sign up log in
Want to go ad-free? Find out how, here.

Comprehensive review of university funding unveiled as government asks them to co-operate more in the wake of a funding grant to help them through crisis

Public Policy / news
Comprehensive review of university funding unveiled as government asks them to co-operate more in the wake of a funding grant to help them through crisis
Te Herenga Waka -Victoria university

Universities will undergo a thorough review of who pays for them and why. 

They will also be asked to compete less and co-operate more to make sure that all subjects currently on offer can be taught at least somewhere in New Zealand. 

These announcements have been made in the wake of financial crises that have left Te Herenga Waka - Victoria University and Otago University millions of dollars in deficit and having to lay off hundreds of staff.   

Other universities have similar problems and have either dealt with them or not yet faced up to them.  

In the wake of this issue, the Government has agreed to pump an additional $128 million into the tertiary sector over the next two years. This is on top of the 5% announced in the budget, and represents in total a 9% rise. 

"When we began our Budget process, universities and other degree providers were forecasting enrolment increases, the Education Minister Jan Tinetti says.

"The opposite has occurred, and it is clear that there is a need for additional support."

The money will go to all degree-granting institutions including Wānanga and Te Pūkenga.

However, the Government is making clear this is not a permanent fix. The Finance Minister Grant Robertson says the two years of extra money will allow time for a thorough review into all aspects of university finances. 

"We have a model of tertiary funding that has proved itself to be unsustainable, and we have a number of different sources of funding that we need to consider altogether," Robertson says. .

Robertson says there are several sources of money for universities that could be considered.

"Universities have multiple sources of funds already. They have funding that we provide them through the Government, and through the Performance Based Research Fund (PBRF)," he says. 

"The universities also obviously have international student revenue, and they have revenue from their commercial activities and research and so on.

"We have looked individually at a number of bits of that, such as the PBRF, but what has not happened is a holistic look at the whole tertiary funding system."

Robertson says all these matters have to be considered and a decision will be made on the scope and the approach to the review before the end of 2023.

He says he hopes the findings of the review would be able to be implemented at the end of the two year period. 

Robertson and Tinetti's comments come in the wake of financial crises worth millions of dollars and hundreds of job losses at universities in Wellington and Dunedin. The proposed redundancies could also remove entire academic subjects from the curriculum. 

Robertson says he wants action taken quickly to prevent that.

"We have asked the Ministry of Education to come back to us by the end of July to determine if any of the changes being proposed by the universities mean we could lose capacity right across the country or lose programmes or courses entirely right across the country".

Robertson says he does not want that to happen and he wants universities to co-operate more and compete less.   

And he is issuing a challenge to them.

"We would ask the universities, which are autonomous, to think about using the next two years to manage their way through (the financial crisis) as we do the funding review, and to look again at the proposals they have made."

But is is not just about that, Robertson says, it is connected with problems with the entire system.

"Ultimately, the (funding) model is what is colloquially called a bums on seats model. It is also one where we have a level of competition between universities that possibly is not justified in a country of our size.

"There are a lot of questions I get from students and staff about the way universities are managed and this review will shed significant light on that.

“The current financial situation of some tertiary institutions points to the need take this broader look into the way our higher education system is funded and financed," says Robertson.

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.

Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.

35 Comments

The irony of our supermarkets being allowed to collude, while our universities are asked to compete, should be lost on nobody. 

Up
5

Supermarkets colluding. And you have presented your unimpeachable evidence of that. Oh wait.........

Up
0

You reckon Pak N Save and New World are going at it then? They're owned by the same company.

Up
2

You really can't be serious. Please don't be dim tokyo. A company cannot collude with itself. Doh.

Up
1

Good. It absolutely is stupid that universities are expected to compete in a country our size. Makes more sense for them to specialise in different things and become world-class in a few things each.

Up
10

Or that we have so many uni's in a country our size?

Up
5

Honestly? Yes. But keeping the ones that make sense (Auckland, Vic, Canterbury, Otago) would mean paring back those in the regions, which seems like a political non-starter. 

