Latest news with #Go8
The Age
21-04-2025
- Business
- The Age
Harvard stood up to Trump. Our top universities could not afford to be so brave
Even the Group of Eight (Go8) – Australia's leading research-intensive institutions – are deeply reliant on government policies. The Dawkins reforms of the late 1980s centralised university funding under federal control, introducing performance-based funding. Since then, government grants have remained important, while international student fees have become critical. In 2023, the University of Sydney earned 42.6 per cent – nearly $1.5 billion – of its revenue from international student fees. Government grants contributed just 9.6 per cent. Together, these politically sensitive streams made up more than half of its income. For the sector, the pattern is similar. International students comprise 35 per cent of enrolments at Go8 universities; Sydney's are the highest at 47 per cent. This over-reliance poses serious risks. Recent visa restrictions have already strained finances. Proposed caps on international students could further destabilise the sector. Australia's centralised university sector gives the federal government broad powers to set funding conditions – including curriculum, performance targets and fees – under the Higher Education Support Act 2003. This opens the door for future governments to link grants to ideological demands. Many Liberal politicians already accuse universities of promoting ' woke indoctrination'. Meanwhile, they scapegoat international students – who occupy just 4 per cent of all rentals while bankrolling universities and boosting the economy – for housing unaffordability. Loading Australia invests just 1.68 per cent of GDP in research and development – well below the OECD average and far short of the government's 3 per cent target. This leaves universities underfunded and reliant on unstable income. Some Trump policies pose a direct threat to Australian universities. In 2024, they received about $400 million in US government funding, now at risk. The damage is already visible. A recent Nature study paints a bleak picture. Australian universities are slipping in global rankings as collaboration and research funding decline. Fewer than one in five would recommend an academic career, citing high levels of burnout, bullying and job insecurity. This erosion of talent is at risk of accelerating due to ongoing funding cuts. A compounding issue is the metrics-driven approach to university management, another legacy of the Dawkins 'revolution ' – which even John Dawkins now calls ' completely out of date'. Since then, universities have been incentivised to maximise measurable outputs: publications in prestigious journals, competitive government grants, enrolments of fee-paying students and completion rates. These metrics can be manipulated and this risks undermining educational quality, institutional autonomy and research integrity. As University of Sydney sociologist Raewyn Connell has noted: 'Since no neoliberal government, Labor or Coalition, is going to put tax money into even one Australian university on a scale that would make it look much like Harvard, the real effect of the league-table rhetoric is to provide a permanent justification for the vice-chancellors to increase fees and trawl for corporate money.' Loading The result is a sector under pressure with limited autonomy. A future government with authoritarian leanings could tie funding to ideological compliance – curbing DEI initiatives, reshaping curriculums or restricting protest. And unlike Harvard, Australian universities lack the financial, legal or political capital to resist. To protect academic freedom and institutional independence, the sector needs real structural reform. This includes diversifying funding to reduce reliance on international student fees and ensuring performance metrics cannot be weaponised. Most importantly, academic freedom must be legally protected – just as Germany enshrines it in its constitution. Australia should also strengthen industry-university partnerships (common in Europe but rare here), philanthropic giving and greater public investment. Tax reform could help ensure that wealthy individuals and big businesses – whose tax burdens have declined for decades – pay their fair share to fund public education. Harvard reminds us that defending academic freedom requires not just courage but financial resources, legal protections and institutional independence. Australia's higher education sector is already stretched. In 2023, 25 out of 39 universities ran at a loss (up from just three in 2019). Real funding for domestic students fell 8 per cent in a decade, with sector-wide losses of $1.2 billion. If we are serious about our universities, we must rethink how they are funded, decentralise control and embed stronger protections for institutional autonomy. Harvard's stand should be praised but not romanticised. It was enabled by privilege, legal insulation and political strategy. If we want Australian universities to stand firm in the face of ideological pressure, we must strengthen their foundations now. Because if the screws are ever turned here, we will lack not courage, but capacity.
