Bills Digest no. 74 2007–08
Higher Education Support Amendment
(Removal of the Higher Education Workplace Relations
Requirements and National Governance Protocols Requirements and
Other Matters) Bill 2008
This digest replaces an earlier version dated 8 March
2008. It takes into account a Legislative Instrument tabled 11
March 2008.
WARNING:
This Digest was prepared for debate. It reflects the legislation as
introduced and does not canvass subsequent amendments. This Digest
does not have any official legal status. Other sources should be
consulted to determine the subsequent official status of the
Bill.
CONTENTS
Passage history
Purpose
Background
Financial implications
Main provisions
Concluding comments
Contact officer & copyright details
Passage history
Higher Education Support
Amendment (Removal of the Higher
Education Workplace Relations Requirements and National Governance
Protocols Requirements and Other Matters) Bill
2008
Date
introduced: 13
February 2008
House: House of Representatives
Portfolio: Education, Employment and Workplace
Relations
Commencement:
Royal
Assent
Links: The
relevant links to the Bill, Explanatory Memorandum and second
reading speech can be accessed via BillsNet, which is at http://www.aph.gov.au/bills/.
When Bills have been passed they can be found at ComLaw, which is
at http://www.comlaw.gov.au/.
The Bill will amend the
Higher Education Support Act 2003 (the HESA) by repealing
section 33-17 and thereby removing the provision for a reduction in
a higher education provider s Commonwealth Grants Scheme funding if
the provider has not met the Higher Education Workplace Relations
Requirements (HEWRRs) and the National Governance Protocols (the
Protocols).
The Bill will also make a range of minor technical
amendments.
The Commonwealth provides assistance for higher education
through the provisions of the Higher Education Support Act
2003 (the HESA). Part 2-2 of the HESA sets out the conditions
for the Commonwealth Grant Scheme (CGS), which provides grants to
higher education providers on the basis of the number of places
they have been allocated in specified funding clusters. The
detailed funding conditions for providers are contained in the CGS
Guidelines made by the Minister under Section 238-10 the HESA,
which, as legislative instruments, are disallowable.
As part of the 2003 higher education reforms the former
Government increased funds per student place by 2.5 per cent in
2005, 5.0 per cent in 2006 and 7.5 per cent in 2007 conditional on
providers offering Australian Workplace Agreements (AWAs) and
complying with the model for institutional governance: the National
Governance Protocols.
On 29 April 2005 the former Minister for Education, Science and
Training (the Hon Brendan Nelson) and the former Minister for
Employment and Workplace Relations (the Hon Kevin Andrews)
announced a set of Higher Education Workplace Relations
Requirements (HEWRRs) for higher education providers.[1] The HEWRRs were
implemented in the Higher Education Legislation Amendment
(Workplace Relations Requirements) Act 2005 and continued the
compliance requirements for full CGS funding provided for in
Section 33-17 of the HESA.
The National Governance Protocols were implemented under the
former Government s reforms in higher education: Our
Universities: Backing Australia s Future. The Protocols
provide a set of standards to ensure that governing bodies
effectively oversee university operations and aim to ensure a
consistent national approach to governance. The Protocols became
effective in 2004.
In late 2005, the Ministerial Council on Education, Employment,
Training and Youth Affairs (MCEETYA) commissioned a review of the
impact of the Protocols and the scope for their enhancement. The
Joint Committee on Higher Education (JCHE) undertook the review
which was placed on hold when the 2007 election was called.[2]
In the Minister s second reading speech, the Hon Julia Gillard
stated that the Bill will put an end to the HEWRRS and the
protocols .[3] If
passed the Bill will end the HEWRRS and the Protocols as a
condition of funding. However both the HEWRRS and the Protocols
have been rendered ineffectual through a Legislative Instrument
registered on 23 February 2008 and tabled 11 March 2008. The
Legislative Instrument (see F2008L00559) has removed Chapter 7 of
the Commonwealth Grant Scheme Guidelines, thereby removing the
imposition on higher education providers of the HEWRRs and the
Protocols.[4] As
discussed above the Legislative Instrument is disallowable. Should
Parliament not pass the Bill, then Section 33-17 will continue to
apply compliance requirements for HEWRRS and the Protocols that no
longer exist. The Legislative Instrument would need to be
disallowed for Section 33-17 to be meaningful.[5]
In the Labor Party s 2006 white paper on higher education and
research, Labor promised to end Government interference in the
internal management of universities and reduce compliance and
reporting burdens and specifically to remove the workplace
relations and governance conditions attached to funding.[6]
Australian Workplace Agreements (AWAs) are a key element of
HEWRRs and their abolition is consistent with the Labor Government
s commitment to abolish AWAs. The Minister points out that the
Government believes that universities should be subject to the same
workplace relations laws as all other employers. [7]
The proposed abolition of HEWRRS should be welcomed by higher
education providers. In 2005 the AVCC, now Universities Australia,
opposed HEWRRs claiming they would be inflexible, increase
administrative workloads and be:
Very intrusive in terms of universities capacity
to manage their internal affairs. The HEWRRs proposal constitutes a
one size fits all approach, whereas the AVCC takes the view that
the focus should be on desired outcomes, rather than specific
industrial processes and particular industrial instruments.[8]
Higher education providers should also welcome the abolition of
conditionality of funding to the Protocols. Universities accepted
and implemented the Protocols but oppose any further prescriptive
requirements that add costs and compliance requirements that are
inconsistent with the potential benefits . In their submission to
the review of the Protocols university chancellors and
vice-chancellors stressed it was not wise to apply a one size fits
all governance model (that extends into areas of management),
particularly when the stated object of the Government is to promote
diversity .[9]
Nil.
