UTAS mea culpa but ‘no’ to Hobart move veto

The University of Tasmania concedes it ‘hasn’t done well enough’ in consulting on the shift of its main campus to Hobart’s CBD.

UTAS Vice Chancellor Professor Rufus Black in one of the Hobart CBD buildings being developed as part of the city move. Picture: Nikki Davis-Jones

The University of Tasmania concedes it “hasn’t done well enough” in consulting on the shift of its main campus to Hobart’s CBD, but rejects calls for a state veto on the move.

Under an at times tense grilling before a state parliamentary committee, UTAS management on Wednesday conceded failings but rejected calls for major changes to its governance.

UTAS faces potentially nationally significant changes to its governing state act of parliament in the wake of public and internal opposition to its plans to develop its Sandy Bay campus for housing.

The plan – which would complete UTAS’ move to CBD buildings - would give the university an independent revenue stream.

However, it has created a storm of controversy, particularly as the Sandy Bay campus land was originally gifted to UTAS for education purposes.

MLCs – whose recommendations could rewrite way UTAS is governed – asked why the state education minister should not have a role in approving the sale or change of use of gifted land.

Vice Chancellor Rufus Black suggested the city move and redevelopment of the Sandy Bay site should be considered by a “different planning mechanism”, beyond the Hobart City Council. “This is a total Tasmanian community question,” he said.

He firmly rejected ministerial veto. “Ministerial decisions can be even more opaque than university council mechanisms,” Professor Black said.

Chancellor Alison Watkins conceded there had been failings on public consultation but said giving the state minister veto could open UTAS to political interference or impact its viability.

“We hear loud and clear that we haven’t done well enough on that because that’s why these concerns are there,” Ms Watkins said.

“However, I’m not sure whether a ministerial approval would have been the answer to that or would have changed that.”

She denied the university council was an “entity unto itself” and cautioned against calls for more elected, academic representation as a check on the power of the Vice Chancellor and senior managers.

However, she said UTAS “could work with a slightly larger” or “slightly differently” constituted council.

Pam Sharpe, of the Save UTAS Campus community group fighting the city move, called for new management. “The arrogance of UTAS management is breathtaking - they thumb their nose at the community, their own staff and students, the Hobart city councillors and even the Premier who has called for compromise,” Professor Sharpe said.