The Claim
“More than doubled the cost of some university degrees, decreasing the government's contribution to exactly $0.”
Original Sources Provided
✅ FACTUAL VERIFICATION
The Coalition government's Job-Ready Graduates Package (announced 2020, implemented 2021) did substantially increase fees for humanities and arts degrees [1]. Arts student contributions more than doubled to A$14,500 per year, while humanities student contributions increased by approximately 113% [2]. For a typical three-year Bachelor of Arts degree, costs increased from approximately $22,500 to over $50,000 [3].
However, the claim that government contribution was reduced "to exactly $0" is inaccurate. Under the Job-Ready Graduates Package, humanities received a government top-up of $1,100 per year, meaning the government did not eliminate its contribution entirely [4]. While this represents a dramatic reduction in government contribution—shifting the cost burden to students who now pay more than 90% of the maximum revenue cap—the contribution was not zero [4].
Prior to these reforms, the government contributed approximately 58% of the average undergraduate degree cost [5]. After the reforms, the government's contribution to arts and humanities degrees was significantly reduced to approximately 7-8% of total student costs (with students paying $14,500+ and government contributing roughly $1,100) [4].
Missing Context
The claim omits several important contextual factors:
Policy Rationale: The Coalition government argued the policy would direct student enrolment toward fields with better employment outcomes and address skills shortages in areas like nursing, agriculture, and mathematics [1]. Nursing and teaching fees were reduced, not increased, under the same policy [2].
Ineffectiveness of Policy: Research from the University of Melbourne found that the Job-Ready Graduates Scheme had minimal impact on student choices, affecting only 1.5% of students' enrolment decisions [6]. This suggests the policy failed to achieve its stated objective of steering students into priority fields.
Student Debt Consequences: The policy significantly increased student debt burden for humanities graduates who typically earn lower incomes than law or business graduates, meaning many would never fully repay their HELP loans [3].
Historical Context: Universities in Australia transitioned from free education (abolished by Whitlam Labor in 1974, then restored by Labor in 1989 through HECS) [7]. The Coalition's 2021 reform continued a trend of shifting educational costs from government to students.
Source Credibility Assessment
Original Sources:
- The ABC source is a mainstream, reputable Australian broadcaster with established editorial standards and political balance
- The Guardian opinion piece is identified as commentary/opinion rather than news reporting, reflecting left-leaning editorial perspective
- Both sources accurately reflect factual elements of the policy, though the framing emphasizes negative impacts
Research Sources Used in This Analysis:
- The Conversation articles are academic/expert-contributed pieces from reputable universities with established fact-checking standards
- University of Melbourne research is from a peer-reviewed institutional source
- Government policy documentation and announcements are primary sources
Labor Comparison
Did Labor do something similar?
Labor's historical approach to university fees differs significantly:
- In 1974, Whitlam Labor abolished university fees entirely to improve accessibility [7]
- In 1989, Hawke Labor government introduced HECS (Higher Education Contributions Scheme) as a graduate contribution scheme—creating student fees but linking them to graduate income [7]
- Under Labor's HECS model (1989-2012), students paid contributions but could defer payment and repayment was income-contingent
- Labor has opposed the Job-Ready Graduates Package and, when returned to government in 2022, announced plans to reduce student debt by 20% [5]
The Coalition's approach under Job-Ready Graduates differs fundamentally from Labor's HECS model in that:
- It eliminated the income-contingent repayment link for determining contribution levels
- It based fees on government workforce priorities rather than graduate earning potential
- It dramatically increased upfront costs for specific fields (humanities) rather than linking to actual graduate income
Unlike the Coalition policy, Labor's HECS was designed with the principle that students could defer payment and repay based on their actual earnings post-graduation.
Balanced Perspective
The Policy's Intent: The Coalition government argued that increased fees for arts and humanities would address national skill shortages by steering students toward nursing, engineering, and other priority fields [1]. The government contended this was necessary for workforce productivity and economic competitiveness.
