In Australia, the claim that international education is an alleged $51 billion (the figure increases with every propaganda article) export juggernaut is peddled by university elites like Vicki Thomson, CEO of the Group of Eight (Go8) universities. But a blistering Macrobusiness article by Leith van Onselen, published April 29, 2025, exposes this as a "fantastical lie," arguing it's a migration racket that bleeds the economy dry. For nationalists, this strikes a chord: the international student boom fuels housing crises and cultural erosion, sold as an economic boon by globalist politicians.
Van Onselen dismantles the narrative that international education is Australia's fourth-largest export, revealing statistical distortions and migration-driven motives. Key points include:
1.Overstated Export Value:
The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) claims $50.5 billion in education exports for 2023-24, counting all student spending—tuition, rent, food, transport—as exports, even if funded by local earnings.
The ABS admits 25% ($13 billion) comes from students working in Australia, not foreign funds, with off-the-books cash jobs likely pushing this higher, shrinking the true export value.
2.Remittances Drain Wealth:
Australia sent US$8.6 billion ($A12.5 billion) in net remittances abroad in 2023, much from students sending earnings home. These outflows, effectively imports, are ignored in ABS export figures.
This contradicts the "export" narrative, as money flows out, not in, especially from South Asian students.
3.Migration Over Education:
South Asian students, led by Indians, prioritise work rights (52%) and permanent residency (43%) over education quality, per the IDP Emerging Futures survey. Many exploit spousal work visas and low-quality courses as migration pathways.
Most arrive with little money, working to cover costs and repay family loans, not bringing foreign wealth.
4.Institutional Complicity:
The ABS adheres to flawed international standards, refusing to adjust export reporting. Universities, media, and government tout the $51 billion figure to protect revenue and deflect migration criticism. It shows in particular the intellectual corruption of the universities.
Van Onselen demands honesty, arguing the exaggerated figure misleads policymakers and the public.
Van Onselen's case is robust, backed by data and expert insight, and aligns with nationalist concerns about immigration's hidden costs. Here's why it holds water:
Statistical Deception Unmasked: The ABS's method is nonsensical, counting a student's coffee purchase as an "export" if they're on a visa, but not a skilled migrant's. Higher education expert Andrew Norton notes students from poor countries rely on Australian jobs to repay loans, nullifying export value. X posts, like @SenatorRennick's call to expose the "gross distortion" of $48 billion, reflect public scepticism.
Remittance Outflows Prove the Point: World Bank data showing $A12.5 billion in net remittances leaving Australia in 2023 tracks with rising student numbers, as van Onselen notes. If education were a $51 billion export, inflows would dwarf outflows, not vice versa. Ireland mirrors this, with Nigerian and Indian students sending earnings abroad, straining local economies while occupying scarce housing.
Migration as the Real Goal: The IDP survey confirms South Asian students prioritise work and residency, a trend seen in Ireland's English-language schools, often visa factories for Indian and Pakistani migrants. The Guardian exposed Australian universities passing students with "basic English," prioritising fees over standards. X users like @MRobertsQLD highlight $10 billion in remittances, calling it a "Ponzi scheme."
Economic and Social Harm: Australia's 499,371 international students in 2024 drive up rents, with Four Corners' "Cash Cows" exposing universities as "immigration mills." Ireland's 100,000 students and asylum seekers exacerbate a housing crisis, with nationalists protesting in Coolock and Roscrea over resource competition, covered today at this blog. Van Onselen's claim that the "export" myth hides these costs resonates, as both nations prioritise foreigners over locals.
Van Onselen's article is a data-driven takedown of the international student "export" myth, exposing a migration scheme that drains Australia's wealth and burdens citizens.
https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2025/04/international-student-exports-are-one-big-lie/
"Last month, Vicki Thomson, the CEO of the elite Group of Eight (Go8) universities, claimed that international education is the nation's third-largest export.
Amid talk of imposing caps on enrolment numbers, Thomson said, "Do not put our third-largest export sector at risk. A $51 billion economy and, more than that, a sector which actually builds our skills base [and] does not damage the economy but enhances the economy".
"Do not put that at risk for cheap political point scoring", she said.
Thomson's claim was demonstrably false. Even the Department of Education states that education was Australia's fourth-largest export, worth $51 billion last financial year.
However, the official $51 billion figure from the ABS is wildly overstated since it: 1) counts all expenditures by international students as an export, even when the money is earned in Australia, and 2) ignores money sent home by students as remittances.
Higher education expert Andrew Norton made these points in an article that appeared in The AFR last week:
"The reality is that for people from poor countries, even doing unskilled work in Australia, is going to pay more than what they would earn back home", Norton said.
"And if they've borrowed money to finance their university or vocational course, which many will have, being able to work in Australia is an important part of paying the cost of that back".
Presumably, most of the money students borrow will be from families in their home countries. Therefore, the repayment of these loans effectively eliminates the export component of international education.
Indeed, Australia loses significant sums of money abroad via remittance payments.
According to the World Bank, Australia sent US$8.6 billion in net remittances to other nations in 2023. A significant share of these remittance outflows would have originated from students working in Australia and sending money home.
However, these remittance outflows are excluded entirely from the ABS' fantastical education export figure.
In a similar vein, the ABS last year admitted that one-quarter of the reported education export figure comprises money earned in Australia and, therefore, is not an export:
All expenditure by international students studying in Australia is recorded as an export in the Balance of Payments statistics published by the Australian Bureau of Statistics. This includes expenditure on tuition fees, food, accommodation, local transport, health services, etc., by international students while in Australia. This expenditure contributed $50.5 billion to Australia's exports in the 2023-24 financial year.
The classification as an export of expenditure by international students studying in Australia does not depend on how the students fund their expenditure in Australia. Some of the expenditure is funded from overseas sources. While it is not possible to be precise, ABS estimates suggest around a quarter of the expenditure (around $13 billion in the 2023-24 financial year) is funded by international students working in Australia for Australian employers.
The ABS said it won't change how it reports education exports because it is an international standard.
A significant share of students work off-the-books for cash. Therefore, the true income students earn in Australia would be higher (meaning education exports are lower).
Therefore, it is likely that the ABS's estimate that one-quarter of expenditure by international students is earned in Australia is highly conservative.
The government, media, and industry should cease reporting the fantastical $50.5 billion education export figure as fact. It is highly exaggerated and misleading.
South Asia, led by India, has driven the recent growth in international enrolments.
Various surveys indicate that South Asian students prioritise work rights and migration above everything else.
South Asian students care about immigration, not education quality.
Indeed, the most recent IDP Emerging Futures survey indicated that post-study work opportunities (52%) are the most important consideration for international students when choosing a study destination. Pathways to permanent residency rank second at 43%.
Prospective international students also covet the ability to bring their spouses to work and live, which has been ruthlessly exploited by South Asian students and graduates.
Who honestly believes these students from South Asia bring large sums of money to study in Australia?
The reality is that most arrive in Australia with limited funds and take up jobs to fund themselves and send money back home to their families.
Money sent home is by definition an import, not an export."