Early responses to the Senate committee inquiry on the ATEC bill demonstrate disquiet – people are unhappy that they are not getting what they wanted. And Uni Queensland demonstrates it knows how to stop a power grab when it sees one.
U of Q does not need to convince long-standing HE governance independent expert Mark Warburton who warns that the proposed Australian Tertiary Education Commission (ATEC) has, “few features of an independent steward and many that imply it may simply function as an extension of ministerial and departmental authority.”
And he adds that ATEC will be able to use negotiated “compacts” with individual universities to ensure they do as government wants. “It will be surprising if there is not some form of financial leverage / penalty to encourage providers to accept the terms sought by ATEC in a standard mission based compact. It is possible the model is simply one of ‘name and shame’, but I am sceptical this is the case.”
Mr Warburton accordingly suggests Senators “seek further details” on how ATEC could impose a “default” compact on providers that do not agree to do what they are told.
He also mentions a question being quietly discussed in the HE policy community, whether the Commonwealth can actually apply its corporation powers so that ATEC uses compacts to “exercise control over a wide range of university activities.”
But even as things are, ATEC will be more of the same; “the functions of the Commission are narrowly framed and effectively enable the proposed stewardship of the tertiary sector to perpetuate the same ‘behind closed doors’ operation that has characterised funding for higher education student places since the demand driven funding system was terminated,” he warns.
Deakin U VC Iain Martin reiterates the university’s support of “an ATEC” but also has concerns about the structure of the commission set out in the legislation. Properly designed, ATEC can be “a groundbreaking reform.” But get it wrong and there will be a risk of “ill outcomes.”
The university’s concerns include:
- Appropriate independence: the commissioners are statutory appointments but the organisation may be responsible to the DoE. “This is not an appropriate level of independence and requires clarification”
- The need for commissioners who are “not locked into a singular paradigm of successful universities/university systems.” And they should have subject-matter expertise rather than be managerial generalists
- The importance setting out features of the compacts process in the legislation.
The University of Wollongong's submission includes core operational issues that the Accord team was always on to, including ATEC developing a funding model grounded in “real costs” of teaching, incorporating costs of future demand and research. And it pushes for a “more seamless tertiary system” and a more equitable one, with an end to the Job Ready Graduates funding model.
UoW also emphasises the importance of what many in the HE community assumed at the start they were going to get; an independent agency “with the right expertise” (to) “drive innovation across the system, not simply administer mission-based compacts.”
But at time of writing, Uni Queensland’s submission is the one mandarins who mean to make ATEC their creature will like least. Whoever drafted it knows their way around the HE weeds, proposing legislative language to make the university’s recommendations happen. Thus the university wants Job Ready Graduates gone and proposes an amendment to the Bill that will help that happen, amending Section 11 to “clarify that the ATEC’s remit extends beyond Commonwealth contributions to include student contributions.”
Uni Queensland also proposes ensuring ATEC has funding to “drive institutional differentiation and support transformational change” by amending the Higher Education Support Act to give the Commission its own cash.
There is also a proposal that matters up front. The university suggests amending the Bill to stop the DoE stacking ATEC with its own, including by requiring the Department to consult with the commission before transferring staff. Plus the Chief Commissioner, not the Department’s Secretary, should appoint externals.
And right at the end is a suggestion designed to warn Senators of a risk in the bill that would make universities agencies of the executive, including in industry policy. The committee should consider clarifying, UoQ recommends, “how research autonomy will be protected under the proposed model and how the ATEC will interact with existing research frameworks and regulators.”
And just in case there are kind-hearted Senators who think ATEC is about helping universities, the university spells it out.
“ATEC will play a significant role in shaping system-wide priorities. It is therefore essential that the proposed model explicitly safeguards institutional research autonomy. Compacts must not impose prescriptive research agendas or priorities that could undermine university independence or restrict curiosity-driven research.
“Further clarification is needed on how statements of strategic priorities will interact with existing research frameworks and regulators.”
Cluey work, it could have been even clueyier if chair of the Universities Accord plan and now former ATEC Interim Chief Commissioner Mary O’Kane had been asked about the submission – but it is too early for that. Professor O’Kane does not become Chancellor of the University of Queensland until July.