‘Reimagining higher education governance’
Delivered by Universities Australia CEO Luke Sheehy
***Check against delivery***
Thank you, and good afternoon, colleagues and friends.
It’s a pleasure to be back in the great state of Western Australia on the lands of the Whadjuk Noongar people.
I pay my respects to elders past and present.
This is my second visit to Western Australia this year.
I love coming here and seeing my wonderful members.
Curtin.
Edith Cowan.
Murdoch.
Notre Dame.
And UWA.
These institutions aren’t just state assets.
They have long helped shape our national system and our economic future.
And they’ll continue to in the decades ahead – merger or no merger.
I’m not sure if it’s a blessing or a curse speaking last at a conference.
On one hand, I get to have the last word.
On the other, I might just be repeating what’s already been covered here today.
Even so, this is a pleasure, and I want to thank the UWA Public Policy Institute for the opportunity.
Governance.
If international students were last year’s sector buzzwords, governance has been this year’s.
And today, I want to speak about it candidly.
Not governance as compliance or procedure, though we must focus on both.
But governance as the foundation for ambition, innovation and long-term national capability.
Right now, there is a shift happening beneath our feet.
The governance landscape in which our universities operate is changing, and fast.
And what’s become clear is that the structures of the past aren’t going to carry us into the future.
Just look at what’s happening globally.
Universities around the world are confronting new expectations, new pressures and new forms of scrutiny.
In the United Kingdom, universities are adapting to an increasingly interventionist regulator and shifting political demands.
In the United States, institutions are being caught in the crossfire of deep political polarisation.
In Canada, tensions between federal and provincial governments are shaping the governance environment in complex, and sometimes contradictory, ways.
Australia is not immune to these currents.
We are part of that global recalibration.
And in many ways, our situation is even more complex.
We operate under a dual governance structure with responsibility for our sector split between the Commonwealth and the states and territories.
We are dealing with evolving expectations around academic quality, student safety, research partnerships, cyber resilience and international engagement.
And we are navigating a major reform moment through the Universities Accord, which asks us to imagine a larger, more accessible, more equitable and more productive tertiary system.
This level of complexity requires governance structures that are modern, agile and integrated.
And the reality is – we are not there yet.
Much of this complexity has historical origin.
Maybe not those of you here today but I’m sure many Australians would be surprised to learn that higher education does not appear anywhere in the Australian Constitution.
The challenges of this today are significant.
The Commonwealth funds and regulates universities.
States and territories establish and oversee them through acts of parliament.
And universities sit at the intersection of these overlapping authorities.
This has resulted in fragmentation, duplication and, at times, blurred lines of accountability.
But it also presents an opportunity.
Because governance in higher education is not constitutionally prescribed, we have the flexibility to design contemporary arrangements that better reflect the needs of our time.
If we’re honest with ourselves, as a sector we haven’t embraced this opportunity.
Government, though, has taken and run with it – and not always in the direction we want.
We should reflect on why this is the case.
If I can be frank – university governance arrangements have not always hit the mark.
They have not been as strong, as robust or as future focused as is expected for a publicly funded sector.
We often see instances of culture, reporting lines and risk management falling short of community expectations.
These challenges have real consequences – for staff, for students, for management and councils.
As a result, we lose public trust.
When government has intervened, it has not always been arbitrary or inappropriate – despite what our initial instincts as a sector might lead us to believe or say.
The truth is that we are not perfect – far from it.
In many cases, government action has been necessary and justified.
We cannot continue to call for autonomy and public investment while resisting appropriate accountability and oversight.
The key is to ensure that this accountability is proportionate, coherent, avoids duplication and supports improvement rather than stifling capability.
That balance is what we must collectively strive for.
That time is now.
I think it’s fair to say that we are in the midst of a university governance renewal.
Leading this is Minister Clare, with the support of the states and territories and the Expert Council on University Governance, and the University Chancellors Council.
Last month, the Expert Council provided advice to government on the principles that should underpin governance across the sector.
This work is aimed at lifting consistency, strengthening culture and aligning governance practices with contemporary risks.
Universities Australia has welcomed this work.
Likewise, the University Chancellors Council has been a critical national voice in driving improvements to governance capability, board professionalism and best practice in institutional oversight.
Chancellors have a key role in strengthening the integrity of the whole system.
These bodies are partners in reform – and their work is essential to lifting governance performance.
I recognise this is not an easy job.
Higher education in Australia is a complex system weighed down by red tape.
