Tertiary Education

Ryan acknowledged the debt reduction as a welcome response to public pressure but argued it was inadequate and failed to address high tuition fees or unfair indexation. Ryan highlighted that arts students face high costs relative to future earnings and that the policy did not benefit new students or address the underfunding of universities. Ryan called for more comprehensive reform to fix the tertiary education system rather than one-off debt write-offs.

Ryan detailed how the debt reduction would benefit over 20,000 people in her electorate, with the Australian Taxation Office processing the changes automatically. Ryan explained the new marginal repayment system, noting that a person earning $70,000 would pay significantly less annually compared to the previous whole-income system. Ryan also reiterated support for paid practical placements and fee-free bridging courses as part of a broader strategy to support students.

Rebello argued the policy disproportionately benefited high-earning graduates while ignoring those who had already repaid their debts, describing it as an inequitable approach. Rebello attributed high student debt to government spending and inflation, claiming the write-off shifted costs to future generations and taxpayers. Rebello contended that the measure was a temporary political fix that failed to address deeper structural issues in higher education and national finances.

Witty described the debt reduction as the largest in Australian history, providing immediate relief to over 36,000 people in her electorate. Witty emphasised that the automatic nature of the reduction and the new marginal repayment system provided tangible financial breathing room for students struggling with rent and living costs. Witty linked these reforms to broader investments in paid placements and university study hubs to improve access and affordability.

Wilson argued that the policy shifted private debt onto taxpayers and future generations without addressing the root cause of inflation-driven debt increases. Wilson claimed that government spending addiction stoked inflation, leading to higher interest rates and HECS repayments, and that the debt write-off was a temporary reprieve rather than a solution. Wilson suggested that the policy punished those who had responsibly paid off their own debts.

Teesdale shared testimonials from constituents in Bass who expressed relief at the debt reduction and the easing of financial stress. Teesdale highlighted that the policy helped students balance work and study, and supported long-term goals such as home ownership. Teesdale reinforced the government's commitment to practical support, including paid placements and expanded access to tertiary education through fee-free courses.

Le supported the immediate debt relief but criticised the government for lacking a long-term structural plan to address systemic issues in higher education. Le argued that the policy was a superficial fix that did not help those who had already repaid debts or those who did not attend university. Le called for transformative reforms, including fully funded scholarships for low-income students and reversing the Job-ready Graduates program, to ensure genuine affordability and access.