The Reality: The policy achieved minimal success in redirecting student choices. Only 1.5% of students changed their field selection due to the fee increases, suggesting the policy failed its primary objective [6]. This indicates the fee increases primarily served to increase student debt burden rather than manage workforce development effectively.
Cost Shifting: The policy represented a significant ideological shift from shared (government-funded) to individual cost-bearing for education. By reducing government contribution from ~58% to ~7-8% for humanities, the policy shifted financial burden almost entirely to students and families [4][5].
Fairness Considerations:
- Humanities graduates typically earn less than law, business, or engineering graduates, making higher debt particularly burdensome [3]
- Over 40% of domestic students—disproportionately from disadvantaged and Indigenous backgrounds—were affected by maximum fees [1]
- This contrasted with fee reductions for nursing and teaching, suggesting the government prioritized professional workforce supply over equity in education access
Legitimate Government Interest: Governments do have legitimate interests in managing public investment and directing education toward workforce needs. However, the execution raised questions about whether fee manipulation was an effective tool for this purpose.
PARTIALLY TRUE
6.0
out of 10
The first part of the claim is accurate: the Coalition did more than double the cost of arts and humanities degrees. However, the second part—that government contribution was reduced "to exactly $0"—is inaccurate. Government contribution was reduced to approximately $1,100 per year (roughly 7-8% of total costs), not eliminated entirely. While this represents a dramatic reduction in government funding responsibility, claiming it was "exactly $0" is factually incorrect and overstates the case [4].
Final Score
6.0
OUT OF 10
PARTIALLY TRUE
The first part of the claim is accurate: the Coalition did more than double the cost of arts and humanities degrees. However, the second part—that government contribution was reduced "to exactly $0"—is inaccurate. Government contribution was reduced to approximately $1,100 per year (roughly 7-8% of total costs), not eliminated entirely. While this represents a dramatic reduction in government funding responsibility, claiming it was "exactly $0" is factually incorrect and overstates the case [4].
📚 SOURCES & CITATIONS (7)
-
1
Fee cuts for nursing and teaching but big hikes for law and humanities in package expanding university places
The federal government will provide an extra 39,000 university places by 2023 in a package that will restructure the amounts students have to pay for courses.
The Conversation -
2
3 flaws in Job-Ready Graduates package will add to the turmoil in Australian higher education
Three key policy errors in the legislation mean the Morrison government is unlikely to achieve the stated goals of its package.
The Conversation -
3
How did Australian universities go from free education to $50,000 arts degrees in 50 years?
Thanks to the Job Ready Graduates scheme, an arts degree today will cost over $50,000. How have five decades of government policy taken us from free education to this?
The Conversation -
4
The inequity of Job-ready Graduates for students must be brought to a quick end. Here's how
Huge disparities in how much students pay for courses mean graduates of high-fee disciplines will take longer to repay their debts or might never do so. That will ultimately add to government debt.
The Conversation -
5
Labor has promised fast action to cut student debt, but arts students will have to wait for lower fees
If you’re among the 3 million Australians with a HECS-HELP debt, it’s about to be cut by 20%, with no repayments until you earn $67,000. But there is one downside.
The Conversation -
6
Research: Morrison Government's Job-Ready Graduate Scheme had minimal impact on student enrolments
Fbe Unimelb Edu
-
7
Explainer: how student fees are set for different university courses
After almost a decade of failed processes to reform the current funding system, the government must produce a revised system that improves the quality of outcomes for students in all courses.
The Conversation
Rating Scale Methodology
1-3: FALSE
Factually incorrect or malicious fabrication.
4-6: PARTIAL
Some truth but context is missing or skewed.
7-9: MOSTLY TRUE
Minor technicalities or phrasing issues.
10: ACCURATE
Perfectly verified and contextually fair.
Methodology: Ratings are determined through cross-referencing official government records, independent fact-checking organizations, and primary source documents.