I have acknowledged where governance has fallen short.
But it’s also important to acknowledge where the system itself is no longer fit for purpose.
The regulatory burden on universities has grown dramatically.
Our institutions are bogged down by layers of reporting, overlapping requirements and duplicated oversight from different agencies and different levels of government.
This has created a compliance environment that consumes enormous amounts of time, money and capability.
The University of Sydney, for example, is subject to more than 300 regulatory instruments.
It’s not just a Sydney problem – it’s a sector problem.
In many universities, this burden is suppressing innovation and crowding out strategy.
That’s why Universities Australia has made reducing unnecessary regulation one of our highest advocacy priorities.
Earlier this year, we wrote to Treasurer Jim Chalmers, urging the government to ensure higher education becomes a focus of the Economic Reform Roundtable’s deep dive into regulation.
Our message was clear: if the government wants Australia to become more productive, it must allow universities to operate more productively.
That opportunity is in front of us.
The government’s recognition that cutting red tape is key to lifting Australia’s sluggish productivity performance and putting it at the centre of its reform agenda is a good first step.
It’s also encouraging that the Department of Education is engaging with us on this.
This is appropriate, timely and extremely important.
As we embark on this task, let me be clear that regulation that protects students, ensures quality and strengthens national security is vital.
But regulation that duplicates, distracts or delays is regulation we cannot afford.
We must not be so emersed in minimising risks that we never seize opportunities.
We must not focus so much energy on regulation that we kill innovation and ambition.
So, what can we do?
We need integrated solutions to mitigate the complexities of our overlapping governance demands.
The dual responsibility between the Commonwealth and the states and territories means universities must navigate:
• national quality and standards regulators
• state establishing acts and reporting lines
• workplace and safety regulators
• cybersecurity and foreign interference frameworks
• research, infrastructure and funding agencies, and
• targeted obligations from multiple departments.
These structures were not designed as a system.
They have grown over time, piece by piece, often in response to issues that were urgent at the time.
We are now operating under the accumulated weight.
Universities Australia has set out a path to improvement.
We’ve called for the Australian Tertiary Education Commission to prioritise Accord recommendations that cut regulatory burden.
We’ve asked government to pursue economy-wide efficiencies by stripping out duplicated legislation and removing regulatory overlap across jurisdictions.
We’ve recommended a simple one-in, one-out rule for regulation, so any new requirement is offset by lifting an existing burden.
And we’ve urged government to draw on the expertise of our academics – in law, taxation, economics, public finance and regulatory policy – to help streamline reform.
Within higher education, we’ve proposed practical steps: improving data sharing, expanding shared services and exploring closer harmonisation between TEQSA and ASQA.
We’ve also suggested mapping the roles of the Department, ATEC, TEQSA, ASQA and the National Student Ombudsman to assess whether the system’s complexity actually delivers value.
We’ve called for a review of the Higher Education Support Act to remove unnecessary complexity and cut back bespoke reporting programs.
And we’ve encouraged consolidation of funding programs and reporting so universities can spend more time educating and researching, not ticking boxes.
None of this requires constitutional change.
It requires political will and a shared understanding that universities are national assets.
And if we are to get the best out of them, we need to unshackle them.
But as a sector we can’t sit idle, we also have an obligation to act.
The problem with waiting for government to do the work is that things don’t always go our way.
We’ve seen that in the last and this term of Parliament.
We cannot call for reform from government without also acknowledging our own responsibilities.
As a sector, we must continue to improve.
Council capability and diversity.
Risk management and financial oversight.
Student safety and wellbeing governance.
Cyber and data governance readiness.
Research integrity.
These are all areas we can strengthen on our own.
We also need governance structures that elevate the student voice and engage communities more deeply.
And we must ensure councils are focused on the long-term strategic horizon, not trapped in a cycle of compliance paperwork.
Governance is not simply the preservation of institutional stability.
It is the stewardship of institutional purpose.
Let me close with a challenge.
The next decade will transform higher education more than any since the Dawkins reforms.
If we want universities to drive national productivity, fuel innovation, expand opportunity and build resilience, then we must modernise the governance frameworks that shape them.
We need accountability and autonomy.
We need oversight and innovation.
We need coordination and institutional flexibility.
Above all, we need a shared recognition that strong, modern governance is not an administrative concern – it is one of the most important investments we can make in support of Australia’s future.
Reimagining governance is about imagining a better system – and then choosing to build it, as a sector and with government.
Thank you.
ENDS
