable to traditional forms of learning. The implications of these provisions for Australian universities and other education providers are significant, as the global convention can reduce barriers and encourage countries to adopt practices that recognise new and innovative forms of education. Providers will be able to continue to grow and innovate by delivering qualifications to new and emerging markets, diversifying offerings with reassurance that the global convention provides for fair recognition of high-quality transnational education.

Another key difference in the global convention is that, for the first time, the global convention defines 'sustainable difference'. This instils a positive and consistent view of recognition and provides a globally shared understanding of what 'substantial difference' means. This will make great progress towards reducing unreasonable, unnecessary and unfair barriers to mobility. In practice, assessors must carefully consider whether the learning would actually prevent the applicant from succeeding in the activity for which recognition is sought. If substantial difference is identified, decision-makers must provide sufficient justification and should seek to grant partial recognition where possible.

I would like to highlight that the global convention will not be prescriptive in how Australia makes decisions about overseas qualifications. The convention fully respects all Australian laws, regulations and policies so that the competent authorities in Australia, including universities, skilled migration authorities, professional or occupational bodies, and employers, maintain their decision-making autonomy on the acceptability of overseas qualifications for student admission, skilled migration, registration and skilled employment. Australian stakeholders, including education peak bodies, skilled migration assessing authorities—most of whom have dual responsibilities as professional or occupational bodies—and state and territory governments, provided positive support for the global convention during consultations for the development of a new national strategy for international education, which was launched by the Minister for Education and Youth in November last year.

Becoming an early party to the global convention will afford Australia the opportunities to strategically shape a global understanding of what is fair and reasonable in the recognition of overseas qualifications, and domestic and international graduates of the Australian education system can be more confident in pursuing further study, as well as work opportunities globally, no matter how or where they study. Chair, we're very happy to take any questions the committee may have.

CHAIR: Thank you so much, Department of Education Skills and Employment. Ms Sandercock, thank you. I have a few questions, which I might kick off with. Does the Canberra end mind muting? Anytime anyone's turning papers there, I'm getting a huge amount of feedback on my end, so, if I can, I will just ask the secretariat to mute their channel, unless we're coming to you. It'll make it a little easier to hear. I might start off with questions. Obviously, other members might have questions too, so I won't go through all of them. This is quite interesting, Ms Sandercock. Can you just tell me when negotiations commenced with this treaty? I imagine it's taken quite some time to conclude.

Ms Sandercock : I'll defer to Ms Azurin for the detail, but this has been a longstanding body of work. We have been engaged in regional conventions and now the global convention for more than a decade, and we are very pleased to see it come to fruition in this draft, in this global text. In terms of the detail—Ms Azurin?

Ms Azurin : Drafting of the global convention commenced in March 2016 with the establishment of a drafting committee comprising a number of independent experts appointed on a geographically balanced basis from all UNESCO regions. Importantly, this committee was chaired by Australia. The committee delivered a preliminary draft text to the UNESCO general conference in 2017. In 2018, UNESCO received extensive feedback on the preliminary text, with over 1,000 written comments from a number of member states and associate members across all regions. UNESCO then brought together more than 200 technical experts, and legal experts as well, appointed by more than 120 member states and associate members at the first intergovernmental meeting, in December 2018. At the second intergovernmental meeting, in March 2019, the final draft text was agreed on by 202 experts from—again—more than 120 member states and associate members before the global convention was adopted unanimously without opposition at the general conference in 2019.

Australia played a leading role throughout this process. Through our department, Australia was chair of the drafting committee that developed the final draft text of the global convention, which was unanimously adopted by UNESCO. Australia was also an active intergovernmental expert during the UNESCO consultation phase between 2017 and 2019.

CHAIR: Thank you. You mentioned in the introductory remarks that this builds on existing regional conventions. To which of the regional conventions is Australia currently a party?

Ms Azurin : Australia has long been a party to a number of regional recognition conventions under UNESCO—namely, the Bangkok convention, operating in the Asia-Pacific, and its revised version, the Tokyo convention, which also operates in the Asia-Pacific region. We have also ratified the Lisbon Recognition Convention, which primarily operates in the European region, but, as Australia is quite a sophisticated player with qualifications recognition, we were invited by the Europeans to also participate in that convention. We've long been a party to those conventions, as I said. The Bangkok, Lisbon and Tokyo conventions were ratified in 1985, 2002 and 2014 respectively.

CHAIR: As I understand it, this global convention that we're considering today effectively means a default of 'yes', in the sense that your qualification is assumed to be recognised or equivalent unless the competent recognition authority in that country can establish grounds for a substantial difference in standards. Is that right? Is it a default 'yes' assumption?

