Opinion - 19 April 2001

 

Not All Carrots Are Equal

"Don't expect this column to explain Samuel Beckett's 'Waiting for Godot,'... It is a mystery wrapped in an enigma. But expect to be witness to the strange power this drama has to convey the impression of some melancholy truths about the hopeless destiny of the human race."

  Brooks Atkinson's opening remark in his 1956 New York Times review of Beckett's 2 act tragicomedy.

  Last week the same might almost have been written with only minor modifications following the events surrounding Professor Gavin Brown's Address to the National Press Club in Canberra. Professor Brown, Vice-Chancellor of the University of Sydney and Chairman of the Group of Eight... but let Vladimir and Estragon fill you in.

V: You see Gavin Brown on the box last Wednesday?

E: Nope, wasn't  interested.

V: Good title.

E: Fine, would you stop playing with your boot and elaborate?

V: Well, he said, "The theme I have chosen for my address is 'Ambition and Commitment.' We [the Group of the Eight leading universities] are ambitious for Australia, all Australia, and we believe that leading universities should lead. That requires close cooperation with parliamentarians, with business and industry. It requires cooperation with the media and I am deeply grateful for today's opportunity. We believe that universities should engage with society and that that must involve speaking in such a way that we are heard. It is not simply a matter of scholarly citation."

E: There's no doubt about you, Vladimir, your eidetic memory is a source of wonderment. Just what did he mean by "close cooperation with parliamentarians?"

V: You forgot business, industry and the media.

E: No I didn't; I just want to go a bit at a time; I have a short attention span.

V: Just hold on, it's more important to look first at his big picture.

E: OK, so get on with the hand waving bit.

V: That's not fair – you'll see. Anyway he listed out:

1.       The first principle is that every individual, independent of means, should have access to the richest possible cultural and intellectual environment from which they can benefit.

2.       The second principle is that Australia's universities should provide for the human infrastructural needs of our business and industry. That is a much more lofty goal than training people to fill some presently identified slots. It involves predicting the future by inventing it, it requires the nurturing of creativity, adaptability and intellectual self-sufficiency. It requires also hard-core technological training on today's equipment, it needs universities which are pushing into territory ahead of industry standard, not limping along behind, curating obsolescent machines.

3.       The third principle is that the modern economy depends fundamentally on universities for innovation.

And he gave the example that (a) Stanford gets 90% of its research funding from the US Government and (b) it's the institution around which silicon valley was created. He then threw in the tailpiece:

"Three desirable goals flow from the three principles which have now been enunciated: Intellectual inspiration for the individual, infrastructure as human resources and infrastructure for innovation and invention. There is yet another word beginning with "I" which must overlay them all – 'International'. Australia must aspire to achieve all these at the highest international level, we do not have the luxury of setting our own comfortable standards."

E: All very worthy, Vladimir, what I understood of it, but what's he trying to accomplish by haranguing a bunch of keyboard jocks?

V: To get them on side I should think.

E: And?

V: I suppose to take the message to the country.

E: You mean the politicians?

V: No not only. I think he hoped that a lot of Australians would have a chance to get an idea of what he and the rest of the university community were promoting and why it was to the benefit of the country to support the universities properly.  He was straight forward; he told them, "What drives me to despair is a rhetoric that there must be complete equity over all universities so that a student who accesses any branch of the Unified National System can be assured of an identical quality of experience according to Principle1. Those who support this position believe there is no window of opportunity unless 38 vice-chancellors can scramble through it together."

E: In short don't foster a system where all 38 universities try to do everything and wind up doing an unmistakably rotten job – but do so even-handedly.

V: Yeah, that'd be about the size of it.

E: I'll bet he then bored through a lot of stats with them, which would have turned them off, no sweat.

V: He did quote quite a few I must admit but he also stood his ground and told them that the Go8 said $13 billion was needed over the next five years, and despite some of the flak that was thrown at them for that statement – it was what was needed. And showed them a chart of just what was happening and what

would happen.  Here have a look. GERD-Go8-screen.jpg (322479 bytes) Pretty dismal isn't it?

E: You're preaching to the converted. Just tell me, where the hell was he and his cohort on January 29th when he, and just about every academic administrator said, or at least implied, that the Government was munificence personified? Bit late now isn't it. Or do you think waiting two-and-a-half months is jumping the gun a bit?

V: Ok, maybe it’s a bit slow in coming, but he's now come out and said it, and don't forget the V-C of ANU has come out a couple of times, once on the 7:30 Report saying the system was in crisis.

E: Umhm, and tell me, friend, what sort of media coverage did Professor Brown receive; especially since he got the Guernsey to give this address in Canberra on the Wednesday before Easter, great timing.

V: A write up in the April 12th Financial Review!

E: And?

V: Michelle Singer and Chelsey Martin did the write up and said, "Addressing the National Press Club on Wednesday, the chair of the so-called Group of Eight universities, Professor Gavin Brown, said the Government's $2.9 billion innovation commitment had to be significantly increased for Australia to remain competitive. Australia's elite universities have attacked the Federal Government's innovation incentive package, claiming it falls more than $8 billion short... 'I believe the figure should have been three to four times higher to bring us up to what a reasonable OECD standard is,' [Professor Brown] said... Professor Brown claims an injection of $13 billion over five years is required to address the slide in research including $4.2 billion from business, $6.75 billion from the Commonwealth and $2.7 billion from other non-Commonwealth sources."

E: Oh that is objective reporting isn't it, using phrases like "the so-called Group of Eight," and "claiming it... ." That should really lock in the support of the "Big End of Town".   How about the popular press? The AFW isn't exactly a daily aimed at the masses.

V: Didn't find anything.

E: 7:30 Report?

V: Nope.

E: Well, Vladimir, there's nothing like extensive publicity to put your point across. Sounds like his vast Wednesday audience wasn't all that spellbound. Never mind, "it's the best of all possible worlds."

V: So, Mr. Smart arse, what would you suggest, or is just being negative how you get your highs?

E: Seeing as you've asked, yeah, I've some suggestions and they all involve money and commitment, which means for starters how about these eight Vice-Chancellors putting their money where their condemnation is?

V: What's that suppose to mean?

E: It means why don't they show a personal commitment to their cause or is the cause important, but just not that important. Just before Professor Brown fronted the National Press Club the Sydney Morning Herald published a report detailing his salary package, starting with his base salary of $330,000 per annum and a total package of about $600,000. My guess is that the base pay for the other seven would average at least $200,000 – 250,000. Now let's say that the eight of them kick in 20% of their base income each year for the next five. Properly set up it would probably be tax deducible.
And they could start a well organised publicity and lobbying campaign to put the universities' case. Obviously the media don't see the problem as being particularly news worthy; pity the couldn't hitch it to the problems with the BAS. 
    Anyway I'd be very surprised that if they were seen to back their rhetoric with their own cash, others wouldn't come to the party. Just as an aside, how much public money was spent on the republican referendum? Some carrots are just more equal than others, my friend.

V: You really expect them to put up their own money?

E: Yes, I do. Ask yourself, "what percentage of his 'GDP' does Pat Rafter give the children's charity he founded?" I think the Go8 might scrape along on 80% of their base salaries plus the rest of their packages. And I would have thought that there was sufficient talent in their universities' commercial courses to get some top class media commercials significantly below market rates. Look, it's no use hollering into a rain barrel, and so far it looks to me that's just about what they're doing. Damn it, Vladimir, it is a crisis and it damn well ought to be treated as one.

V: What have you done with the carrots?

E: Planted them, consider it an investment in our future.

 

Alex Reisner
The Funneled Web