The second hearing of the NSW Parliament’s inquiry into the university sector put the University of Wollongong under the spotlight — and showed, again, why NSW Government action is urgently needed.
UOW should be one of the great public institutions of the Illawarra. It was created under NSW law, built around a regional public mission, and should be accountable to the community it exists to serve. But the evidence at the second hearing painted a picture of a university pulled too far toward corporate management, consultant influence, offshore expansion and top-down restructuring — while staff, students and the local community are left to deal with the damage.
The day began with evidence from Dr Adam Lucas, who described what he called a profound governance failure across public universities. His evidence went to one of the central problems in the sector: financial narratives being used to justify cuts to jobs, courses and disciplines, even where the underlying position of the university is more complex. He warned that accrual accounting methods can make university finances look worse than they are, and that those financial narratives are then used to justify job cuts, subject cuts, course closures and the hollowing out of whole disciplines.
That evidence matters because it goes to the heart of what NTEU NSW has been saying throughout this inquiry. Universities are not ordinary businesses. They should not be making short-term cuts to teaching and research based on narrow corporate logic, particularly when those decisions affect the future of students, staff and whole regions.
The NTEU session brought that reality into sharp focus. Former UOW Branch President Professor Fiona Probyn-Rapsey and current UOW Branch President Associate Professor Susan Engel gave detailed evidence about the human, educational and institutional damage caused by UOW’s restructure.
Professor Probyn-Rapsey described how UOW’s “transformation” unfolded under what she called a uniquely bizarre and chaotic governance arrangement: a new chancellor, Michael Still; the sudden departure of a vice-chancellor; the appointment of interim vice-chancellor John Dewar; and KordaMentha being contracted to conduct operational reviews that led to job cuts and restructures while Dewar remained connected to the firm. She told the inquiry that a GIPA application showed Dewar was working a nine-day fortnight at UOW, with one day set aside for KordaMentha.
That was one of the key moments of the day. Staff had been told one thing. The documents told another. And the broader question remains: how did a public university end up in a position where a private consultancy firm was so deeply connected to the running and restructuring of the institution?
Associate Professor Engel’s evidence showed what this meant on the ground. She described the aftermath of around 136 academic redundancies, major changes to learning and teaching, exhausted staff, postgraduate students left without adequate supervision, and professional staff restructures that consumed thousands of hours while producing unstable and sometimes dysfunctional outcomes. She also pointed to the ongoing churn in senior management and the continued presence of former Big Four consultancy figures at the top of university governance.
The student evidence made the same point from another angle. Wollongong Undergraduate Students’ Association representatives Hanzel-Jude Pador, Caitlin Veigel and Alexia Chipperfield spoke about weak student voice, poor consultation and serious concerns about transparency and accountability. Their evidence about SSAF funding was particularly stark: students pay the fee, but the democratically elected student bodies say they have been left fighting for proper control, recognition and consultation over how student money is used.
This is what happens when public universities lose sight of their purpose. Staff are told their disciplines are unaffordable. Students are left to navigate disrupted degrees. Research money is restricted. Professional staff are reorganised, displaced and sometimes effectively replaced. Meanwhile, universities continue to spend heavily on consultants, pursue offshore campuses, and maintain governance structures that too often keep real decision-making away from the people most affected by it.
UOW’s international operations raised especially serious questions. Professor Probyn-Rapsey noted that UOW operates campuses through its global entities in Dubai, Hong Kong, Malaysia, Singapore and India, and has announced plans for Saudi Arabia. Associate Professor Engel questioned the adequacy of human rights risk assessment for those ventures, particularly where academic freedom and public accountability may be at stake. For a university with a statutory mission tied to the Illawarra, these are not side issues. They go directly to whether public resources are being used for public benefit.
The later evidence from university leadership did not remove the need for reform. If anything, the questioning of chancellor Michael Still and UOW representatives reinforced the problem: too much depends on internal processes, internal assurances and council structures that are not transparent enough for institutions of this scale and public importance.
This is why NSW Government action is required.
University autonomy should protect teaching, research, inquiry and public debate. It should not protect opaque restructures, consultant-driven change, conflicts of interest, offshore ventures without adequate public scrutiny, or decisions that strip regional communities of courses, expertise and educational opportunity.
NSW needs a modern governance framework for its universities: stronger public reporting, Auditor-General performance audits, enforceable public-good duties in university Acts, proper scrutiny of consultants and controlled entities, transparent workforce reporting, and councils with majority elected staff and student representation.
The UOW hearing showed the cost of leaving public universities to govern themselves like private corporations. The task now is to restore them as public institutions — accountable, transparent and worthy of the communities they serve.