Sydney Morning Herald
21-04-2025
- Business
- Sydney Morning Herald
Harvard stood up to Trump. Our top universities could not afford to be so brave
Even the Group of Eight (Go8) – Australia's leading research-intensive institutions – are deeply reliant on government policies. The Dawkins reforms of the late 1980s centralised university funding under federal control, introducing performance-based funding. Since then, government grants have remained important, while international student fees have become critical. In 2023, the University of Sydney earned 42.6 per cent – nearly $1.5 billion – of its revenue from international student fees. Government grants contributed just 9.6 per cent. Together, these politically sensitive streams made up more than half of its income. For the sector, the pattern is similar. International students comprise 35 per cent of enrolments at Go8 universities; Sydney's are the highest at 47 per cent. This over-reliance poses serious risks. Recent visa restrictions have already strained finances. Proposed caps on international students could further destabilise the sector. Australia's centralised university sector gives the federal government broad powers to set funding conditions – including curriculum, performance targets and fees – under the Higher Education Support Act 2003. This opens the door for future governments to link grants to ideological demands. Many Liberal politicians already accuse universities of promoting ' woke indoctrination'. Meanwhile, they scapegoat international students – who occupy just 4 per cent of all rentals while bankrolling universities and boosting the economy – for housing unaffordability. Loading Australia invests just 1.68 per cent of GDP in research and development – well below the OECD average and far short of the government's 3 per cent target. This leaves universities underfunded and reliant on unstable income. Some Trump policies pose a direct threat to Australian universities. In 2024, they received about $400 million in US government funding, now at risk. The damage is already visible. A recent Nature study paints a bleak picture. Australian universities are slipping in global rankings as collaboration and research funding decline. Fewer than one in five would recommend an academic career, citing high levels of burnout, bullying and job insecurity. This erosion of talent is at risk of accelerating due to ongoing funding cuts. A compounding issue is the metrics-driven approach to university management, another legacy of the Dawkins 'revolution ' – which even John Dawkins now calls ' completely out of date'. Since then, universities have been incentivised to maximise measurable outputs: publications in prestigious journals, competitive government grants, enrolments of fee-paying students and completion rates. These metrics can be manipulated and this risks undermining educational quality, institutional autonomy and research integrity. As University of Sydney sociologist Raewyn Connell has noted: 'Since no neoliberal government, Labor or Coalition, is going to put tax money into even one Australian university on a scale that would make it look much like Harvard, the real effect of the league-table rhetoric is to provide a permanent justification for the vice-chancellors to increase fees and trawl for corporate money.' Loading The result is a sector under pressure with limited autonomy. A future government with authoritarian leanings could tie funding to ideological compliance – curbing DEI initiatives, reshaping curriculums or restricting protest. And unlike Harvard, Australian universities lack the financial, legal or political capital to resist. To protect academic freedom and institutional independence, the sector needs real structural reform. This includes diversifying funding to reduce reliance on international student fees and ensuring performance metrics cannot be weaponised. Most importantly, academic freedom must be legally protected – just as Germany enshrines it in its constitution. Australia should also strengthen industry-university partnerships (common in Europe but rare here), philanthropic giving and greater public investment. Tax reform could help ensure that wealthy individuals and big businesses – whose tax burdens have declined for decades – pay their fair share to fund public education. Harvard reminds us that defending academic freedom requires not just courage but financial resources, legal protections and institutional independence. Australia's higher education sector is already stretched. In 2023, 25 out of 39 universities ran at a loss (up from just three in 2019). Real funding for domestic students fell 8 per cent in a decade, with sector-wide losses of $1.2 billion. If we are serious about our universities, we must rethink how they are funded, decentralise control and embed stronger protections for institutional autonomy. Harvard's stand should be praised but not romanticised. It was enabled by privilege, legal insulation and political strategy. If we want Australian universities to stand firm in the face of ideological pressure, we must strengthen their foundations now. Because if the screws are ever turned here, we will lack not courage, but capacity.