Item 6 provides for the repeal of section 33-17
requiring higher education providers to meet the Higher Education
Workplace Relations Requirements (HEWRRs) and the National
Governance Protocols as a condition of Commonwealth Grants Scheme
funding.
Items 1, 2, 3, 4 and 9 are
technical amendments relating to the definition and scope of a
quality auditing body. Proposed section 19-29
enables the Minister to list additional auditing bodies in the
Higher Education Provider Guidelines.
Item 5 provides for additional causes for the
Minister to revoke a body s approval as a higher education
provider.
Item 8 is a transitional mechanism which
extends eligibility for Other Grants funding to allow the transfer
of unspent funds to the new Diversity Fund for those corporate
bodies entitled to receive grants under the former Collaboration
and Structural Reform Fund.[10]
Concluding comments
The Bill significantly demarcates the Government s policy from
that of the Coalition Government which was seen to impose an
increasing prescriptive and costly administrative red tape burden
on higher education providers. The Minister s speech to the House
described the administrative burden as unwarranted, bullying
government interference in the running of universities and she
foreshadowed a more collaborative relationship with
universities.
The provisions sit within the Government s broad policy of
introducing a negotiated compact model of university funding first
proposed in the Labor Party s 2006 white paper on higher education
and research that would value universities individual missions and
their different roles and circumstances .[11] The Group of Eight universities
envisage that under a compact model there will be a much reduced
compliance, bidding and reporting burden placed on universities,
and greater flexibility over the use of resources. [12]
Copyright Commonwealth of Australia
This work is
copyright. Except to the extent of uses permitted by the
Copyright Act 1968, no person may reproduce or transmit
any part of this work by any process without the prior written
consent of the Parliamentary Librarian. This requirement does not
apply to members of the Parliament of Australia acting in the
course of their official duties.
This work has been
prepared to support the work of the Australian Parliament using
information available at the time of production. The views
expressed do not reflect an official position of the Parliamentary
Library, nor do they constitute professional legal opinion.
Feedback is welcome
and may be provided to: web.library@aph.gov.au. Any
concerns or complaints should be directed to the Parliamentary
Librarian. Parliamentary Library staff are available to discuss the
contents of publications with Senators and Members and their staff.
To access this service, clients may contact the author or the
Library s Central Entry Point for referral.
Members, Senators and Parliamentary staff can obtain further
information from the Parliamentary Library on (02) 6277 2709.
Coral Dow
18 March 2008
Bills Digest Service
Parliamentary Library
© Commonwealth of Australia
This work is copyright. Except to the extent of uses permitted
by the Copyright Act 1968, no person may reproduce or transmit any
part of this work by any process without the prior written consent
of the Parliamentary Librarian. This requirement does not apply to
members of the Parliament of Australia acting in the course of
their official duties.
This work has been prepared to support the work of the Australian
Parliament using information available at the time of production.
The views expressed do not reflect an official position of the
Parliamentary Library, nor do they constitute professional legal
opinion.
Feedback is welcome and may be provided to: web.library@aph.gov.au. Any
concerns or complaints should be directed to the Parliamentary
Librarian. Parliamentary Library staff are available to discuss the
contents of publications with Senators and Members and their staff.
To access this service, clients may contact the author or the
Library’s Central Entry Point for referral.
Back to top