At the end of February, the lobby group for Australia’s universities – Universities Australia – boasted that “international education is powering Australia’s economy” and is one of the nation’s largest export earners.
“Education is our largest services export and the biggest product we don’t source from the ground”, Universities Australia said via media release.
“The export income our universities help generate pays for essential services and underpins a higher standard of living for all Australians, regardless of where they live”.
“Covid-19 halved the value of education as an export, but we are well on our way back to reaching, and hopefully surpassing, the $40 billion mark we recorded in 2019″.
The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) reported $20.8 billion of education-related exports in 2021-22, with goods & services expenditure accounting for $11.9 billion (57%) and tuition fees accounting for $8.9 billion (43%).
I have regularly clowned the ABS’ education exports data for the simple reason that a large share of the international students that come to Australia pay for at least some (if not most) of their expenses by working in Australian jobs, as noted by the RBA:
“Labour market conditions in Australia will also be a key consideration for these students. Census data indicate that over three quarters of Indian and Nepalese holders of student visas were in the Australian labour force in 2016…”
Indeed, 2016 Census data showed that the overwhelming majority of students from South Asia (as well as the Philippines and Colombia) undertook paid employment in Australia to support themselves:
A recent survey from Navitas also showed that that the main reason that students from South Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa study in Australia is because of our generous work rights (with quality of education ranking least important):
By definition, money spent in Australia that was earned via employment is not an export. Yet, the ABS, Treasury and the education industry wrongly claim that it is.
As a result, we saw the unusual situation during the pandemic whereby thousands of overseas students pleaded with the government for financial assistance and turned to charities when they lost their employment.
It’s obvious that these students needed to earn money in Australia to cover their expenses, which means they are not an export.
The mythical education export figure also does not subtract funds sent home (remittances) by migrants including international students, which grew significantly in the years leading up to the pandemic:
Now we are witnessing complaints that international students won’t be able to fund themselves when the number of hours they are permitted to work is scaled back to 24 hours a week on 1 July (from unlimited hours currently).
“It will be really hard to survive financially as I won’t be able to work as many hours I can do in the COVID period”, international student Ojha Rupak said.
“It’s going to be really hard for me financially to pay my accommodation, groceries and my fees for my study. It’s around $10,000 a year for my course”.
The article explains how 90% of workers on Jack Beattie’s Tasmanian strawberry farm are international students, mostly from Nepal and Bhutan.
Farm foreman Basant Sresta believes many of these students will struggle when the work cap is reinstated.
“It is really hard because the cost of living are getting higher, the cost of rent and college fees are getting higher, so I think they will struggle”, he said.
All of which highlights, yet again, that international education is more of a people-importing immigration industry than a genuine export industry.
If work rights and permanent residency were scaled back, the entire international education industry would collapse since most “students” come to Australia for work rights and permanent residency, not an education.
