Federal Education Minister Jason Clare refers concerns about Australian National University to regulator

The federal education minister has referred concerns about the Australian National University in Canberra to the country's tertiary education regulator.
Independent ACT senator David Pocock wrote to the minister, Jason Clare, on June 16 to raise concerns about governance and financial management at the ANU, which is pursuing a controversial restructure to save $250 million by 2026.
There has been widespread staff and community outcry over the university's ongoing plans to slash hundreds of jobs, after it revealed a cumulative deficit of around $600 million.
Senator Pocock's letter, which also includes other unspecified serious allegations, has now been referred to the Tertiary Education Quality Standards Agency (TEQSA), which regulates higher education.
Mr Clare said he had also written to ANU Vice-Chancellor Genevieve Bell on June 6 after hearing of "significant concerns" from his ACT Labor colleagues and the broader community about the university.
"I wrote to ANU seeking assurances that they are managing these issues appropriately," Mr Clare said in a statement.
Federal Member for Canberra Alicia Payne said she welcomed the minister's intervention.
"Over many months I have been meeting with ANU staff and community and have become increasingly concerned about the situation there," Ms Payne said on social media.
More than 400 people attended a town hall address at the ANU campus and online on Tuesday night hosted by Senator Pocock, who said he had no confidence in the ANU's leadership.
"You're trashing an amazing institution," Senator Pocock said in a response to crowd questions about ANU executives.
"It's probably one of the things people have stopped me in the street to talk about the most over the last few months.
"People who have put their lives into the ANU, love it as an institution, recognise how important it is to our nation and have very, very serious, and I think valid, concerns about what is happening here."
The National Tertiary Education Union (NTEU) said the minister's referral to TEQSA was a significant escalation in oversight of ANU's process.
"Problems have been mounting at ANU, so we're looking at wage theft, conflicts of interest, job cuts, financial mismanagement and more going on at the ANU over a period of time.
"Those problems have mounted to such a significant extent in our national university that the education minister, who is understandably wary about ministerial intervention, has decided that he could no longer look away."
The ANU is a Commonwealth authority, which means it is subject to public governance and public interest disclosure responsibilities, and is the only university over which the federal minister has jurisdiction.
Renew ANU, which has spearheaded the university's financial overhaul since October 2024, said change plans had so far saved the university $12.5 million.
In a statement, TEQSA confirmed it was considering Minister Clare's referral.
"TEQSA gives consideration to all concerns received, including those from the minister, and where warranted, outcomes can include undertaking regulatory processes to assure provider compliance."
"As this is ongoing, it is not appropriate for TEQSA to comment further until these processes are concluded."
The ANU has been contacted for comment.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

ABC News

43 minutes ago

• ABC News

West Australian marine business actively considering bid for Darwin Port

The business behind two major new West Australian marine infrastructure projects is considering a bid for the Darwin Port, as the federal government seeks a buyer to get it "back under Australian control". The Darwin Port was controversially leased by the Northern Territory government to Chinese-owned firm Landbridge for 99 years in 2015, and since then the facility has been a lightning rod for national security debate. Although no security risks have ever been proven regarding the port's lease, both Labor and the Coalition promised to return the port to Australian operation during the recent federal election campaign. The Australian government has said it is negotiating with parties over the port's future, but it has not yet revealed exactly which companies or consortiums could be in the running to bid for the lease. Founder of the Kimberley Marine Support Base in Broome and the Onslow Marine Support Base in the Pilbara, Andrew Natta, said the private Australian business was actively considering a bid for the Darwin Port. While the Onslow and Kimberley projects exist as separate entities, they share a common founder in Mr Natta and overlapping shareholders. "If you look at what our business has done in Western Australia … it makes sense for us to consider the opportunity, for sure," Mr Natta said. "If you look at our history and you look at what we're investing in in Broome, the piece of infrastructure [Kimberley Marine Support Base] that we're building now is almost $250 million. Mr Natta said he had not yet met with representatives from the federal or NT governments over his business' potential ambitions to take on the Darwin Port, but that it was likely on the cards for the near future. "At this point in time we're definitely saying that there is interest, and more than likely, yes, we would go forward and [meet with government]," he said. Both the Kimberley and Onslow port infrastructure projects have been vocally supported by the West Australian government, which has praised their potential to build capacity across multiple industries. Mr Natta said the aim would be to bring a similar ethos to "enhancing" the Darwin Port. "If we were to consider Darwin Port, we would be investing in a way that is very generational, very patient, but at the same time, enhancing," he said. He did not weigh into the controversy surrounding Darwin Port's current leaseholder, Landbridge, but said he believed there was merit in having the facility back in Australian hands. "I don't have a comment on the current ownership other than I think that it works very well when we have an all-Australian partnership, and that we can help facilitate those that need a port," he said. While the federal government has not yet revealed who it has been speaking to regarding the Darwin Port's future, a number of companies have reportedly shown interest. US private equity firm Cerberus Capital Management, which has strong links to the Trump administration, has reportedly been working towards a joint bid for the port with Australian-registered firm Toll Group. Neither company has confirmed if that bid is going ahead. The federal government has also said it has been speaking with superannuation firms over the port's future. Landbridge Group has repeatedly said it is not searching for a buyer. Earlier this month, Landbridge's non-executive director for Australia, Terry O'Connor, told 7.30 he believed the company had been subjected to a campaign of "myths and mistruths", including by ministers in the Australian government, over the port's lease. Federal Infrastructure Minister Catherine King said in a statement on Friday that "the Australian government is working closely with the Northern Territory government on next steps". "It would not be appropriate to comment further on matters that may be the subject of commercial negotiations," she said. The ABC understands the federal government has been approached by a number of interested parties. NT Treasurer Bill Yan said the territory government was "working alongside our Commonwealth counterparts in the best interests of Australia and the NT". "We will not pre-empt that work," he said.

