When the Australian government imposed its China travel ban on 1?February, there were 7,000 in China’s “ground zero”, Hubei province, with another 1,000 or so appearing every day.
Three weeks on, there are in Hubei, with 2,500 deaths. Four other Chinese provinces have at least 1,000 cases each, with two more almost certain to tip over that mark this week.
South Korea has its fourth-largest city, Daegu, in an effort to contain the first major coronavirus outbreak outside China. Italy, Japan, Singapore and Iran are also facing concerns. Airport-style symptom-based screening for detecting the disease.
Australia’s travel ban remains in place – for now. But at a time when other countries are travel restrictions and airlines are , the Australian government seems to be heading in the opposite direction.
The government’s expert health panel, the Australian Health Protection Principal Committee (AHPPC), that, subject to certain caveats, “there is a case for government to consider…a temporary relaxation of the travel restrictions to allow entry to a larger number of tertiary students” starting next week. Only students from Hubei province are excepted.
Acting on the AHPPC’s advice, the government has to admit Year?11 and 12 high school students from China. In what may come as a surprise to many, Australia’s state education departments for fee-paying international students. Federal data suggest that there are international students in Victoria alone, with another 3,000 in New South Wales (of 12,000 nationally).
The AHPPC and the federal education minister, Dan Tehan, do?not explain why Year?11 and 12 children should be the first Chinese visa holders allowed into Australia, ahead of university students, business travellers or even family members. In fact, the AHPPC’s advice on travel restrictions does not even mention non-student travellers from China.
Even more worrying is the “third country” route around the travel ban. The current rules allow Chinese students to enter the country if they first travel for 14 days before coming to Australia.
There is no requirement that the students self-quarantine, test for the new coronavirus, or even take their temperatures before flying on to Australia. Enterprising Chinese travel agents have responded by offering targeted at students who are eager to resume their studies in Australia.
Some Australian institutions are this kind of circumvention. Western Sydney University has gone as far as to .
But it is risky to reroute thousands of Chinese students through a poor country that is to Chinese pressure to keep its borders open. The Australian government itself to “exercise a?high degree of caution” in Thailand. Israel, which is well known for its cautious approach, travellers from Thailand completely.
Watching the Australian government crack open the door for Chinese students is like watching a slow-motion crash unfold. Everyone claims to be motivated by student welfare and concerns about public health. Rare are the acknowledgments of the posed by the large dollar values at stake.
So there is little surprise that Saturday’s announcement allowing states to admit Year?11 and 12 students from China was by Tehan and his Victorian counterpart, James Merlino. The Victorian A$18,163 (?9,238) a?year, plus fees, from each of its international high school students. Chinese students probably generate close to A$100?million in tuition revenue in the state, including both government and non-government schools.
Similarly, last week it was revealed that the government has been to “make sure flights can quickly start operating again” when the travel ban is lifted, despite the fact that Chinese airlines have cancelled flights until at least June.
At a time when China’s own universities are closed and more than half its population is subject to , Australia is preparing for incoming Chinese students .
Perhaps not coincidentally, it has been estimated that 10 leading universities face in fees, and the education export sector as a whole is likely to suffer between .
Three weeks ago, the Australian government moved aggressively to protect its people from coronavirus contagion, imposing one of the world’s first travel bans in response to the epidemic. More than have since followed suit.
There is certainly a financial cost to maintaining the travel ban. That is nothing compared to the potential human cost of lifting?it.
Salvatore Babones is an adjunct scholar at the Centre for Independent Studies, an associate professor at the University of Sydney and author of the paper?“”.