The Guardian
07-04-2025
- Business
- The Guardian
Dutton playing ‘Donald Trump anti-migration card' in plan to slash international students, higher education peak body says
The Coalition has been accused of using the 'Donald Trump anti-migration card' with its election policy to slash international students, as the university sector warns it favours the private vocational education and training (VET) sector. On Sunday, Peter Dutton announced he would reduce the number of international students to 240,000 a year, a reduction of 'over 80,000 in annual new overseas student commencements compared with 2023 levels', he said. It would mean a cap of 115,000 commencements at publicly funded universities (which include the University of Sydney and University of Melbourne) and 125,000 combined across VET (including Tafe), private universities (including Bond University) and non-universities (including institutes of higher education and colleges). Dutton also announced all public universities would have their percentage of foreign students capped at 'around 25%' – expected to disproportionately impact metropolitan institutions – and that the non-refundable student visa application would be hiked to $2,500, or $5,000 for Group of Eight (Go8) institutions. Last July, Labor more than doubled the international student visa application fee from $710 to $1,600 – already making it the highest of all global competitor markets. Speaking on Sunday, Dutton said the international student market was a 'great and lucrative' one for universities, adding 'they've made literally billions of dollars over the last few years'. 'Our problem is that it's been distortionary to the housing market,' he said – something experts have cast doubt on. Sign up for the Afternoon Update: Election 2025 email newsletter The CEO of the Go8, Vicki Thomson, said the Coalition's further visa hike 'makes no sense on any level', adding she learned of it in the media. 'It beggars belief that the Coalition would single out the Go8 for extra burden – Australia's top universities all ranked in the world's top 100 – that attract the best and brightest minds from our region and around the world,' she said. 'We have been talking about international students as a commodity. This is an isolationist policy agenda that is base politics at its worst.' The International Education Association of Australia CEO, Phil Honeywood, said there had been no consultation with the sector on the policy proposal, accusing Dutton of playing the 'Donald Trump anti-migration card' to voters. He said providing more punishing targets to publicly funded universities could be seen as 'punishment politics'. 'Many Coalition MPs argue public universities don't support them,' he said. 'Traditionally, the Coalition are more inclined to support independent providers over their public counterparts.' The former senior immigration official, Abul Rizvi, said caps were an 'inherently poor policy tool' which did nothing to address student quality or the quality of courses. 'The biggest change the Coalition is proposing compared to Labor's student capping plan is an overseas student program that shifts the balance towards the private VET sector,' he said. 'That is the sector with the longest history of rorts and dodgy qualifications.' Sign up to Afternoon Update: Election 2025 Our Australian afternoon update breaks down the key election campaign stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters after newsletter promotion In 2023, a parliamentary inquiry heard the VET sector's reputation would be destroyed if urgent action was not taken to clean up malpractice among international education providers. The committee heard of private providers working with unregulated international education agents to steal students from prestigious public institutions for massive commissions, sell work visas and open 'ghost schools' where students do not attend classes and get handed degrees. Rizvi said the Coalition's additional cut of 30,000 international student places impacted publicly funded universities, while the private sector retained the same cap as Labor had proposed at 125,000. 'I don't know if [Dutton] has an axe to grind with the Go8, but why target the best universities in the country?' he said. 'Good students will think 'I don't want to go to that chaotic country'. The Universities Australia CEO, Luke Sheehy, said the proposed cuts would 'take a sledgehammer' to one of Australia's biggest income generators, estimating a hit to the economy of more than $5bn, including $1.2bn at the Go8. The Business Council of Australia chief executive, Bran Black, said the Coalition's proposed 25% foreign student cap would undermine a sector worth more than $50bn annually without improving the housing crisis. 'We're in a period of higher global and economic uncertainty, and so now is the time to prioritise growing successful sectors, such as education, where we already enjoy a competitive advantage,' he said. 'Enrolments there are now well below the imposed cap, and so Australia following this model risks impacting our fourth largest export.' There were 376,731 student visas granted in 2023-24, a decrease of 34.7% compared with the same period in 2022-23 (577,295). Since 2019, growth in enrolments has been highest in the VET sector (40%) while enrolments in higher education have grown by 13%. The Independent Tertiary Education Council Australia (Iteca) was approached for comment.
The Guardian
14-03-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
‘Trump's hateful agenda': Australia's university sector accuses US administration of ‘blatant interference'
