Corporate-style boards will undermine the independence of universities and their staff, writes the president of the Tertiary Education Union, Sandra Grey.
One of the standout features of the New Zealand system has been the fact our institutions of learning are publicly owned (by and large) and publicly governed (for the most part).
So why are the minister of tertiary education and his Government colleagues changing a winning formula by disbanding public governance in the tertiary education sector?
In 2009, the Government changed polytechnic councils from democratic and community-oriented councils to a more "business-like model".
Councils had once consisted of staff, students and community representatives, who lent their expertise and passion for education to ensure New Zealand's tertiary institutions served students, businesses, communities and the nation.
But the Government turned these broad-based councils into "boards" made up of four Government appointees, who in turn appointed additional members to the council.
Now the minister is looking to impose a similar travesty on our nation's universities. The minister says he wants leaner and "more entrepreneurial" university councils.
The question is why? Best-practice models of good governance show our university councils are operating effectively and serving their purpose well.
So one begins to suspect something altogether more sinister is behind the Government's plans to make these bodies less democratic and devoid of any grass-roots representation.
Southern Institute of Technology council chairman Graham Cooney mused at the time his polytechnic's new council formed that "ministerial selection of council members could be abused in the future ... The ministerial appointment of the chair and deputy chair could be used at some point by a political party for the wrong reasons."
Mr Cooney said it was not happening now, but the selection by a minister was "not normal governing practice".
Perhaps that is what the minister wants: the ability to appoint "corporate-style boards" which are more interested in the shareholders' wishes (in this case the shareholder would be the government), than the needs of students, communities and staff.
There is an added bonus from having "corporate-style boards" which look up towards their master, rather than out to the broad community in which they work, and that centres on a crucial role for universities and other tertiary education institutions.
Hundreds of years of history and New Zealand law demand the need for tertiary institutions to maintain some distance and autonomy from governments. This is because tertiary institutions have a legal duty to be the "critic and conscience" of society.
Worldwide, we recognise that the greater the government control over tertiary institutions and their staff, the quieter those staff will be with regard to public critique of our political and economic elite.
This suspicion may sound far-fetched in a democratic nation, but already there are signs the Government is increasing centralised control over universities, their staff, their students and the communities they serve.
The tertiary education minister and his government agencies are already using very strong financial incentives and regulatory frameworks to create a tertiary education sector that fits his vision of good teaching and research.
In its recent guidance to tertiary institutions for developing their strategic plans, the Tertiary Education Commission noted it "will be using its performance management consequences framework" to ensure institutions meet Government objectives.
But no matter how good the Government's objectives are, such directives undermine institutions' autonomy and make it harder for them to challenge received wisdom or government plans.
The Government now no longer even trusts universities to decide what courses should be taught and to whom. Rather, the Government is telling educational professionals how to do their job.
Ministerially appointed council members can too easily be suspected of feathering their own nests financially and appointing their "mates" to seats on university and polytechnic councils.
They lack any air of openness, transparency or accountability. And, more importantly, given who appoints them, they are not in a safe position to make autonomous decisions if those decisions cut across government desires and goals.
Members of the public, staff and students should be appalled at the minister's approach to governance of the tertiary education sector.
The professionals who work in education; the students who study at our polytechnics, universities and wananga; and the public, who benefit from broad-based educational institutions operating in New Zealand, all deserve publicly governed and owned institutions.
Dr Grey, at present based in the Tertiary Education Union's Wellington office, is a senior lecturer at Victoria University's School of Social and Cultural Studies.
