In recent decades, Australia’s international student landscape has undergone a significant transformation, marking a departure from the dominance of Malaysians, Singaporeans, and Hongkongers who once comprised a substantial portion of the student population. According to national statistics, these demographics no longer feature prominently among the top 10 source countries for international students in Australia. Instead, mainland Chinese, Indian, and Nepali students have ascended to the forefront, followed closely by cohorts from the Philippines, Vietnam, and Colombia.
Over the past ten years, there has been a remarkable surge in the number of students arriving from Nepal, Colombia, and the Philippines, with growth rates exceeding 300 percent, albeit from comparatively lower initial figures. Similarly, the influx of Indian students has nearly doubled within the same timeframe. Despite this, their numbers still pale in comparison to the overwhelming presence of students from mainland China, who currently constitute the majority of international students in Australia.
This demographic shift reflects a profound evolution within Australia’s international education sector, which now stands as the nation’s fourth-largest export, valued at approximately A$36 billion (US$23.6 billion). This industry not only serves as a vital revenue stream for universities and colleges but has also burgeoned into a complex ecosystem encompassing various interconnected services, including accommodation provisions and academic support such as assignment writing.
While many international students pursue graduate degrees, there is a notable contingent opting for more fundamental courses, often geared towards English language proficiency or vocational training in fields like nursing or teaching. However, the proliferation of such programs has inadvertently provided fertile ground for exploitative practices, including the manipulation of the student visa system as an alternative pathway to skilled-worker migration.
Recent reviews conducted by Canberra have revealed instances of systemic abuse within the international education framework, with concerns ranging from the exploitation of student visa regulations to facilitate cheap labor in industries like hospitality, to even connections to illicit activities such as sex trafficking. Phil Honeywood, CEO of the International Education Association of Australia, attributes many of these issues to the removal of a 20-hour weekly cap on international students’ work hours in early 2022, characterizing the resulting scenario as akin to a “Ponzi scheme.”
Honeywood underscores the prevalence of what he terms “labour hire,” wherein foreign students, predominantly from countries like Nepal, India, and the Philippines, are enlisted to fill roles that domestic workers eschew. This phenomenon has been perpetuated by a proliferation of ostensibly low-cost courses, such as A$8,000 (US$5,250) “leadership diplomas,” which some individuals exploit as a means to secure a student visa primarily for work purposes.
A comprehensive review conducted by Canberra, known as the Parkinson Review, highlighted the commodification of student visas by certain educational institutions as a means of accessing Australia’s labor market. The report identified a concerning pattern of systemic exploitation, warning of the emergence of a “permanently temporary underclass.”
The allure of Australia for international students is manifold. For individuals hailing from nations grappling with limited economic prospects, such as Nepal, India, the Philippines, and Colombia, the promise of enhanced employment opportunities and a higher standard of living serves as a compelling draw. Additionally, relaxed visa regulations and expanded work rights further incentivize migration to Australia, facilitating a steady influx of students seeking to capitalize on these opportunities.
In response to mounting concerns and revelations of abuse, the Australian government has initiated a series of reforms aimed at bolstering regulatory oversight within the international education sector. Measures such as heightened English language requirements and the introduction of a “genuine student test” seek to mitigate fraudulent practices and safeguard the integrity of the system. Despite these efforts, the evolving landscape of Australia’s international education industry underscores the ongoing imperative for vigilant oversight and proactive intervention to ensure the equitable treatment of students and the preservation of the sector’s reputation.
