Universities acknowledged this week that they had failed to keep Jewish staff and students safe on campus, but two institutions revealed how operational planning had reduced the impact of protest encampments on their campuses.
As a former managing director of the ABC and head of the NSW Department of Education Mark Scott (Uni Sydney) is an expert in giving evidence to inquiries. Professor Scott told the Royal Commission into Antisemitism and Social Cohesion that he apologised for what Jewish staff and students on campus endured in 2024. He set out the university’s attempts to protect them, but recognised that he should have consulted Jewish Staff and Students more closely. Listening to Professor Scott’s evidence, it appeared that the university’s management was surprised by the vehemence of protests, and was for months bewildered on how to respond.
Uni Melbourne Interim VC Glyn Davis had an even tougher task. He gave evidence on events that occurred when he was not at the university (being head of the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet at the time). The University initially did not decide to shut down the campus encampment, because management feared violence, as occurred at US universities. But he stated that Jewish staff and students were impacted by that caution and he apologised for the university not engaging more with them. It was difficult, he added, not to despair at vilification of Jewish students.
The university’s approach changed when a building was occupied and classes cancelled in May and academic Stephen Prawer’s office was invaded. The late Emma Johnston, who became VC early last year, introduced bans on disruptive campus protests, which Professor Davis recently confirmed.
ANU’s acting provost Joan Leach suggested, like other unis that the university was anxious to avoid the violence that had occurred on US campuses in 2024.
Of the universities appearing at the Royal Commission, only Uni NSW had no encampment. VC Atilla Brungs presented evidence why. One reason was geography – UNSW borders are not porous, like Uni Sydney’s, thus making it less accessible to external protestors. But mostly the reasons appear to have been about management. Professor Brungs explained policies and processes in detail, on complaints comms (including QR codes in all bathrooms), on facilitating campus conversations on racism, on a management response group to anticipate, identify and act on problems. And he acknowledged failings with apparent interest in the happy prospect of fixing them.
He was followed by Monash VC Sharon Pickering, who explained how the university anticipated a protest on the US example and planned for it. She had just reached New York when she was briefed an encampment was imminent and flew straight home.
Her evidence focused on activities put in place to “protect our people,” in place then and continuing now, with the DVC E and ED for student safety meeting with Jewish, Arab and Islamic student groups. And she went on to explain the process that contained the encampment on the Clayton campus, using existing powers and working with the university’s student associations – the university never negotiated with protestors, but they broke camp of their own accord after 17 days.
In a personal submission to the Royal Commission Western Sydney U chancellor Jennifer Westacott states, “we must honestly face the fact that universities became a focal point for antisemitism. Free inquiry and the right to protest are essential to a university’s mission. But what occurred on too many Australian campuses was not free speech.”
Nor was it inevitable, as Attila Brungs and Sharon Pickering show.