The Trump administration has been accused of 'blatant foreign interference' in Australia's universities after researchers who receive US funding were asked to confirm they aligned with American interests, including only recognising two genders. The questionnaire, sent to university researchers over the past fortnight, seeks a response within 48 hours to more than 30 questions to support 'program determinations', according to a copy of the questionnaire seen by Guardian Australia. The questions relate to the priorities of the Trump government, including whether the organisation receives funding from China, whether there are DEI elements, and whether the project is taking 'appropriate measures' to defend against gender ideology in line with Trump's executive order on gender. The questionnaires were distributed by various federal agencies on behalf of an executive memo from the office of the president, requiring them to identify all funding was consistent with 'policies and requirements'. Separately, six sandstone universities represented by the Group of Eight have already had research grants suspended or terminated in line with changes introduced by the Trump administration, according to the Go8. Researchers were notified shortly after the US election that the projects, which spanned a range of topics from agriculture to foreign aid and diversity and equity, had been cancelled under higher education cuts, pending a review. The chief executive of the Go8, Vicki Thomson, said the body was 'extremely concerned' about the implications of the Trump administration's policy, particularly for health and medical research and defence collaboration. 'Go8 universities are deeply engaged in collaborative activities with the US, especially through our defence initiatives and the Aukus alliance,' she said. 'For every one of our members, the US is the largest research partner by far.' Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email The Go8 has sought Australian government intervention and last week wrote to the chair of the US House Committee on Science, Space and Technology, Brian Babin, for guidance and an extension of time to respond to the requirements. The questionnaire seeks to confirm university projects don't work with 'any party that espouses anti-American beliefs', or whether they have received 'ANY funding from the PRC', including Confucius Institutes and Chinese state or non-state actors. It also asks whether research is a 'no DEI project' or a 'climate or 'environmental justice' project', as well as ensuring it takes 'appropriate measures to protect women and to defend against gender ideology' and combats 'Christian prosecution'. Universities and colleges across the US have been grappling with cuts to research under the Trump administration and the tying of its DEI agenda to funding, prompting thousands of scientists to rally across the US and EU last week. In February, the education department sent a letter to universities instructing that any consideration of race in 'all … aspects of student, academic, and campus life' was illegal. The administration has also proposed limiting curricula on gender. Donald Trump's federal congressional budget is also proposing billions of dollars in federal funding cuts across higher education, including capping all 'indirect funding' from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) at 15%. The US is the largest international research partner for Australia, with the two nations sharing nearly 1,000 formal collaborations. It is also Australia's top international research collaborator and biggest global collaborator in cancer research, with the National Cancer Institute awarding 211 grants to projects with Australian collaborators from 2013-2023. The Go8 received about US$161.6m in grants from the NIH between 2020 and 2024. The National Tertiary Education Union (NTEU) has urged the federal government to intervene and reach out to the Trump administration on behalf of universities. Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion Its national president, Dr Alison Barnes, said the Australian government must guarantee researchers would be protected from 'blatant foreign interference'. 'Donald Trump's hateful agenda is racist, transphobic and misogynistic. The idea of research funding being tied to any of those values is sickening,' she said. 'Allowing Trump to dictate the terms of research will have devastating impacts on research including life-saving vaccines, critical social sciences and climate solutions that could save the planet – just to name a few.' This week, the US administration cancelled 33 research grants investigating vaccine hesitancy and was conducting a review of mRNA vaccine projects. The NTEU Queer Unionists in Tertiary Education national convener, Amy Sargeant, said Trump was 'disgracefully attacking' LGBTQ+ people. 'Trying to force research to comply with transphobia is disgusting, and the Australian government must unwaveringly stand up against this fascist foreign intervention,' she said. The CEO of Universities Australia, Luke Sheehy, said Australia's international partnerships were 'critical' for tackling global challenges. 'We will … work closely with the government to ensure our universities can keep doing world-class research,' he said. The shadow minister for education, Sarah Henderson, said higher education played an important role in combating foreign interference in the face of 'increasing threats from others who want to do us harm'. 'The Albanese government should provide clear guidance to universities on how to navigate these matters in line with Australia's values and national interests,' she said. The education minister, Jason Clare, was approached for comment.
The Guardian
27-02-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
Australian universities' new antisemitism definition has some academics worried. Here's why
Australia's universities have confirmed they will unilaterally enforce a new definition of antisemitism on campuses after an inquiry recommended higher education providers 'closely align' with the contentious International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition. The working definition, developed by Group of Eight (Go8) institutions, was unanimously endorsed by Universities Australia's 39 members this week and made public on Wednesday, based on close work with Jillian Segal, the special envoy to combat antisemitism. Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email Here's what you need to know. The adoption of a sector-wide definition emerged as a key recommendation of a report on antisemitism on Australian university campuses, which found there was an 'urgent need for reform' to ensure the safety of Jewish students and staff. The report, tabled this month by the chair of the parliamentary joint committee on human rights, Labor MP Josh Burns, found the reluctance of university leaders to enforce 'meaningful consequences' had allowed a 'toxic environment to escalate', resulting in a 'lack of trust' between the Jewish community and universities. The committee received more than 600 submissions, many from Jewish students and staff detailing their experiences of antisemitism since the 7 October 2023 Hamas attack on Israel. Universities were criticised by the opposition and some Jewish groups for their handling of pro-Palestinian encampments, which were disbanded largely peacefully last year. The definition states: 'Antisemitism is discrimination, prejudice, harassment, exclusion, vilification, intimidation or violence that impedes Jews' ability to participate as equals in educational, political, religious, cultural, economic or social life.' The definition states that criticism of the policies and practices of the Israeli government or state is 'not in and of itself antisemitic' but further reads: Criticism of Israel can be antisemitic when it is grounded in harmful tropes, stereotypes or assumptions and when it calls for the elimination of the State of Israel or all Jews or when it holds Jewish individuals or communities responsible for Israel's actions … All peoples, including Jews, have the right to self-determination. For most, but not all Jewish Australians, Zionism is a core part of their Jewish identity. Substituting the word 'Zionist' for 'Jew' does not eliminate the possibility of speech being antisemitic. Thomson said the Go8 consulted widely with various stakeholders, including 'select eminent members of the Jewish community', to craft a definition that addressed 'practical concerns'. It was endorsed by the Group of Eight (Go8) board in December, and will be reviewed after a 12-month period. The IHRA's definition of antisemitism has been adopted by many countries and organisation around the globe, including the US state department, several European governments and the Australian government. It has also been contentious due to concerns it could be used to shut down legitimate criticism of the state of Israel. It defines antisemitism as 'a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.' It lists 11 specific examples of antisemitism in public life, including: 'Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, eg, by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor' and 'targeting of the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity'. The definition agreed to by universities does not include some of the IHRA's specific examples of antisemitism, but it does refer directly to criticism of Zionism as potentially being antisemitic, unlike the IHRA definition, which does not mention Zionism. The chief executive of the Go8, Vicki Thomson, said 'consistent and clear advice' from members was that the IHRA definition was 'not workable' without adaptation to the Australian context, acknowledging concerns raised over the IHRA's potential limiting of academic freedom. Critics have cited 'unreasonable' accusations on campuses after many UK universities adopted the IHRA definition. Australian universities have been split on whether to adopt the IHRA definition. In January 2023, the University of Melbourne became the first institution to announce it would adopt it as part of its broader anti-racism commitment. The university definition will act as a non-legally binding guide for individual providers to interpret when determining antisemitic conduct. It will not change freedom of speech policies, and is unlikely to apply to contested phrases such as 'from the river to the sea' because there is no clarity about when or whether using them would be against the law. But it will factor into how universities make rulings on allegations racial discrimination, harassment or vilification that could lead to disciplinary proceedings against individual students and academics. A report into the application of the IHRA definition in a UK context found 40 cases between 2017 and 2022 where staff or students were accused of antisemitism based on the definition. Almost all the claims were ultimately rejected, but the report found many led to long disciplinary processes, two led to threats of legal action, and 11 prevented events, student activism or scholarship on campus. Some academics at Australian universities have warned the definition could have a 'chilling' effect and limit the scope of what could be taught on the Middle East. Naama Blatman, a Jewish-Israeli academic of settler-colonialism and Israel/Palestine, said she believed the definition could be 'weaponised' to silence her work. She said on a practical level, funding could be removed for research that applied critical theory on Israel/Palestine, while promotion applications could be delayed or rejected and 'entire literature' would be excluded from courses. 'There is a genuine risk in terms of academic freedom and rigour to have an entrenchment of cultural intimidation,' she said. A sessional academic at the University of Sydney, Fahad Ali, said he would not comply with the direction and 'looked forward' to a court challenge if he were disciplined. Ali posted on social media that universities would 'not seek to prohibit First Nations from criticising Australia as a state built on anti-Indigenous bloodshed and prejudice'. Some Jewish groups that had pushed for the IHRA definition to be adopted are lukewarm on how effective the new definition will be. The Executive Council of Australian Jewry (ECAJ), which acts as the umbrella organisation for more than 200 Jewish groups across the nation, said the body hoped to see 'better identification of antisemitic conduct and more effective complaints-handling at universities' and would wait to see the new definition in practice. Late last year, the ECAJ wrote to Thomson expressing 'disappointment' that it hadn't been consulted on efforts to develop the definition. The Australian Academic Alliance Against Antisemitism, a coalition of members across universities and medical centres, said unlike the Universities Australia definition, the IHRA 'does not set a high threshold requiring proof of a particular adverse impact'. 'Conduct or accusations, such as 'Israelis/Zionists are the new Nazis', which … do not actually impede a Jewish student's ability to attend classes or a Jewish academic's ability to attend a staff meeting, can easily be antisemitic yet still pass muster under the Go8 definition,' they said in a statement. Sarah Schwartz, a human rights lawyer and executive officer of the Jewish Council of Australia, said Zionism, as a political ideology, 'should be subject to debate, not insulated from critique'. 'This definition risks increasing antisemitism by suggesting that all Jews support the state of Israel, and can be held responsible for Israel's egregious human rights abuses.'
