I am only concerned with the number of international students, if that should impinge on the placement of Australian Students.
Kennett and Howard were instrumental in creating universities where the user pays and this means the universities are basically "meat in the sandwich". Kennett's directive to the colleges to go and generate their revenue, has subsequently resulted in the commercialisation of our education systems. Even industry training has been effected. We no longer keep a pool of experience and knowledge developed by the older workers and this is no longer a benefit to those just entering industry.
With the de-skilling of trades and their replacement with "Mickey Mouse" training programmes we are facing the loss of experience, knowledge as well as quality education. this has given industry/commerce the opportunity to go to government and claim that there is not the required level of knowledge, experience, etc available in Australia so we need to import skilled people from other countries.
Why, Our education and training system was among the best in the world, so has government done?
Level Playing fields; Global Economy has meant share raiders are free to come in an destroy viable Australian companies and then claim they are no longer viable, so we need to move off shore to manufacture our goods!
It is not an issue of how many foreign students but whether Australians can access places in the system or without incurring a major debt that they are not able to repay. Britain found out the hard way under Thatcher and is in the process of re-introducing the old system of education and training. Britain still provides education to all levels of society, starting with its nursery levels right through to University. An education system that provides a sound introduction to literacy and numeracy and follow this up with a sound industrial education and training system. This includes the pure sciences. Pure science and Maths is no longer an option for students. Britain, unlike Australia, seems to consider a well educated work force an asset.

Statistics?
What are they? The plaything of academics and are only of value when the parametres are set correctly.
I have worked in this area for many years and always check/question the parameters. If you want to argue a case then provide the statistics without the real base figures. Then you may manipulate them to obtain a pre-conceived value.

Providing the parametres and the real figures makes it more difficult to manipulate the data. I once had to write a reply on the government water strategy and within the first few paragraphs I could see errors within the data. In fact my coment was that it was a very poor document and one I would have expected better from a first year high school student. One error claimed that Geelong used 35 mg litres of water anually. Wow! With a population of some 200,000 Geelong has to be the most efficient users of water, both for its domestic as well as its industry, or, it has to be among the dirtiest people in the western world. Logically I know the figures are incorrect. However, if you publish the data then you have to be accountable. Eighteen and a half litres per person, wow!
The whole of the government document was full of such errors and my conclusion was that it was not interested in public comment but producing a document so the "peasants" would be impressed with such a large document:

The easiest and most common form of 'lying' with descriptive statistics is to use them accurately, but selectively - i.e. featuring verifiable figures that support a particular agenda, while omitting others that might not.

Perhaps one of the most relevant documents to this debate is the April 2009 Access Economics report entitled "The Australian education sector and the economic contribution of international students" [ http://tiny.cc/bLXmI ], but strangely nobody here's referred to it.

Since I'm no longer involved in higher education, I hadn't read the report until stimulated to do so by this thread (thanks to Banjo for that, at least). Having now skimmed it, it looks to me to be quite reliable as far as it goes - but of course it doesn't purport to cover the kinds of issues that seem to concern him. and others.

Since the4 report appears to be one of the principal sources for recent media reporting on potential economic implications of the apparent crime wave against Indian students, I'm quite astounded that those at OLO who were apparently previously oblivious to one of Australia's major sources of export revenue haven't found the report for themselves. It took me about four clicks on Google to locate it.

I actually have numerous concerns about the current state of affairs with respect to the higher education 'industry', and I'm happy to discuss them with anybody who bothers to acquaint themselves with some of the abundantly available background.

However, I'm not the slightest bit interested in arguing with ignorant xenophobes who are stridently and latterly demanding to know why they weren't consulted in the development of one of Australia's most economically successful and sustainable industries.

Professor
You said "With the de-skilling of trades and their replacement with "Mickey Mouse" training programmes we are facing the loss of experience, knowledge as well as quality education. this has given industry/commerce the opportunity to go to government and claim that there is not the required level of knowledge, experience, etc available in Australia so we need to import skilled people from other countries"

That is something I can relate to. Years ago a Telstra (Telecom) linesman told me that all the NSW linesmans training facilities were now closed. He did not say about other states but said this was done to increase the profit margin to enhance the sale of the first part of the organization. I asked what is going to happen when the current employees kark it, and he shrugged his shoulders. It was only a year or two later that I saw ads in overseas papers that Telstra needed linesmen.

This is an example of how much big business cares for Aus. With this in mind, I do not doubt that Kennett told the Unis to generate their own funds and with Howards blessing.

Our young are missing out from Telstra and most likely from other places in the education/training systems. If so that does concern me. I am not concerned about having foreaign students here, but I do not wish to see them taken for a ride or that some are using it as a backdoor method of immigration. Not do I want to see any dissadvantage to our own students.

I wonder if the figures are padded out to improve the perceived importance of the 'industry' to the economy.

With the drop in secondary industry is seems illogical that we have a shortage of skills and need to import. Should this not be seen as a failure of government and industry?

“Since I'm no longer involved in higher education,”
CJ.Morgan, I’m laughing at myself, I should have spotted the symptoms immediately, you’re a TEACHER!
The sneering put-downs, the arrogant pedantry, the dismissal of contrary opinions as “ignorance”, the demands for proper presentation and quoting of sources, the inability to listen to others, all the habits,… right up to and including…
“Have you done your homework yet?”
LOL, thanks for all the giggles, I’ll know better in future, and make allowances for your limitations. You should have explained sooner, I wouldn’t have written as I did, I thought I was talking to someone reasonable, lol

professor and Banjo,

I think it a mistake to equate higher education to what is happening in trades and industry education. The dearth of industry-based training has nothing to do with foreign student intakes.

Perhaps it should be suggested that industries that are suffering from a lack of trained individuals pull their finger out and pay for more training programs.

So, got something against teachers Max? Explains a lot.