Ms Azurin : The global convention—like the regional conventions already at play—does take a very positive view of recognition. As you say, there is an approach to recognise rather than not to recognise. So the default is a positive view to recognising overseas qualifications, building that will and trust through information provision and sharing and a framework for international cooperation in a dedicated sense to provide information to inform decisions by those recognition decision-makers in country.

CHAIR: Okay. So, in general terms, this global convention will increase the portability, if you like, of tertiary qualifications and, I imagine, also help to establish a more significant global market in higher education?

Ms Sandercock : That's right. This is a longstanding agenda to increase the mobility of Australian qualifications and also to increase the delivery for Australian education providers and, where they deliver in other countries through traditional or non-traditional forms, to increase the recognition of those qualifications and create new opportunities for cross-border education delivery.

CHAIR: Is it open to all 193 UN member states to become a state party to this convention?

Ms Sandercock : That's correct.

Ms Azurin : It is.

CHAIR: Without wishing to be mischievous, I note that we see this a bit with shipping and flags of convenience, where lightly regulated or poorly regulated states are often the flag states of commercial vessels. What will stop there being a race to the bottom here? Where a country does not have standards of higher education or tertiary education that we would accept or at least consider equivalent to those in Australia—suppose they're churning out medical degrees, for argument's sake, at a rock-bottom rate and flooding the market—how will we make sure that standards are not lessened as a result of establishing a universal regime like this?

Ms Azurin : The global convention does not prescribe how to assess an overseas qualification. In Australia's decentralised recognition system, the global convention fully respects the autonomy of Australian authorities involved in the recognition of overseas qualifications. So universities and other education providers are fully autonomous and responsible for setting the standards and the procedures required to meet those standards for admissions purposes. The skilled migration assessing authorities that were mentioned—some of whom also wear dual hats as professional bodies in Australia, for people to enter the profession—are also fully autonomous in the skilled migration decisions that they make and in setting those standards. Employers, as well—whether they be for skilled employment or for general employment—are very autonomous with those standards.

In fact, the global convention, in its provisions for supporting international cooperation, seeks to share and provide information about Australia's education and training system and its qualifications and quality assurance mechanisms to other countries so that they can make well-informed decisions about Australian qualifications. Likewise, if an education institution or skilled migration assessing authority or an employer seeks more information about an overseas qualification, the global convention provides that dedicated mechanism to contact another party to get more information about the system so that a very well informed decision can be made here. But the decision does rest with those competent authorities in Australia.

Ms Sandercock : Building on that, one of the department's key roles is to facilitate that information flow and decision-making process. The department publishes extensive material on other countries' education systems, designed to assist employers, skilled migration authorities and education providers in making those decisions. That material is widely available, and that goes into some detail to assist with those decisions and to help appropriate authorities understand other countries' education systems and how they compare to our own.

CHAIR: That being the case, will the department take the lead role in, I guess, communicating to other treaty parties the decisions of Australian authorities and helping them liaise? I'm just conscious that we don't have a centralised authority in this regard, so, for another state party to it, it could be a little confusing to navigate. Will your department be a counterpart, if you like, for centralised authorities overseas?

Ms Azurin : The regional conventions under UNESCO, to which Australia has already been a long party, have a substantial provision whereby the department serves as the national information centre for recognition and for education, so we already serve as a central point of contact to cooperate with other parties and other countries, including at the organisational level all the way down to the individual level, to provide official information about Australia's education and training system and its qualifications as well as its recognition system. Under the global convention that same provision has carried across, so the global convention builds on and complements the regional conventions already at play and the ones that Australia has already ratified. We, through this department, will continue to serve as the national information centre should the global convention be ratified.

CHAIR: Okay. I have maybe two more small questions before I turn to other members. In practical terms, if you're an Australian student or an Australian education provider, what will the global convention provide that isn't currently provided under bilateral regional agreements? Could you give me a couple of concrete examples of how this would benefit either Australian individuals or Australian education institutions.

Ms Sandercock : Yes, indeed. A concrete example is that an Australian graduate, be it an international or a domestic student, going to a region outside the reach of our current regional conventions where another party has ratified the convention will be guaranteed a process to have their qualifications recognised. This gives us entrée intro discussions with other parties to enable that student to have their qualifications recognised. Very importantly, what the global convention does differently from regional conventions is it brings transnational education, online or blended learning, within the remit of recognition. This often acts as a barrier to the expansion of the delivery of Australian qualifications, whereby online learning or blended or mixed modes of study are not recognised by some other countries. The global convention makes concrete progress towards that.

