A nightmare for higher education before Christmas

In Tim Burton’s iconic Christmas film, The Nightmare Before Christmas, a scene unfolds where a little boy unwraps his Christmas present with eager anticipation, only to be startled by a ghoulish, severed, shrunken head. This eerie moment mirrors the reactions university vice-chancellors in Australia, Canada and the United Kingdom might experience when confronted with various government immigration policy pronouncements ahead of the New Year.

Headlines across Australian, British and Canadian media highlight a slew of issues, including bogus student asylum claims, international student caps, the introduction of an international student levy or tax, heightened English language requirements for study, substantial increases in student visa fees and elevated salary levels for eligibility for skilled work visas.

Misleading headlines in papers and on social media propagate the notion that international students are “to blame” for rising inflation, the housing crisis and placing “unreasonable pressure” on already strained public services.

To extend the cinematic parallel, one could compare the moment when Jack Skellington commissions his henchmen Lock, Shock and Barrel to kidnap Santa Claus to the government somehow ‘kidnapping’ university autonomy through taxation and restricting universities’ ability to recruit international students.

This struggle arises as universities globally grapple with an existential funding crisis, unable to bridge the funding gap between the revenue derived from domestic tuition fees and the financial demands of conducting groundbreaking research, all while endeavouring to keep their operations afloat in Western economies beset by high inflation and rising interest rates.

From the UK to Canada

The UK Russell Group warns that the sector’s funding for the next year is projected to reach the “lowest point in this millennium”. This is a consequence of domestic fees being frozen since 2018 and losing a third of their value due to inflation.

Universities are increasing international student enrolment to offset the reduction in domestic revenue in real terms and increased costs due to inflation. They may be compelled to recruit more international students if tuition fees remain frozen for the foreseeable future and if a sustainable funding model for higher education is not forthcoming.

The proposed Australian international student levy, just one of the ‘70 ideas’ in the Universities Accord interim report, has faced severe backlash from the majority of the higher education sector. Jason Clare MP, speaking on ABC Afternoon Briefing, emphasised the absence of a “magic money tree” for funding reform in higher education and encouraged a robust debate about various ideas.

The levy has faced vehement criticism from the Group of Eight, representing major research-intensive universities that recruit the lion’s share of international students, including the University of Sydney, the University of New South Wales and the University of Melbourne, which earn billions of dollars in revenue from international students.

They label it an “envy tax”. However, critics overlook that international students will only be impacted if universities pass the tax on to them through increased tuition fees.

Brendan Coates and Trent Wiltshire, hot on the heels of the Grattan Institute report, Graduates in Limbo: International student visa pathways after graduation, suggest an alternative.

“Immigration is smashing renters. It’s time to hike fees for international students. Australia’s rental market is running hot. Slowing migration to take the temperature down, while housing supply catches up, is a smart move. But only if we do it the right way… Raising student visa application fees from AU$710 [US$467] to AU$2,500 would raise about AU$1 billion a year. That would be enough to boost Rent Assistance by 20%, putting another AU$1,000 a year into the pockets of vulnerable renters,” they write.

In Canada, which has been a beacon for international students and those looking to immigrate, two recent polls indicate a decline in Canadians’ support for immigration, signalling a need for government attention.

Immigration Minister Marc Miller states: “We won’t be imposing a cap... Doing surgery with a hammer, which is what a cap would have represented, was not a preference that I retained today,” but questions linger about the future.

Other measures to restrict international student numbers

Apart from caps and levies, governments can use subtler means to restrict the flow of international students. The Australian government is considering raising English language proficiency levels, sparking concerns that it could deter 30,000 people annually from applying to study in Australia.

International Education Association of Australia Chief Executive Phil Honeywood warns that international student numbers would be hit if the government increases the English language requirements, stating: “Tougher English language tests will cost universities!”

The UK government is contemplating a rule requiring foreign workers to be paid a salary exceeding £30,000 (US$38,000) to come to Britain, aiming to address concerns about immigration levels.

This situation could have been far worse, however. Allies of the former UK home secretary Suella Braverman, recently sacked from her position, asserted that Prime Minister Rishi Sunak agreed to a covert four-point migration plan as he sought her support in his bid to become prime minister. As part of this plan, the prime minister pledged to elevate the salary threshold for migrants to £40,000, unveiling a set of measures aimed at reducing migration.

The plan also involved the closure of the graduate visa route, limitations on the number of dependants migrants can bring to the UK (a measure that is coming in the new year), and a focus on prioritising overseas students applying to Russell Group universities.

While Sunak did not formally sign the agreement, allies of Braverman disclosed that he verbally agreed to it on multiple occasions, according to The Telegraph.

An immigration-neutral approach

All this unfolds at a time when international education should foster a virtuous circle of learning, employment and sustained global economic growth. Rather than fixating on post-study work, English-speaking destination countries should pivot towards supporting international students’ successful transition to jobs back home, making international education immigration neutral.

Higher education institutions often champion the Sustainable Development Goals, but concrete action to achieve them is lacking. They promote post-study work to increase student recruitment, while the focus should be on reducing the brain drain from South to North and supporting economic growth and prosperity in the developing world.

International students are not the Oogie Boogie man; far from it. In fact, they “make a huge contribution, as well as bringing a wide range of cultural, social and economic benefits, [with] revenue from international students reinvested into high-quality education and research to benefit all students,” says Tim Bradshaw, the chief executive of the Russell Group.

To this end, what is needed now to counter hostile government policy is a change in direction and a focus on what is right. For too long, higher education has focused on international students’ tuition fees with little thought to their futures and the skills shortages in their home countries. It is time for a reset before Halloween Town, in the form of anti-immigration legislation, truly damages international education and takes over Christmas!

First published on University World News, by Louise Nicol, at 9 December 2023, A nightmare for higher education before Christmas.