Parliamentary Committees

Joint Committee on Establishment of Adelaide University

Adjourned debate on motion of Hon. R.B. Martin:

That the final report of the committee be noted.

(Continued from 18 October 2023.)

The Hon. J.S. LEE (Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (16:42): I rise to speak on the motion about the report of the Joint Committee on the Establishment of Adelaide University. The joint committee was formed on 6 July to inquire into and report on the proposal to amalgamate the University of Adelaide and the University of South Australia. The joint committee was given a very tight time frame because there was a requirement that the committee report must be ready by 17 October 2023. It has been a lengthy process in terms of time taken over the winter break.

During the time of inquiry the committee met on 14 occasions, with each session generally lasting on average about three hours. The committee received 86 written submissions from a long list of stakeholders. We had face-to-face evidence given by 47 witnesses, with two important witnesses, namely the vice-chancellors of the University of Adelaide and the University of South Australia, Professor Peter Høj AC and Professor David Lloyd, who were recalled to give further evidence.

It was a privilege to be a member of the joint committee—my first joint committee—representing the Liberal Party, along with the member for Morialta, the Hon. John Gardner, Deputy Leader of the Opposition, shadow minister for education, training and skills. I wish to acknowledge the strong leadership and passion of the shadow minister for education, the Hon. John Gardner, who worked diligently and relentlessly to engage with stakeholders across the board, not only as a member of the joint committee but outside of parliament, to conduct extensive research and preparation of briefings for key stakeholders including the Liberal parliamentary team.

From the opposition's point of view, we believe that the joint committee should have had a longer time frame to consider the proposal of a merger of this scale and importance. In opposition we have very modest resources available, and certainly the work on the committee has applied a significantly heavy workload on members like the Hon. John Gardner and myself over the last four to five months as this matter has been considered.

The membership consisted of the Hon. Dan Cregan, Speaker of the House of Assembly, as the Chair. The House of Assembly members were the member for Morialta, the member for Adelaide, the member for Gibson and the member for Florey. The composition from the upper house consisted of the Hon. Reggie Martin, the Hon. Robert Simms, the Hon. Sarah Game and the Hon. Connie Bonaros. The Hon. Tammy Franks, in the absence of the Hon. Robert Simms, was with us from 6 July until 28 August and subsequently the Hon. Robert Simms took over on the committee from 29 August.

I also want to place on the record my thanks for the members. I also particularly want to thank all the administration and research support staff for the committee. I would just like to place on the record my thanks to Mr David Pegram, the secretary to the committee, Ms Alison Meeks, Mr Shane Hilton, Ms Tonia Coulter, and the two research officers, Mr Alistair Taylor and Ms Megan Fink.

The terms of reference are well documented; I will not go into that. I just want to point to the fact that this committee was established because the government had made a decision to make special funding provisions to help the amalgamation of the two universities, namely, the University of South Australia and the University of Adelaide. Yesterday, during the debate, I mentioned a great deal about the minority report subsequent to the actual report that was presented by the joint committee.

Overall, the committee received evidence from a range of witnesses in support of the amalgamation. Those that supported the merger had a number of reasons for doing so: (1) they saw it as having the ability to deliver long-term economic benefits to South Australia; (2) they saw an increased international ranking of a new institution when compared with the other institutions in the sector; (3) they attract more international students; (4) enhanced research output and quality; and (5) provide possible benefits of scale, including a reduction of various research intensity of collaboration.

However, we also heard a number of witnesses who opposed and showed hesitation about the purported benefits. Those who opposed mentioned that the merger will: (1) lead to redundancy or job losses through efficiency measures; (2) deliver an inferior student and staff experience arising partly from the scale of the new proposed institution; (3) deliver an education model that is out of step with the ongoing review of the national higher education sector as part of the Australian Universities Accord; (4) reduce the quality of research through the failure to retain leading researchers; and (5) divert key staff from their core teaching and research roles when they are engaged in completing the merger schemes of arrangements.

There were seven recommendations. I think honourable members can read them for themselves, but the Liberal Party wants to stress that we argue very strongly that we must provide additional funding to support the institution that is not part of this merger. We call on the government to consider backing a new research fund for Flinders University and, together with the Hon. Robert Simms and the Greens, we have advocated very strongly for it. We also advocated for more funding to support regional students, the regions having onsite education delivery, and not just for the sake of merging the institutions and forgetting about the implications for the region.

Overall, we do not believe the Malinauskas Labor government has handled the merger discussions well. Their political fumbling and poor management of the process has really put a dark cloud over the proposal for months and months. It has really undermined the confidence among staff and the public and that has been spoken about. I encourage members who want to fully understand the position of the Liberal Party to read the Hon. John Gardner's extensive contributions in the House of Assembly during the tabling of the joint committee report.

The Malinauskas Labor government's incompetence highlights the importance of the work undertaken by the Joint Committee on the Establishment of Adelaide University. We made a series of recommendations to reduce the risks inherent in the proposal. The Liberal Party believes that not enough has been done for Flinders University or the regions as part of the merger proposal, which is why we are committing, as the media release has shown and the Hon. John Gardner has announced, to a new research fund for Flinders, as well as a regional university hub, if elected in 2026.

