Blatant self interest in "GROUP OF EIGHT" university funding proposal, says NTEU
26 August 1997
A proposal for a partial voucher system of university funding, put forward by the \"Group of Eight\" sandstone universities to the West review of higher education, is a case of blatant self interest, say the National Tertiary Education Union (NTEU).
The universities want to see the brightest school-leavers awarded special \"scholarships\" tenable at the university of their choice, a policy which would tend to concentrate these students in the high-status institutions.
NTEU General Secretary, Mr Grahame McCulloch, said today that the proposal would have disastrous consequences for newer and regional institutions. \"These institutions would suffer a decline in enrolments, while those universities which already enjoy considerable advantages would prosper at their expense.\"
Mr McCulloch pointed out that, in any case, if the students’ interests were paramount in the collective mind of the Group of Eight universities, then they would have realised that high-achievers already enjoy wide choice of course and institution. \"The high TER scores of these students ensures that they can choose to study wherever they please, provided that they meet other entry criteria,\" he said. \"A TER in the nineties is already an entry ticket to most courses, including those in the elite universities. It is the students with lower TER scores whose choices are limited.\"
The Group of Eight submission also calls for increased powers to sack university staff. \"Claims that institutional managements are ‘hamstrung’ by cumbersome procedures and awards are complete nonsense,\" said Mr McCulloch. \"Dismissal provisions in relevant industrial awards are no more onerous than those applying in other parts of the public sector. And the advent of enterprise bargaining has allowed employers considerable scope to seek to introduce new provisions at institutional level.
\"The universities are bleating for sympathy on this score when none is warranted,\" he said.
The NTEU also commented on the release of four research papers on funding mechanisms for higher education by the West Review Committee yesterday.
\"Two of the papers appear to propose funding systems which are unworkable, potentially chaotic and ideologically driven,\" Mr McCulloch said. \"They are based on vouchers, fees and a deregulated approach. One in particular - that by Mark Harrison - proposes total abolition of a planning role for Government. This ignores the practical reality of Australian geography and demography, and would result in the decimation of higher education in regional areas.
\"By contrast, the suggestions made by Bruce Chapman in his paper are restrained, sensible and workable,\" he said. \"NTEU agrees that a fundamental overhaul of the current system of funding is unnecessary. It is serving us well, providing a good range of options for students and producing graduates whose skills are fitted to the needs of the economy.
\"An irresponsible, doctrinaire approach to higher education policy threatens an immensely valuable public resource. It also threatens to reduce opportunities for young Australians to undertake higher education,\" Mr McCulloch concluded.
Further information Jane Nicholls, National Research Officer 03 9254 1910 (bh)
Dr Julie Wells, National Research Officer Tel 03 9254 1910 (bh) or jwells@nteu.org.au