Statutes Amendment (Universities) Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 30 November 2016.)

Mr GARDNER (Morialta) (12:54): As shadow minister for education, I am very pleased to speak on behalf of the opposition in relation to the Statutes Amendment (Universities) Bill. This bill will reduce the size of university councils, will extend the tenure of student representatives on the councils from one to two years and will allow the tabling of annual reports in the parliament by the Minister for Higher Education and Skills instead of by the Governor. It will strengthen statutory liability protections for council members and senior officers, it will include provision for the establishment of common investment funds, and it will expand the delegation powers of the university councils.

It will change the name of the Flinders University of South Australia Act 1966 to the Flinders University Act 1966, which I am sure will reduce confusion immensely for all the alumni of the University of South Australia and Flinders University of South Australia (soon to be known as Flinders University). It will also make associated consequential amendments. These are changes to the act that have been sought by the administrations of the two universities.

For a number of reasons, they have argued that these measures will improve the functioning of those universities, and I think some of the measures are clearly and unambiguously of benefit, whether it is changing the name or strengthening protections and dealing with funds. The issue that has caused anxiety amongst some members of the university communities is, of course, that of reducing the size of university councils.

In relation to this matter, the bill specifies that, notwithstanding the flexibility around the number of independent members, the University of Adelaide council will be changed from 20 to 21 members as it is at the moment to between 12 and 16 members, and Flinders University will change from 20 to 21 down to between 15 and 16 members. To put that into context, the University of South Australia currently has 15 to 16 members on its board.

Regarding the make-up, the chancellor is one of those members at each of the universities, as well as the vice chancellor and the presiding member of the academic board. The universities have independently appointed members, eight in the context of the University of South Australia. For Flinders University, the bill would reduce that from 10 to eight. At Adelaide University, it is currently seven, and under the new proposal it will become up to seven; there would be some flexibility for fewer than seven to be appointed.

In terms of staff representation, the University of South Australia has one general and one academic staff member, and Flinders University currently has two general and two academic staff members, which would be reduced to one general and one academic member. The University of Adelaide has two general and two academic staff members, and that would be reduced to one general and one academic staff member.

In terms of student representation, the University of South Australia has one undergraduate and one postgraduate member, and Flinders University currently has three, of which at least one must be an undergraduate and one a postgraduate. That is also the case for Adelaide University. This bill will reduce that to one undergraduate and one postgraduate, so it is a reduction of one student representative.

In terms of graduates, only Adelaide University currently has graduates as automatic members of the council. It currently has three, and that is proposed to be reduced to one. I suppose I should declare a conflict of interest here: as a graduate, I will have my opportunities for representation reduced by two-thirds, although I should indicate to the house that I had no plans to attempt to become one of those graduates, so perhaps it is not such a conflict.

Regarding co-opted members, all universities have the optional position of one co-opted member. It is proposed that stay, although I note that at the University of Adelaide, certainly at the moment, in his endeavours to keep the size of the University of Adelaide council more manageable, the chancellor does not exercise that prerogative. So they currently have 20 and not the opportunity for 21.

Obviously, the views of the administrations of Flinders University and Adelaide University were sought by the opposition. I can confirm that Flinders University has advised that the proposed changes to the Flinders University Act would create a contemporary governance structure, one better suited to addressing the major strategic challenges faced by the university in a rapidly changing environment. Similarly, Adelaide University is also in favour.

Regarding the implementation of this matter, council appointment procedures have already taken place at Flinders University, so these changes will not impact on the Flinders University council until January 2019. Similarly, Adelaide University board members are also set to see out their terms, so if the bill passes as it is new members would take their places in 12 to 18 months. Otherwise, the council would be unaffected.

Fundamentally, the question posed by the challenging parts of this bill is whether the universities wanting to run more efficiently, with more manageable councils, is worth the reduction in breadth of representation from impacted stakeholders. Are they best considered as businesses operating in a competitive environment, albeit with tens of millions of dollars of commonwealth government support, or are they traditional institutions with ingrained cultures and expectations of accountability that need to be maintained? I will answer that question after the lunch break. I seek leave to conclude my remarks.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.

Sitting suspended from 13:00 to 14:00.