Up
0

Close Auckland uni.  Move its talent to other places.  Instant solution to Auckland's problems with congestion, no new harbour bridge or light rail. Homelessness solved instantly; house prices would drop to an affordable amount.  Auckland's climate change targets might be met.  

Up
7

WTF are you smoking

Up
0

With the benefit of technology over the last 10 years staffing levels and general building size needs should have reduced significantly, even with more students.

 

 

Up
2

To some extent. Some programs aren't offered remotely or after-hours, and are only delivered during business hours. Limits opportunities for upskilling if you are already working business hours. Whether that is to ensure use of facilities is unclear, but it's something I would have expected to change post-Covid. 

Up
1

Open Polytechnic does it well.  I'm 2/3rds through a Diploma in Construction with strands in Quantity Surveying. The tutors are very responsive to questions via the online portal so the support is there.  

Even the library system works very well.  Requested a book, it turns up 1 - 2 days later in the post with a return bag.  Online access to the full NZ Standards database too.  

Up
8

Good effort

Up
2

Yes, Massey too has both substantial investment and lengthy experience in on-line learning. This is what I believe Robertson is alluding to - if you are looking at canceling offerings at your institution - make sure you negotiate an agreement (i.e., sub-contract) for your students to maintain access to these subject courses online, particularly where electives are concerned. 

If this model were scoped and implemented nationwide, we would end up with different uni campuses specialising in only certain disciplines and degrees, yet still retain a diverse and comprehensive mix of subjects/courses being available via on-line learning.  Unis need to sub-contract one another where there is academic/learning excellence elsewhere in the country.

  

Up
2

If 100 years ago some department and or discipline commenced, it does not mean it has to continue forever.

Up
1

The Polytech to University change combined with a reduction in education to citizenship scam has created a situation where this is now to many academics and institutions. Accordingly some will drop (more) headcount and funding. Welcome to the real world.

Earn the no doubt large salaries they are getting. Make the hard calls to remain financially viable.

Up
4

Plus the bulging group of employees (sorry professor's) that wouldn't no what productivity is. Well only rushing to the coffee machine along with all the other subsidized perks.

Up
2

Coffee has been shown to stimulate brain activity - elevating brainpower to such lofty heights as being able to discern the difference between words such as ‘no’, versus “know”.

 

Seems like a *subsidised perk worth keeping around, don’t you think?

Up
4

Perhaps chopping a pile of meaningless and worthless courses along with the staff that teach them would be a better solution. 

Up
9

In whose judgement? Yours? Mine?

Education has simply run into the Limits to Growth, as has Health, as has local infrastructure. This is a Polycrisis.

All debt is a bet on the availability of energy/resources in the future; student debt, university debt, local government debt, government debt; they're all forward bets. That future is smaller than today, and that reduction will accelerate. Thus a widening gap will open up between 'funding' and 'learning'.

A functioning society needs knowledge, the irony being that we have not been this collectively ignorant, for some decades. We need a new model, as we do with Health. The big point is that the neoliberal stupidity - that competition delivers - has been a proven failure; time we moved on. Rationalising and cooperating are obvious moves; teaching of Systems (none do it, currently) is probably important too (increased house-prices lead to increased rents, leading to students being unable to carry the debt - all things knock-on to all things).

 

Up
5

Maybe competition doesn't deliver in first world countries but in third world countries getting a bag of rice for a few cents less may be life or death. The recent astonishing reduction in those living in absolute poverty has to be admitted and praised.  There are sufficient third world countries without competition to compare with.  

I generally agree with your idea that finite resources mean we are heading towards disaster. But I don't see a non-competition solution working.

Up
1

"neoliberal stupidity - that competition delivers - has been a proven failure". In whose judgement, yours? Health is hardly competitive in this country kiwi, and for that matter, neither is Education. So neither of those can be used as a competitive failure. If Universities were competitive and one or more was being outcompeted, it should be left to fail. The best Universities would survive. But that won't happen, because the Government will bail them out. As I say, get rid of the crap courses and the hangers on that teach them, and concentrate on and become experts in the rest. Be the best. And people will come.

Up
1

It's been a proven failure in more arenas than that - the Bradford debacle re electricity, is something we are all still suffering from.

