The Empire talks Back: Universities Australian sets the Senate straight

Plant growing from coins in the glass jar on blurred green natural background. copy space for business and financial growth concept.

The peak body for all publicly-funded universities urges the Senate inquiry into system governance to, “focus on real improvements and outcomes.”

“All too often, we see issues tangentially linked to governance framed as such and utilised for political purposes. When this happens, it distracts from the major policy and funding discussions that we need our policy and decision makers to prioritise,” UA asserts, in its brief submission to the Senate Education and Employment Legislation Committee inquiry.

It is never wise to suggest to Senators that a Committee’s priorities might not be quite right, but what appears to be UA irritation is understandable.

Labor Senator for NSW Tony Sheldon floated an inquiry such as this last June but it was announced in January, just after Education Minister Jason Clare appointed a university governance advisory board. This Committee Inquiry will keep the pressure on, assuming it does not disappear, not to return after the election. It’s terms of reference include, staff not paid agreed rates, “broader compliance with workplace laws,” “accountability of decision making” and VC pay

“There’s no other job in Australia where you can be paid so exorbitantly while performing so badly, with seemingly no consequences or accountability for the impact on university staff and students” Senator Sheldon said when the committee was created.

Which UA suggests is a distraction from the more important issue of underfunding. “Student funding arrangements are inadequate, government investment in research has never been lower and universities no longer receive dedicated infrastructure funding. Our sector can’t expand in line with Australia’s growing need for skills and research under these conditions.”

UA also worries the committee’s terms of reference extend way beyond the stated focus on governance. They have a point with (d) “the impact of providers’ employment practices, executive remuneration, and the use of external consultants, on staff, students and the quality of higher education offered” and especially (e), “any related matters”

“I urge the committee to reconsider the terms of reference to ensure they are not used for political purposes,” UA’s Luke Sheehy suggests.

Share:

Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
LinkedIn

Sign Up for Our Newsletter

Subscribe to us to always stay in touch with us and get latest news, insights, jobs and events!