Lukewarm response on combined compacts

Collective compact negotiations would defeat the purpose, academics argue. Academics have given a lukewarm response to a recommendation that the Victorian government become involved in university compact negotiations “to ensure that the needs of the state are considered”. The expert panel’s report on the development of a tertiary education plan for Victoria, released last month, said the state government could help ensure that “coordinated and consolidated bids” were part of some compact negotiations. Panel chair and former University of Melbourne vice-chancellor Kwong Lee Dow said compacts were about aligning universities’ activities with national priorities. “It is equally important to align institutional activity at the ‘sub-national’ level to reflect regional and state needs and priorities,” he said. He said workforce development issues and “the significant state contribution to university funding” warranted a state government seat at compact negotiations for all Victorian universities – but particularly the four dual-sector institutions. “There is a compelling case to support direct state involvement in compact discussions with the four Victorian multi-sector universities,” he said. “These are among the largest providers in Victoria, enrolling some 84,000 TAFE students and 56,000 domestic higher education students. TAFE is not only fundamental to the missions of these unique institutions – TAFE activity is also an important element of their funding base.” Lee Dow said that for several dual-sectors, state TAFE funding was roughly equivalent to direct Commonwealth funding. “Joint conduct of compact discussions in these multi-sector universities would be a useful step towards more integrated planning and reporting.” He said joint discussions would also help reduce duplication and complexity while recognising “the complementary nature” of higher education and VET provision in dual-sector institutions. Dr Rob Brown, pro vice-chancellor (institutional services) at Victoria University, said the state’s universities probably wouldn’t be too threatened by the proposal because of the relatively high state funding contribution. “Victoria University would be reasonably comfortable – we talk closely to the state government anyway,” he said. “The state government sees us very much as a key player in its plans for western Melbourne. We need the support of the state government to do the things we want to do too. We see it as a sensible partnership and wouldn’t see it as a disadvantage.” Brown pointed out that almost all universities were instruments of state Acts. “The government of any state can make an argument that it has a reasonable interest in discussions formalising a compact for a university mission,” he said. But Brown opposed the idea of joint negotiations. “The four dual-sector universities in Victoria are quite different in character. The notion that you could somehow negotiate some kind of a joint mission – I would find that a bit of a stretch.” Professor Richard James, director of the Centre for the Study of Higher Education at the University of Melbourne, said it was difficult to see how state governments could be involved in compacts for any universities. “Compacts have been depicted as one-to-one agreement setting between universities and the Commonwealth. It’s unclear what role a third party might play in these discussions, and how they would be written into a compact document,” he said. “This is another example of the state-federal tensions emerging as higher education and VET nestle closer and as the plans emerge for the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency assuming a wide remit.” Go to www.skills.vic.gov.au/corporate