Ms Azurin : I might add to that as well. Without an overarching global framework for cooperation, it is more challenging to engage countries from other regions to adopt best principles and practices, to eliminate barriers to the recognition of Australian qualifications and studies. These include barriers to recognition of those non-traditional forms of learning, which are already traditional in Australia, including those transnational delivery modes. Those transnational delivery modes are a key means of diversifying Australia's international education offerings to support sustainable sector growth.

CHAIR: Okay. One last question, if I can. What are the dispute settlement provisions of this treaty? If, for argument's sake, another country decides that there are substantial differences in the terminology of the convention with Australian qualifications versus their own and they will not extend recognition to, for example, Australian architecture degrees, and we disagree with that assessment. What are the recourse avenues available under the treaty if we disagree with the assessment of the competent authority in another country about our own qualifications?

Ms Azurin : Australian qualifications are by and large very well recognised globally; however, there are some problems that come up from time to time. Of course, working through a multilateral organisation such as UNESCO, we work with like-mindeds to cooperate and support other countries to adopt best principles and practices in recognition. With that said, there are a range of reasons why a country or a state party might not recognise an Australian or another country's qualification at face value—for example, an Australian bachelor to their bachelor degree. That could be for a range of reasons, including that they have a very different education and training system, different numbers of qualifications, less rigorous quality assurance mechanisms or a very different approach or philosophy to education.

Generally, when those issues arise, where we disagree with another country's judgement of an Australian qualification, that's where the global convention can kick in to provide that dedicated mechanism for bilateral cooperation. We can harness other like-minded countries that have a sophisticated and mature view of qualifications recognition to support us in our efforts while maintaining diplomatic relationships. There are no provisions in the global convention that explicitly deal with differences of opinion. What the global convention tries to do is support information exchange and cooperation, and build that long-term agenda in cooperation in this particular field.

CHAIR: Thank you so much. That was all I had by way of questions initially. I'll pass to some of the other members of the committee. Deputy Chair, have you got questions you would like to ask?

Mr KHALIL: Yes, I've got a couple of quick questions. Thank you for appearing today. From going through all the submissions, obviously, there are some very positive ones around the convention and recommendations to ratify and so on. My first question is around the fact—and I think you touched on or alluded to it a bit earlier—that we already have competent authorities that assess here in Australia, and there's a very smooth transition under the convention to continue doing that. Is there any modelling done on whether there'd be a substantive change as to the number of incoming students? Would there be an increase, or would we basically be doing business as usual with respect to the analysis or assessment of qualifications for incoming students? That's the first question. Then there's the brain drain question—I'm wondering whether there'd been any pushback from less-developed nations in the sense that some of their best and brightest might be assessed under this convention. There may be more of those students from less-developed nations leaving and seeking educational opportunities elsewhere, and that could be an issue for their own tertiary sectors, their own educational institutions, in that a lot of students will be leaving and seeking to study in, say, Western countries like Australia.

Ms Sandercock : Thank you, Deputy Chair. I might kick off there. As to whether we anticipate this will increase study demand for Australia, that is very hard to determine as well as the extent to which students' decisions are driven by their mobility factors. We certainly anticipate it will be a factor that makes Australian qualifications more attractive to students whether they're delivered here in Australia, delivered online or in a student's home country, but we don't have anything that would suggest that it will have a direct impact on demand for study.

As to what that will do to other countries' education systems, again, we don't see this so much as brain drain as increasing two-way mobility opportunities. It can just as easily increase an opportunity for an Australian education provider to deliver in that student's home country as to make it attractive for a student to come to Australia. So, we would expect that quite a range of other factors are at play there. It is something we will look to with considerable interest, of course, as will other parties to the global convention, once ratified.

Mr KHALIL: Thank you very much for your answer. I have no further questions, Chair.

CHAIR: I have a few more questions, since there are no others. Can you just give me a sense of the industry feedback, if you like, or the stakeholder feedback? I've seen the submissions. I see they are, by and large, supportive, but I wouldn't mind hearing how the higher education sector view this and what they see as the benefits and if they see any potential risks in this for our own sector.

Ms Sandercock : The feedback has been very positive over the period of the development of the draft text and the consultation since. I'll turn to Ms Azurin for more detail, but we have engaged extensively with universities, with peak bodies, with state and territory governments, and all have been supportive of this work.

Ms Azurin : Certainly the stakeholder consultations and communications have been a very important part of the development of the global convention for Australia. Consultations have been undertaken from the ministerial level through to the recognition practitioner level all the way through the development of the global convention.

