Senate Education and Employment Legislation Committee, , 59:38 to 1:06:46
Witnesses advocate for removing ministerial veto power over research grants and discuss the role of the proposed Managed Growth and Student Equity Innovation Fund.
Topics: Education, Integrity
Speakers: Luke Sheehy, David Pocock, Unknown Speaker
>> thank you chair thanks for your time um much of it has been covered and thank you for your submission and opening statement um just thought maybe touch on something that's just come up repeatedly which goes to the independence and and that is to remove ministerial veto on publications y >> and allow a tech to initiate and publish research independently. Um just wondering if you could highlight why you think that is and I mean so many of your your your colleagues think that is such an important part of the ATH. Well, I
think it speaks to the broader point, Senator, that uh political interventions and the political cycle mean we get a lot of temporary or inadequate interventions in this in this system. If a state of the sector report, the state of the finances, the state of you know um what students are paying, the financial position of students, whatever it might be, which is um an important thing we should do as an an important piece of data and and um analysis that we ought to have. If it is determined by a minister and then the release of that report is determined by a minister, it just simply becomes another report of of government within a political parameter of the of the government. We want to see a a frank and fearless and public analysis of the state of our sector and other things for that matter. What is the financial pressure that students are under? How is JRG putting up barriers to access to education? What is the state of research in this country? So if we allow the ATH to generate its own reports and make them public free of that political intervention, we're going to get free, we're going to get better and we're going to get more frank advice. And I think that's really important. The other point, and it's a little wonky one, Senator, is data. We we suffer in this sector from data that is up to 18 months old. We want the Ache to have up to-ate uh real time data and make that data publicly available through its analysis. That's going to help everyone. It's going to help parliamentarians, it's going to help the sector and it's going to help um students and that's really important as well.
>> Thank you. Um one of one of the other things which has come through loud and clear and as you said for for many years now is JG. Earlier Professor Williams I think referred to it as an unmitigated disaster and this is now a policy that's been in place for longer under Labor than it was under the coalition. And so I'm interested how you think we uh guess embed a mandate into the a tech to actually deal with something that everyone is crying out for reform on. Um
because I've been around for so long, Senator, I can remember the hearings on job ready graduates in 2020 and the sector um didn't argue enough for amendments at the time and we got an unmended bill. uh and there were sensible things we could have done then to ensure that JRG didn't become an unmiticated disaster as uh professor Williams has rightly pointed out >> you certainly did Senator it was co we were all kind of had our own individual sessions I remember it fondly um but nonetheless um it's so fundamentally important that an independent A tech can look at not just theu the comwalth grants but also the student contributions uh students pay seven upwards more than $7 billion sorry more than $2 billion uh each year uh as part of the the hex fees. Um that's a lot of money and if the a tech can't look at that then what are they looking at? They're looking only you know half the dinner. Uh so we want them to be able to produce recommendations for a full meal. Yes, we accept that ultimately that will be decision of government because it's expensive and it it requires prioritization in the budget process. But we ought to have public frank and fearless advice on that. Productivity Commission again is a really great example of this. It can come up with bold and innovative ideas for tax or the economy. Um it doesn't have to be taken up by government, but it certainly starts a conversation. And so we'd like to see that we don't want it kicked down the road. Students shouldn't be paying more than $50,000 for a three-year arts degree. So we can't say, "Oh, give it to the A Techch and in 16 years time we're still talking about it." The Job Ready Graduates hearings were in 2020. It's now 2026. we've had a number of elections in between. So, let's get on with it and let's get some expert and independent experts on it.
>> Thank you very much. Um, and strongly agree with those those views. Um the last thing I wanted to ask you about was um the suggestion to establish a modest innovation fund and wondering if you could maybe outline what you think the the need is for it and what it would actually be doing and and and what sort of problem it sol it
So as the uh the ATH has in its role of stewarding uh the sector should be able to identify excellence and should particularly in the area of teaching and learning. Uh many of the academics that that lead teaching and learning or teaching and learning innovation in our uh our sector would see that they're often seen as the poor cousins to to their friends in the more re research intensive part of the university. uh many years ago we had an office of learning and teaching that was funded by the Commonwealth and it incentivized and citations and innovations in teaching and learning. They're really important things that an A tech should have a small amount of money to be able to incentivize. I've got a few examples and of course I have 38 members and I could give you 38 examples but the block model at Victoria University that supports students to get into university from nontraditional backgrounds that aligns to more a school setting where they do this is subject by subject hours by hours that model could be supported to be rolled out in other contexts online across the country there's small innovation fund we could incentivize that and I think that's really important and it speaks to stewardship rather than regulation And so I I note this idea is one that the University of Tasmania strongly supports as well. And I think it is a really important one that um as a steward it should be able to provide some support and some nurturing in the sector and and and and help make some really good ideas replicable and scalable.
>> Just just finally just to out of curiosity what happened to the office of learning and teaching?
>> Look it was abolished in a budget. I think it was a Howard government budget. It's a very long time ago now. Um, one thing that we took on was some citations and teaching awards. Um, on behalf of our sector at Universities Australia, which we now fund ourselves. Um, it was an excellent um, thing and I'm sure Senator Faruqi remembers it. Um, it should it should be returned. It was a it was widely discussed through the accord process. The, um, office of learning and teaching was a centralized area in government that could support innovation and teaching and learning. And that's really important. If we're looking at something like tertiary harmonization and bringing TAS and universities closer together and having lifelong learning approaches and micro credentials and all those important things, um we do need some funding for this innovation.
>> Great. Thank you very much. Thank you,