Digging a big hole for international education

Stark comparisons can be drawn between the government’s attitude to the mining industry and international education, writes Paul Rodan. Those in the international education sector cannot have missed the obvious contrast between their treatment by government and that given to the other export giants, the ones in the mining industry. Indeed, one could almost be forgiven for concluding that government views international education as some sort of liability compared with the miners. Certainly, it is unthinkable that the international education industry could help bring down a prime minister or have a major tax plan radically modified. Of course, international education is not located totally (or even mainly) in the private sector, so funding a suite of hard-hitting, anti-government ads is not really an option. Moreover, compared with mining’s concentrated location in various (mostly) key electorates, the international education workforce is dispersed throughout a variety of (usually suburban) locations without the critical mass to sway the result in any particular seats. As with higher education more generally, this adds up to a political impact of “not much” or even nil. The public listing status of mining companies ensures a broader audience for their concerns than international education can possibly secure (“let 1000 Navitases bloom”?). And, apart from direct shareholders, those in various superannuation schemes are also potentially affected, a point very much factored into the miners’ successful scare campaign. I have a residual suspicion that service industries are just not regarded as “real” in the way that primary and secondary industries are. Politicians love dressing up in hard hats and fluoro vests and haunting mining sites and (what’s left of) manufacturing plants for photo ops, but there simply is no equivalent in international education: wandering around the language lab just doesn’t cut it. And in passing, aren’t mining sites and factories just so macho? Employment issues are another area of contrast. Potential job losses for miners or timber workers are treated as a national calamity necessitating working parties, support packages and emergency assistance of various kinds. Yet, the potential loss of tens of thousands of jobs in international education (where many staff earn a lot less than miners) is treated as of no consequence at all, not even producing a response from a relevant minister (to the best of my knowledge). Perhaps, there is an assumption that such workers are easily re-employable in urban areas, or more likely, not sufficiently concentrated in marginal seats to worry about. Whatever the explanation, this disdain is offensive. A change of government would seem to offer little relief. Indeed, the conflating of the legitimate international student industry with aspects of a racist-tinged pseudo-immigration debate will not go down as any high point in Australian political history. Leadership which resists the temptation to play to the lowest common denominator now seems like a dream. One can only hope that, in the event of a coalition victory, traditional business allies might be able to sell the business case for keeping the international education industry alive and vibrant (we can give up on the education element). The only consolation after all these years of political irrelevance is that we should at least be used to it. Paul Rodan is director, International Education Research Centre, CQUniversity, Melbourne.