The anger at the proposed ANU cuts is not abating. Photo: Nicholas Ward.
You can’t really compare the ANU apple with the University of Canberra orange, but last week’s events drew very contrasting pictures of the ACT’s two main higher education institutions.
Both have had to deal with budget issues, but while the bad headlines and pain keep coming for ANU, UC appears to have got its restructure and job cuts done quickly and moved on with a new direction under Vice-Chancellor Bill Shorten and a genuine understanding of its place in the world.
ANU continues to roll out phases of its change program, which guarantees ongoing media attention. This is exacerbated by a governance investigation by the higher education regulator and, arguably, the most damaging aspect: Senate committee grillings that portray ANU executives, including Chancellor Julie Bishop and Vice-Chancellor Genevieve Bell, in a particularly unfavourable light.
To cap that, both failed to front the Senate last week. Ms Bishop was engaged in her capacity as the UN Secretary-General’s Special Envoy on Myanmar, and Professor Bell was down with the flu.
Apparently, Ms Bishop has already felt the media torch over alleged conflicts of interest and million-dollar expenses to do with her Perth office and staff, including an $800,000 fitout in 2020.
Not a good look when your university is cutting jobs left, right and centre.
Last week, demographer Dr Liz Allen levelled shocking bullying claims at Ms Bishop, which she denied.
Then there were allegations of interfering with the workings of the ANU Council.
The current austerity drive at the university is the second in five years, following former Vice-Chancellor Brian Schmidt’s cuts in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and the subsequent decline in international student numbers, which severely impacted the ANU’s budget.
But it seems the Nobel Prize winner didn’t go far enough. That, or something went horribly wrong after he left.
The ANU changes include axing the School of Music and its one-on-one tuition and performance studies. It may be a bit part in the overall drama, but it has angered influential people in this town and contributed to turning public opinion against the ANU leadership.
The comments of the Dean of the ANU College of Arts and Social Sciences, Professor Bronwyn Parry, about real-world needs, have only incensed the School’s supporters, who accuse her of manipulating the figures.
When it comes to the cost, they also say there have been specific endowments made to the school to pay for performance studies.
The higher education sector’s financial troubles aren’t limited to ANU. Campuses across the nation are struggling after years of underfunding from the Commonwealth.
But those such as the National Tertiary Education Union argue that staff, students and the university’s reputation are paying an unnecessary price for executive extravagance and poor governance.
Professor Bell argues the bald fact is the ANU needs to find $250 million-worth of savings to put its budget back on track.
How this impasse will end is anybody’s guess, but the longer it goes on, the more the ANU’s reputation is damaged and the less likely that its stature as one of the world’s best universities will be maintained.
It has to be asked whether ANU’s whole approach will be worth it or if Professor Bell will go the same way as a previous vice-chancellor who tried to take an axe to the university, Professor Ian Young.
Many will invoke Oscar Wilde’s axiom that the current ANU leaders know the price of everything and the value of nothing.
Meanwhile, over at Bruce, Bill Shorten has a plan that staff endorse and a clear vision for UC’s future.
And a free hand to get there.
