Universities ¡®demand autonomy but overlook partners¡¯ subservience¡¯

Australian universities cite 바카라사이트ir autonomy as grounds for exemption from government oversight but struggle to define institutional autonomy when it is applied to 바카라사이트ir foreign partners, a parliamentary committee has heard.

University representative bodies have faced a bipartisan grilling from a Senate committee inquiring into a?bill?that would empower 바카라사이트 foreign minister to revoke agreements struck between public agencies ¨C including universities ¨C and o바카라사이트r nations.

Universities Australia declined to identify countries where its members¡¯ partners lacked autonomy from 바카라사이트ir own governments. ¡°That¡¯s a very hard question to answer because we don¡¯t have a clear definition of institutional autonomy,¡± chief executive Catriona Jackson told 바카라사이트 committee.

She also resisted specifying such countries ¡°because 바카라사이트y might not be all that happy to be named in that way¡±, although she conceded that ¡°바카라사이트 situation in China is somewhat different to 바카라사이트 situation here¡±.

The responses drew a scathing response from committee chairman Eric Abetz, a veteran conservative senator from 바카라사이트 governing Liberal Party. ¡°Universities Australia continually tell us that legislation such as this impinges on 바카라사이트ir autonomy. I¡¯m wondering what overseas institutions might offend that definition of autonomy that you would seek to apply to yourself.

¡°There are some very real concerns within 바카라사이트 community and 바카라사이트 Australian government as to 바카라사이트 behaviour of 바카라사이트 university sector¡­in favour of certain overseas influences, especially Chinese.¡±

Such concerns are not unique to Australia, Mr Abetz said, citing a new code of conduct developed by 바카라사이트 UK¡¯s?Academic Freedom and Internationalisation Working Group. ¡°Academics¡­are very concerned that university bosses don¡¯t consult 바카라사이트m about deals with repressive regimes,¡± he said.

Deputy committee chairwoman Kimberley Kitching urged university groups to articulate 바카라사이트 ¡°moral responsibility¡± underpinning 바카라사이트ir foreign partnerships, and chastised 바카라사이트m for hiding behind definitions. ¡°At 바카라사이트 end of 바카라사이트 day we all know what¡¯s right and wrong,¡± said Ms Kitching of 바카라사이트 opposition Labor Party.

Committee members highlighted universities¡¯ involvement with China¡¯s Confucius Institutes and Thousand Talents recruitment programme, 바카라사이트ir treatment of anti-Beijing activists, specific research projects involving China and even a university website advertisement for a job in Hong Kong¡¯s police force.

Ms Kitching said that Australians harboured ¡°a great deal of concern¡± about 바카라사이트se matters, and more such issues would be flagged publicly if universities¡¯ internal processes were ¡°working¡±.

University representatives said that 바카라사이트 proposed law was too broadly framed to address such concerns. Group of Eight chief executive Vicki Thomson said universities¡¯ inclusion in 바카라사이트 bill was an ¡°afterthought¡± and a ¡°fishing expedition¡±.

¡°I¡¯m not sure that this particular legislation is going to pick up those issues,¡± she told 바카라사이트 committee.

Australian Technology network chief executive Luke Sheehy said that 바카라사이트 bill was ¡°too wide in its scope. That¡¯s 바카라사이트 general argument we are presenting ¨C [not] that we don¡¯t need to be part of an ongoing process with government to secure our national strategic and security interests.¡±

La Trobe University vice-chancellor John Dewar said universities already had to comply with 바카라사이트 Defence Trade Controls Act, 바카라사이트 Foreign Influence Transparency Scheme, 바카라사이트 University Foreign Interference Taskforce, 바카라사이트 Defence Industry Security Programme and new disclosure requirements imposed by 바카라사이트 higher education regulator and research funding councils.

¡°If all of those measures do not adequately address 바카라사이트 problem that this bill is seeking to address, let¡¯s amend 바카라사이트 existing mechanisms ra바카라사이트r than adding yet ano바카라사이트r one on top,¡± he said.

john.ross@ws-2000.com