ANU Chancellor Julie Bishop has vigorously denied allegations of bullying and harassment made against her. Photo: Claire Fenwicke.
An Australian National University student advocacy group has expressed its outrage after new documents revealed former vice-chancellor Genevieve Bell received severance pay of more than $400,000 and will return to the university on even more money.
The ANU advised Professor Bell was provided a cessation payment of $362,587 gross (taxable) plus $61,639.79 superannuation when she resigned as the university’s vice-chancellor and president on 11 September, 2025.
ANU Chancellor Julie Bishop had previously told a Senate estimates hearing in October the package was what Prof. Bell “was entitled to under the contract of engagement as vice-chancellor” after her resignation triggered the conditions.
“I can tell you it was in accordance with the terms and conditions of her engagement as vice-chancellor,” Ms Bishop said.
The documents also revealed Prof. Bell, now on 12 months of paid study leave, will receive $200,000 in research start-up fund money upon her return, to be paid by the ANU College of Systems and Society.
The college houses the School of Cybernetics, where Prof. Bell is a distinguished professor (academic level E3) on a five-year contract worth $498,712, plus $84,781 superannuation, each year.
The documents also showed the university would be spending $9126 over six months for online security services for Prof. Bell. The same service will also cover Interim Vice-Chancellor Rebekah Brown.
Professor Brown is earning $950,000 ($30,000 super) while filling the role and can temporarily live at the VC on-campus accommodation at a market rental rate.
No Cuts at ANU co-convenor Ell Lappin said the student group saw Prof. Bell’s package as a reward for her “attacks” on student education and staff jobs.
“Our education continues to worsen because of the cuts that have already taken place. The hundreds of staff let go this year will not be rehired. Entire colleges and departments will not be reinstated,” she said.
“While we pay thousands for our degrees, Genevieve Bell gets paid almost half a million dollars for her crimes.”
Fellow co-convenor Lucy Chapman-Kelly described the package revelations as a “joke”.
“This represents exactly why our education shouldn’t be run for profit, or run by these corporate millionaires,” she said.
“Our education should be free, and run by and for students and university staff.”
The group has vowed to keep speaking out against any further cuts, noting ANU staff’s enterprise bargaining agreement negotiations will start early next year.
Dr Liz Allen claims she has been targeted by ANU leadership over her concerns about university governance and council during a Senate inquiry. Photo: ANU.
The answered questions on notice also related to queries about allegations of bullying and harassment made by former ANU employee Dr Liz Allen.
Ms Bishop has vigorously denied these claims.
Senator David Pocock asked the university if it or Ms Bishop had received Dr Allen’s 53-page complaint (of which he had a copy) and, if not, why this was the case.
The ANU’s response detailed both entities weren’t aware of the document nor its length until the question was asked.
“As at the date of this response [21 November], the Chancellor has not been notified by ANU that she is a respondent in a workplace grievance, nor has she received a copy of the 53-page document,” it stated.
“This matter has been subsumed into the investigation currently being carried by Dr Vivian Thom AM in relation to the allegations raised at the 12 August 2025 Senate Committee inquiry hearing.”
The documents showed Ms Bishop emailed ANU chief operating officer Jonathan Churchill after Dr Allen’s complaints were aired, noting Mr Churchill had mentioned a formal workplace grievance process was in place.
“I have several key rights if, in fact, any adverse allegations have been made against me in such a grievance process,” she wrote.
“On the assumption following the Senate hearing that allegations have in fact been made against me in the grievance process, none of my rights have been protected.”
Ms Bishop concluded her email by asking when the workplace grievance was made, the state of the process, and why she wasn’t told about the allegations.
Deputy chief people officer Mark Cook responded to her four days later, stating Dr Allen had first formally raised her concerns on 23 March through a confidential Work Health and Safety incident notification, and followed up on 27 March asking for her grievance to be treated as a formal complaint about workplace conduct.
“The matters originally articulated by Dr Allen were expressed in broad terms and lacked the specific details, evidence and witnesses required to meet the necessary standard for notifying a respondent,” he wrote.
He outlined an alternative, external firm with “scale, legislative expertise and subject matter knowledge” would be engaged to investigate.
“Through this process, the specific details of Dr Allen’s claims will be clarified, and you will have the opportunity to put your position forward,” Mr Cook wrote.
Dr Thom is heading up the ANU Special Governance Committee established to investigate Dr Allen’s allegations.
