HECS Repayments

In the press over the last couple of days, Bruce Chapman, the inventor/architect of the HECS system has suggested that sportspeople who have benefited from training at government at government institutions such as the Australian Institute of Sport, and the elite sport bodies dotted around the states.

The first targets of course, are those who possess a huge public profile, such as Lleyton Hewitt. Earning over AU$15 million per year, the repayment of Australia’s investment in him would be a drop in the ocean. Scholarships for sports at the AIS are within the region of $50,000; an amount that is somewhat equivalent to some HECS debts built up by university students over the course of their degree.

Lleyton's manager said he only received support for one year, and did not 'live in' at the AIS. So reasonably, he would not be liable for the full amount.

It seems unfair to try and retrospectively enforce it on those who have already had success, as the motivations for entering the ‘elite sports system’ are determined not just by the scholarship but things such as the repayment of debt. The potential repayment threshold should be set at a level that does not interfere with their capacity to progress in the sport.

Surprisingly Angus McFarland, National Union of Students President, is against such a proposal ever making it onto the statute books.

Sport is a cultural investment in the country, and athletes give a lot back to the community in the pride that we get from their achievements internationally.

Unfortunately, someone still has to pay for it. In a case of selective hearing, the NUS is happy for payments to flow from HECS style levies into its own coffers:

Under the NUS model, a compulsory HECS-style levy would be charged for student services. Students could then choose whether to become a member of their university student union. Fees from those students who chose not to would be used for a “Community Facilities Fund”, which would be used for such things as “student space, computer labs and sporting grounds.

It is always an honour to represent your country in your field, whether it be science, sport or occasionally holding your end up in a London pub, each of us has been trained. In the upcoming Olympics, beyond the scholarships provided by the AIS, there is a huge amount of government support that is often never seen, and oft forgotten when athletes mount the dais.

The expansion of the system should not be seen as lingering toll poppyism, and making a grab at money for those who are rich, and can pay. In the case of gymnasts, whose careers in the Olympic fields are short when very young, they have an entire lifetime ahead of them in which to repay the amount. The program shouldn’t be about naming and shaming those who should pay but haven’t, the system should be based on fairness. Some free-marketeers would question the existence of the original HECS system; but inherently, this allows the collection to occur rather than not. The administration costs are yet to be seen; would it be a revenue positive proposition?

I can’t predict their goodwill, but it would be very Australian to give something back voluntarily as recognition that the reasons for their success is shared between their own aptitudes and talent, as well as the Australian people, whose taxes were used to develop them. A side question would be how to treat Australians who list their primary place of residence as being outside Australia (Pat Rafter and Bermuda anyone?), and how legally income can be collected.

At ANU, Professor Denniss is preparing a list of the top 50 earning Australians who have received support, probably with an implicit requirement that they pay it back. Tennis is again at the forefront, with Jelana Dockic estimated to have had $250,000 of contributions made. In 'absconding' she has followed the lead of many young graduates who head overseas and don't repay their uni fees. Often the main purpose is not to avoid the tax, but to explore working in other countries. Chapman had a solution for this that he presented last year:

"The first way to fix the overseas problem is write on the bottom of HECS contracts that in the event that you are going overseas for six months or more, you are obligated by law to pay the minimum HECS," Professor Chapman said. He said while this repayment would not be linked to income, it was not much money and most graduates going overseas to travel or work could afford to pay.

Les 400 coups, or 314 of them?

In the movie "Les 400 Coups", a youngster played by Jean-Pierre Léaud is disowned by his parents and thrown into the state juvenile system for his crimes. "Les 400 Coups" literally translates as the 400 Blows. Today saw the leaking of a document prepared by Jacques Attali, a former advisor to Francois Mitterand, with 314 ways to "unleash economic growth" in France. Sounds good doesn't it?

To Bernard Fixot, the editor of this review who hoped that it would be launched in book form before being pre-empted on a news website, the leak was considered "Theft, concealment and forgery". Especially when it was to be launched amid great fanfare, and make some money for the (hard copy) publishers. That doesn't relate to the content though.

Mitterand once described Attali, the author of said report thus:

“I don’t need a computer; I’ve got Attali.”

The words of a past advisor to a socialist president wouldn't encourage great confidence in the majority of sitting MPs. However, he has come up with some good ideas to modernise France out of its (well earned) reputation for being a nanny state, and failing to make improvements in areas such as the public sector since the second world war. Despite the good idea, there is no 'mode d'emploi' (user guide) to go with the suggestions. The implementation is thus left up to the current Government, whose Prime Minister is now outpolling the President in terms of popularity.

Oh yes, and even the author has a bearish outlook on the state of the French economy:

“France remains very largely a society of connivance and privileges”, Mr Attali says, in a leaked draft of the report.

Some of the key suggestions include:

• Each child should have mastered French, English, the three Rs, Information Technology and the ability to work in groups by the time they complete their first year of high school.
• 10 centres of excellence for higher learning and research to be established around the country, as well as having the means for France to become a leader in fields to matter in the future.
• Link together towns and suburbs known as 'Ecopolis', integrating green and communications technology.
• Very high speed Internet for all, whether at work or at home.
• Reduction of old departements administrative set-up into more regional structures, and urban councils.
• Freeing up retail business to trade on their own terms. It is illegal to affix the word "Soldes" (sale) unless in the government mandated period. This is crazy.
• Freeing up quotas on taxis, hairdressers, vets and lawyers. A bit of competition would only benefit consumers wouldn't it?

Less bureaucrats, more flexible workforce, less waste. The suggestions also seem to rebalance the immense tax burden that is place on those in the private sector who subsidise the benefits, conditions and retirement of those who work in the public; a polarising gripe considering how large the layers of bureaucracy make the French public service. There will be a summer of discontent and riots if this plan is implemented too viciously, and the French will be up to their old tricks in taking to the streets.
Sarkozy is still acting on the strength of the mandate he garnered in his own election, and that of his parliamentary colleagues. He is acting, because he can see the fabric of the nation fraying under the weight of its generosity, built up over the post-war generations.

The final word goes to Marine Le Pen of the National Front (remember her father Jean-Marie?) tagging Mr Attali as Attila (boom boom):

"because this is a precise and organised plan for ensuring the death of the French nation as we know it”.

You know what, she's absolutely right. The French nation as it is cannot continue to survive: it must follow the Darwinian philosophy of evolving or dying.

Update: Sarkozy's Parliamentary Majority is 314. Coincidence?