In terms of the characterisation of the feedback that we've received on the global convention, it has been very, very positive, as has the feedback from the Tokyo convention that we had last ratified more recently. What it does is it brings the Australian education and training system into the world stage as a high-quality system, and the recognition of qualifications is a very integral part of that system in terms of its quality offerings. It also sends very strong signals to the world that we're very inclusive in terms of our education and training system and that our education and training system is considered to support lifelong learning, so not just to educate the youth but also to reskill and upskill as an individual or a graduate makes their way through their employment journey. The education and training system here in Australia will recognise overseas qualifications for participation in education and training here but also support employment opportunities.

Ms Sandercock : I'd probably add to that. This will essentially bring other parties up to the very high standards that Australia already operates when it comes to qualifications recognition, which is viewed as favourable. You touched on risk, and certainly we see comparatively little risk in this regard. The one thing that I would point to there is the fact that the global convention, once ratified, will still not place obligations on an appropriate authority to recognise a qualification; they are obligated to go through a very rigorous process, but at the end of that process, the decision still rests with the appropriate authority, which is an important risk mitigation.

CHAIR: Yes, thank you. I appreciate that point. What about in terms of Australian professional bodies, like the Australian Medical Association and the Royal Australasian College of Physicians? Often these professional bodies, as you would know, are quite keen to control the number of people that can enter their professions and determine who can practice them. What sort of role will they play, or not, in Australian decisions about the recognition of overseas qualifications?

Ms Azurin : The global convention primarily deals with the recognition of qualifications for the purposes of access to higher education. It however also does support graduates seeking employment opportunities. Its principles for fair recognition can apply to professional recognition and the professional bodies that undertake those decisions where there is a minimum requirement to meet an Australian education standard, such as an Australian Qualifications Framework qualification, such as a bachelor's degree, to access employment in that professional field. So Australian professional bodies already assess overseas qualifications amongst a range of other requirements against the Australian benchmark using the global convention's principles of fairness, transparency, timeliness and nondiscrimination. So, where more information is required, for example, by that professional body, they can contact another participating country to seek more information, and we in the department can help to facilitate that as well. However, I just wanted to emphasise that decisions about employment and professional recognition remain at the discretion of that professional body.

CHAIR: Alright. Thank you very much. I have some procedural questions, just to finish up. How many countries have ratified this to date? Did I read a figure of about five or six?

Ms Azurin : To date, as of this month, seven countries have ratified the convention, and a couple more are expected to deposit their instruments of ratification early this year.

C HAIR: Does a certain threshold number of countries need to be met before the treaty enters into force?

Ms Azurin : Yes, indeed. Twenty state parties are required before the convention can enter into force.

CHAIR: Are there any domestic legislative or regulatory requirements for Australia to meet its treaty obligations should we proceed to ratification of this convention?

Ms Sandercock : No. Effectively we are meeting those obligations already in our current arrangements.

CHAIR: If, for argument's sake, the committee did recommend the government proceed to ratification and the government decided to do so, roughly when do you think we would be in a position to deposit our instrument of ratification—sometime this year, next year?

Ms A zurin : This year, absolutely.

CHAIR: So we would probably be one of the earlier countries to deposit our instrument of ratification then?

Ms Sandercock : That's right.

CHAIR: Thank you. I also noticed that the treaty was concluded in November 2019; is that right?

Ms Sandercock : That's right.

CHAIR: I'm just curious why it has been so long, over two years, for it to be tabled in the parliament. Is there a reason for that?

Ms Sandercock : You broke up a little bit with our audio.

CHAIR: I was just asking whether there was a particular reason why it's taken a little over two years for the treaty to be tabled in the parliament following its conclusion.

Ms Sandercock : Not that we are aware of. That's a matter of process around consideration of the treaty, other processes of government and the legislative timetable.

CHAIR: Although you did say there's no legislation required here. That's correct, right?

Ms Sandercock : That's right.

CHAIR: I have no further questions. Deputy Chair?

Mr KHALIL: No questions from me. Thank you, Chair.

CHAIR: Ms Cavenagh, from the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, you didn't wish to say anything or add to anything that's been discussed before we conclude?

Ms Cavenagh : No. Thank you.

CHAIR: Thank you, Ms Cavenagh, Ms Sandercock and Ms Azurin for your attendance here today. I don't believe you've been asked to provide any additional information, but, if I've got that incorrect and you have been, would you please forward it to the secretary within seven working days. You will be sent a copy of the transcript of your evidence when it becomes available and you will have the opportunity to request corrections to transcription errors then. I now declare this public hearing closed and I ask that you disconnect from the videoconference. Thank you, once more, for your attendance here today.

Committee adjourned at 12:03