Editorial-26 June 2003

 

Pot-Shot Policy Formulation or Progress Through Propaganda 

 

 

Commonwealth government departments maintain large budgets to inform the public about what they are doing that is in the national interest. Among other conduits for information distribution they maintain sophisticated World Wide Web sites and in fact one of the noticeable improvements coinciding with Brendan Nelson becoming Minister for Education, Science and Training has been the upgrading of the department's website and its response time compared with its predecessor, though at times it takes a bit of digging to get to the information you might be looking for.

 

One of the less attractive features of the Department of Education, Science and Training's website is the extensive use made by Dr. Nelson of media releases for naked party political preposes. It's the public's money that pays the salaries of those who write and promulgate these media releases. DEST and it's minister are hardly unique in using governmental departmental resources in broadcasting political propaganda and it is hardly something indulged in exclusively by the Coalition. Nevertheless that doesn't make it right and one of the consequences is that it calls into question the veracity in general of the material put out by the Department.

 

For "party political broadcasts" use party resources?

 

No, couldn't do that, far too radical a suggestion.

 

Of course most of the media releases drop into a black hole but it may be instructive to have a look at some of the June titles.

 

June 25, 2003 NSW BUDGET HAMMERS TAFE STUDENTS
June 25, 2003 NSW GOVERNMENT AGAIN FAILS TO FUND ITS SCHOOLS
June 25, 2003 Senate Inquiry into Higher Education/TAFE Fees in NSW
June 24, 2003 LABOR MISLEADS ON HIGHER EDUCATION – AGAIN
June 19, 2003 THE BULLETIN MAGAZINE (June 3): "WHERE ON EARTH IS LABOR’S BLUEPRINT FOR UNIVERSITIES?"
June 18, 2003 LABOR RULES OUT SUPPORTING HIGHER EDUCATION LOANS FOR POORER STUDENTS
June   4, 2004 QUEENSLAND GOVERNMENT AGAIN FAILS TO FUND ITS SCHOOLS

 

These seven are the blatant Labor Party bashing releases. The total number of media releases for the month up to June 26th is 21. While displaying a good deal of hype the other 14 are at least positive in tenor. So a full third are manifest pot-shots and have no place on a governmental website.

 

On the other hand since the release of Dr. Nelson's higher education reform package no rebuttal of carefully crafted criticism has been forthcoming. For example The National Tertiary Education Union published a 10 page critique of Dr. Nelson's reform package, Estimating the Impact of Funding Changes in Backing Australia's Future on University Operating Income in which it determines that of the $1,465 million promised in the reform package over four years, $753 million (51.4%) is new money the rest is giving back with the right hand what the left hath taken away.

 

Similarly the Australian Vice-Chancellors' Committee earlier this month published a 44 page assessment of the reform package and listed 17 recommendation which it considers need to be addressed because of deficiencies in DEST's package. So far there has been no public response to the AV-CC's reaction.

 

Considering that the Department for Education Science and Training had 728 submissions and spent over $1 million in its drive to formulate what was pretty well touted to be DEST's "Marshall Plan" for higher education, it's just as well Dr. Nelson wasn't responsible for the reconstruction of Europe following World War II.

 

 

The AV-CC's Seventeen Recommendations

  1. The AVCC restates its strong recommendation that the Government index both its funding and the HECS levels by the same level as schools’ indexation arrangements
     

  2. The AVCC urges the Government to reconsider the AVCC’s proposal that substantial contestable Government funding be made available to universities to support the education of students from under-represented groups. These funds should roughly equal the total income raised from HECS contributions set above the standard rates by those universities that choose to do so.
     

  3. The AVCC calls on the Government to untie significant additional education funds from requirements for changes to governance and workplace relations. Funds to support the quality of universities’ teaching and learning should only be tied to requirements directly related to universities’ teaching and learning performance. Instead, the Government should work with universities to support useful changes in governance and workplace relations. To do this:
    the AVCC urges State and Commonwealth governments to work together with universities to improve governance arrangements through effective national protocols that will provide governance that supports the diversity of Australia’s universities; and the AVCC calls on the Government to provide considered criteria for the new workforce productivity program that will truly measure the effectiveness of actions to increase flexibility and improve arrangements of advantage to the institution, rather than criteria that presume that particular paths must be taken.
     

  4. The AVCC urgently calls on the Government to assure universities that it does not seek to determine centrally, and externally, the internal balance of university activity, but will rather let universities develop (within agreed funding levels), in response to student demand, regional participation rates and community needs.
     

  5. The AVCC calls on the Minister to make available clear information and detailed guidelines relating to the new Commonwealth Grant Scheme (and other funding arrangements) to allow universities to assess how they should take advantage of the Government’s reforms.
     

  6. The AVCC recommends that, given the complexity and initial unpredictability of the impact of the new Commonwealth Grant Scheme, there be clear transition arrangements for its introduction to ensure no university is unfairly affected.
     

  7. The AVCC reiterates its call on the Government to improve student income support arrangements.
     

  8. The AVCC calls on the Government to raise the loan repayment thresholds to the average graduate starting salary from 2003-04.
     

  9. The AVCC calls on the Government to remove the proposal to levy a real interest charge on FEE-HELP and Overseas Study HELP.
     

  10. The AVCC asks the Government to clarify that Overseas Study HELP is open to both full-time and part-time students, while noting that the overseas study should be full-time.
     

  11. The AVCC calls on the Government to abandon its intended restrictions on student services fees and arrangements for membership of student organisations.
     

  12. The AVCC urges the Government to change its guidelines for the Commonwealth Learning Scholarships so that they: cover the period required to complete the student’s course; do not count as income for Youth Allowance (and similar allowances) income testing purposes; can be allocated by universities to maximise participation by the target groups, not necessarily by academic merit nor only to full-time students; and are doubled in number.
     

  13. The AVCC urges the Government to work with the AVCC to develop a better package of international initiatives, funded through direct Government support for a major export industry.
     

  14. The AVCC recommends that the Government’s proposed next package of investment in research and development focus on underwriting the base research infrastructure of universities.
     

  15. The AVCC recommends that the proposed funding levels for each discipline group be reset following assessment of the cost of effective provision, without being limited to what is actually being spent now on each course.
     

  16. The AVCC recommends to the Government that it make clear its ongoing commitment to supporting Australians in life long learning by legislating the basis for renewing learning entitlement as part of the legislation to introduce the entitlement.
     

  17. The AVCC urges DEST to work with the AVCC and universities to consider the details of the proposed Higher Education Information Management System, and restates that any system must involve reporting the essential information only, and build off the preferred information collection arrangements of each university.

 

 

Alex Reisner

The Funneled Web