But your ideology probably blinds you - education is a societal good. Nothing to do with competition - just a Good.

Those who needed to prolong growth - which was always doomed to be temporary - had to commandeer the Commons; all that was publicly owned, all that was a good, or considered free. They eyed up education, they eyed up health; Tomorrow's Schools was ALL about using public money to line up public assets for private ownership. So was just about everything; the rich levering to s--ew the poor.

That is over now - been over really, since 2008 (2005/6, if you're into energy physics). So we have to ask how education looks, post-growth?

 

Up
1

The issue is fundamentally the way degrees have become a job ticket instead of institutions of higher learning. The fact that Vic, the arts and government orientated university which furnishes the public service, is cutting its classical languages and contemporary languages is disgusting. Anyone who has worked in the London Banks knows why the classical languages and arts are preferred to business degrees amongst the bankers. The mindset and thinking you learn in the arts is far more useful and you can learn all the rest on the job.

The Universities need reform, but their purpose as a training place for the professional scientific and managerial class is the issue. We lack the number of children coming through to justify the size of these institutions. The peak attendance at these university was most likely ~2005 to 2012. Despite higher enrollments, the rate of graduation has not improved, it sits at ~60% after six years. There are just too many layers of problem, but this spending will only delay the problem somewhat.

This money is effectively a bailout for the Tertiary Education Union, by far the most Left wing union in New Zealand, which lives entirely off the states' dime.

Up
10

Agree with most of that actually. At face value, the money buys time to change the system. Of course the big question then is: what sort of review of the tertiary sector really happens before the end of an election year?

 

Up
0

Or the biggest question; will the money simply pay redundancies which are very attractive for those employed for a reasonable amount of time at tertiary institutions.

Up
1

I doubt it. None of the voluntary schemes offered during covid times were particularly attractive unless you already had one foot out the door.

Up
0

Over the last few years, global Governments have realised that teaching critical thinking skills to the general populace is a bad idea.  Far better to dictate and indoctrinate them. 

Secondly, the increasing focus on mandatory Maori studies in every degree course is limiting the value of a NZ degree internationally, thus preventing graduates from gaining employment overseas, or working for global employers in NZ.  See the international reaction to our B.Sc in "Maori Science".  https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/why-im-sticking-up-for-science/  NZ education has become an international laughing stock.

Now that Australia offers up citizenship for all, parents are far better to move to Australia and enroll their kids in high school there, so they are full citizens by the time they reach Uni, and can enroll in a reputable institution to gain a degree that has international gravitas. (Note currently NZ students can enroll as domestic students but can't access the student loan scheme).  NZ doesnt have a single University in the top 100, whereas Australia has 5 in the top 50.  Crimson is also doing a good job in placing NZ students in overseas Universities.  We should expect more of our best and brightest to go offshore to study in order for their skills to be properly recognised.

Up
3

That’s what I’m planning! And for those reasons exactly. I don’t see a need to push Māori on every single subject, and then charge you for it. The future opportunities are far greater in Australia as well. South Africans I know see NZ on the same path as SA years ago.

Up
1

In other news, the government has asked the Crusaders to compete less because the other teams are getting sad.

Up
2

Frankly it's getting pretty dull. 

Up
2

It must be time to break them up into North Canterbury and South Canterbury.  The Govt should set up a Working Committee to look at that.

Up
2

Just to point out Otago Uni wanted to change their main emblem to be more inclusive cost off the top of my head over a million. When they had already had a survey done with all the alumni who the majority had said no. Waisted a mill. Yet they wanted to persist didn't Victoria uni look at changing their name if so how much did that little exercise cost. Go woke go broke 

Up
5

Yes, Vic Uni changed to get Wellington into its name to distinguish it from other Victoria Universities overseas.

Up
0

Need to go to 100% user pays. This will ensure useless and unnecessary courses are dumped as customers / students will expect to receive valuable skills not crap. Māori should be removed from all educational facilities and taught through Iwi providers, again 100% user pays, or funded through the full and final treaty settlements of the past. The system has become a revenue stream for the government I.e. as students can get loans fees have been raised. It’s a drag on the country for the young to be screwed with student loans. 

Up
4