Kim Carr (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Industry) Share this | Hansard source

You would not know what a cliche is, apart from when you chase the odd sheep around your Gippsland properties. That is absolutely true. On the Collins Street farms, that is probably what they get up to—that is about all they get up to. Senator McGauran would like to engage us on the question of research policy. I look forward to Senator McGauran’s contribution about how this proposal is internationally acceptable and what measures are being taken within the Liberal Party to ensure that it is world’s best practice.

What you have here is a need to ensure that funds, which are inherently short in supply because we cannot conceivably fund all options that are available for research inquiry, go to a program that will: transparently reflect research quality and achievement in our universities; allow universities to concentrate on their research strengths; reward genuinely high achievers; weight research costs accurately by field and by discipline; promote university autonomy and decision making on research funding and policy; recognise and reward groundbreaking, long-term fundamental research whose full impact may not be apparent within a limited or arbitrary time frame; and provide separate and objective measures that reflect research quality in each of the broad discipline areas—the arts and humanities, the performing arts, the social sciences and the sciences and technologies.

We argue that if you have a quality assurance mechanism in place it is important that it actually works. We are obviously not opposing the additional moneys that are being provided, but the government’s approach is fundamentally wrong and a completely different strategy is needed to deal with the issue of quality assurance within our universities. We support efforts and measures to increase the overall level of research undertaken by universities. These measures, as we saw last night, will not lead to any increase of money being provided by the government through the Australian Research Council or through research training. You will not see any direct benefit to the universities; only costs. Labor believe that the money can be more effectively used in the development of an alternative research quality assessment regime.

I will turn to other areas within this bill, particularly the National Protocols for Higher Education Approval Processes. The national protocols regulate the recognition of new universities, the operation of overseas universities in Australia and the accreditation of courses offered by higher education institutions. The protocols were first approved by the Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs back in 2000 and were subsequently amended by agreement of the states and territories in July 2006. In the 2006 amendments, it was identified that there needed to be: nationally agreed criteria and approval processes for all higher education institutions; criteria and processes for the registration of non-self-accrediting higher education institutions and the accreditation of their higher education courses; and criteria and processes for awarding self-accrediting authority to higher education institutions other than universities. This is extremely important stuff because it goes to our international reputation for the provision of higher education in this country. It is fundamental that we have, once again, a rigorous process that provides, as the Group of Eight argue in their submission to the Senate committee inquiry:

... appropriate protection for the use of the term ‘university’ in an Australian context ... So long as the Government remains vigilant about ensuring that the quality assurance mechanisms contained in HESA are rigorously enforced for all current and new entrants to the sector, the Go8 believes that the introduction of New Protocols will be a positive development for Australia’s higher education system.

However, my concern is that those criteria actually be identified and carried out. We know from the sorry saga of the Greenwich University affair on Norfolk Island just how perilous a course we sail with this government because of its preoccupation with the quick and nasty little stunts that it pulls to try to get around these important quality assurance issues. I think it is important that there is provision to allow for the establishment of centres of research and teaching excellence within universities and which allow for greater attention to research expertise. It is appropriate that there are clear mechanisms established for institutions with strong track records in higher education delivery and quality assurance to become self-accrediting, particularly when they are under the stewardship of an established university. It is also appropriate that there be an extension of the application of the national protocols to all new and existing higher education institutions. That is basically what these arrangements perform.

My concern is this: in allowing international higher education providers and specialised higher education providers to establish themselves as universities or university colleges we have to ensure that these very rigorous provisions are in fact implemented. I am concerned, however, that the government’s approach to the greater specialisation in the sector is one of stealth. It does not actually spell out what it is proposing here, but the essence of these changes goes to the issue of whether we are going to have teaching only universities and university colleges in this country. Under the name of competition this government is opening up the destruction of the unitary system as we have known it in this country for 30 years. This could have serious consequences for regional universities and for the so-called blue gum universities in that financially weaker members of the university community in this country may find that they are effectively deprived of the capacity to undertake serious research. We must therefore ensure that the accreditation regime that is introduced here is able to guarantee that the high standards of our higher education providers will not be eroded and that our international reputation for having first-class institutions is not undermined.

We do have a serious problem with the placement of our universities on an international scale; however, the answer to that problem is not the dumbing down of our institutions. It is about investing in the future and ensuring that our institutions are genuinely able to measure their performance on an international basis. My worry is that the lack of details in the provision of the guidelines on how these protocols will be applied to existing higher education providers opens this government to the charge that it is about destroying the unitary system and imposing a whole new set of arrangements.