I have made many mentions in my second reading speech during the debate stage of the bill. I will not repeat them, but I do believe that the people of South Australia deserve no less than us putting them first on every occasion. While we are supporting this merger, we really want a pathway and benefits for the regional economy and regional students in their area and to make sure that there is equity and a level playing field applying to Flinders University in terms of funding.

I also want to particularly include some comments from a letter that was written to Mr John Gardner and myself dated 30 October, a letter in which both vice-chancellors want to address some of the concerns that we had when we raised the minority report. The letter reads:

Dear Mr Gardner,

We are writing to provide a response to the Minority Report by yourself and the Hon. Jing Lee MLC as part of the Joint Committee on the Establishment of Adelaide University.

Firstly, we wish to acknowledge the careful and constructive way in which both you and the wider committee have engaged with the Universities as part of this parliamentary process.

We believe that the ambition of a new University is clear. As captured in our first collective vision statement:

The Minority Report's recommendations propose a number of matters for consideration. Some are directed towards the Government; others relate to how the Universities could best manage the transition period and post-merger activities of Adelaide University. We wish to respond, in broad terms, to those recommendations regarding to risk and regional delivery.

Risk and its mitigation

The Universities, in their various submissions and evidence before the Joint Committee, outlined the detailed attention that has been given to matters of risk and their mitigation. We acknowledge the risks are tangible, though manageable and in our view outweigh the longer-term risk of not pursuing this opportunity.

The Universities have put in place very detailed plans and mitigations relating to all aspects of the merger, not all of which is in the public domain for competition purposes. However, there is some additional information we would like to provide you as part of our response to the Minority Report.

Following a rigorous tender and procurement process, with independent probity, the Universities have jointly appointed Deloitte as our Integration Management Partner. Deloitte has a proven track record of delivering successful integration projects of substantial complexity. They will support critical subject areas such as integration and transformation oversight, project management and quality assurance, business process design, systems integration, change management and the communication frameworks. This partnership is one of the key measures that has been taken to de-risk this merger.

Staff retention and attraction during any complex change of this scale is a risk.

The universities have admitted that. It continues:

It is one that the Universities identified early as part of its transition planning. Processes and procedures have been put in place to retain/minimise the loss of key staff with an ambition to attract and retain more talent in the medium to long term. While the pre-legislative period does cause a level of uncertainty, we cannot yet identify any discernible trend to suggest that the staff are departing the universities due to the merger…The new Adelaide University is committed to enhancing the student experience and do not believe that the lived experience in a merged university will be in any way diminished. The enhancement of the student experience has been identified as a key institutional strategic goal, is a key transition path and is an area in which planning has already commenced. Indeed, it is proposed that Adelaide University will appoint a Deputy Vice Chancellor whose primary portfolio attention will be upon student experience and success.

The Universities welcomed the focus the Joint Committee placed on the risk involving this merger. The Universities have always anticipated the risks and have spent considerable time identifying and putting in place management plans to address them.

In terms of regional delivery, which is a question and also a recommendation outlined in the Liberal opposition's minority report, in response to that the universities have provided these comments, and I would like to include them in my contribution here today:

Regional Delivery

As identified in the Minority Report the viability of many offerings is dependent on scale. You correctly noted one area that merits serious consideration is that of courses with low student numbers. The Committee heard evidence that a risk inherent in the status quo is for such courses. As they require subsidy from other parts of the Universities' budgets, the future of these courses might be vulnerable in times of financial pressure. It was suggested that the proposed scale of the new institution would give such courses a much stronger level of protection.

This conclusion is directly relevant to the regional campus and hubs. Both Universities have invested in regional education research in Mount Gambier, Whyalla, Roseworthy and the Waite. In addition, there are focused activities in Port Lincoln, Ceduna, Elizabeth and the APY Lands. A university of scale provides the means by which the academic offerings in the regions become more sustainable and can possibly be further expanded.

In designing and implementing a new curriculum for the new University, a fundamental principle is that the student ambition and experience will be paramount. The new curriculum will be contemporary, 'modular, adaptable and stackable' with digital underpinnings. The ability to engage with students through face-to-face, hybrid-mode or online education will provide important means of access for students in the regions. We believe that this approach to curriculum design and delivery will allow more regional students to attend Adelaide University without necessarily relocating to Adelaide…

The Universities, and a future Adelaide University, will subject to sufficient demand and support actively engage with any such state policy initiatives designed to establish regional hubs or learning centres. As the founding legislation for the new Adelaide University obligates and the existing regional campuses of our two institutions demonstrate, the new University intends to serve the state, not just metropolitan Adelaide. As such, Adelaide University would, subject to the appropriate assessment, be extremely well placed to being an anchor tenant in any regional initiative that may be advanced in the future.

We again thank you for the opportunity to respond to aspects of the Minority Report. We are encouraged by the carefully consideration that has been given to the establishment of the new Adelaide University.

Yours sincerely

Professor Peter Høj AC

Vice-Chancellor and President

The University of Adelaide

Professor David Lloyd

Vice Chancellor and President

University of South Australia

I am going to make some concluding remarks. From the outset, we have always mentioned that we want the best results from the merger. It is our responsibility to ensure that this report provides all the evidence necessary. I think all along we have said that transparency and accountability were lacking in the whole process in terms of getting the merger and the haste with which the agreement was signed. With those remarks, I commend the report.

Debate adjourned on motion of Hon. I.K. Hunter.