ABC News

4 hours ago

• ABC News

Jim Chalmers wants a fight on tax, just like his 'brawler' hero Paul Keating

For those hoping Labor might use its landslide victory to be more ambitious, Jim Chalmers came to the press club with a message: game on. His speech was overshadowed by dramatic developments on the other side of the world, and buried under the dull heading of productivity and tax reform. But there was no mistaking the impression that Chalmers is emboldened by the election result and wants to seize his moment. The speech was light on specifics but lofty in aspiration. The treasurer was explicit that he wanted to use August's reform roundtable to make a lasting change to the tax system — to pick a fight and win it, like his "brawler statesman" hero Paul Keating. Chalmers is several steps ahead of his more cautious prime minister, whose own press club speech about economic reform last week was more grounded in talk of "win-wins" and incremental progress. But creative tension between treasurer and prime minister is the hallmark of all consequential governments, as with Hawke and Keating, or Howard and Costello. And economic reform — especially tax — is what those governments are remembered for, just as the political graveyard is littered with infamous tax failures like Gillard's carbon tax, Hewson's "fightback" and Shorten's negative gearing and franking credits. Tax matters to people, even if its finer details can make the eyes glaze over. So it is no small matter that the treasurer is standing at an open windowsill of opportunity and declaring he wants to jump through it. As one Labor frontbencher in the room remarked, it was the kind of speech the Labor faithful had waited 15 years to hear. For now, reaction from commentators has ranged from ambivalence to outright scepticism — "Rome not yet built on day one", read the opinion pages. And it's true that ambition is often thwarted by the cold light of reality, because anything worth doing on tax is hard to do. But even the whisper of a chance is enough for economists to prick up their ears after years of relentless caution and "safe" incrementalism. And there is much that could be done. For all the rancour, economists, unions, business and welfare advocates agree a lot about what's wrong with the status quo. There are always quibbles, but the broad collected wisdom is as follows: First, Australia taxes working people too much. That picture gets even worse if you factor in transfers (welfare and subsidies), which are below the poverty line for those on the lowest incomes and effectively impose extra taxes on middle earners, because the payments are withdrawn as you earn more. The picture is worse again if you factor in bracket creep — the fact that tax settings are not adjusted for inflation, meaning people pay more tax over time. Second, our tax system is wildly inconsistent in how it treats different types of income. A couple with no assets, both on the minimum wage, could pay more tax than a couple with three homes, a share portfolio, and hundreds of thousands in annual income. In fact, without needing to bend reality too much, it's plausible that the second couple could pay no tax at all. As well as the obvious inequities, these inconsistencies are inefficient, encouraging people to park their money in certain places (especially super and property) over others. At the same time, there are many reasons to expect we will need to raise more tax over time, in part because as people live longer they will require more care. And while there is lively debate over whether some government spending can be cut, there is pressure to spend more in several areas, much of it with strong public support. So if we want to be less reliant on taxing wages, we would need to consider other ways to raise money. Increasing taxes on consumption (GST) or land are among the options that would be more efficient, though not necessarily more equitable. Finally, all of this creates an intergenerational problem, because in the coming years there will be more retirees for every person of working age, piling the tax burden onto the shoulders of the young, a problem which gets worse the longer we neglect it. To summarise: the wrong type of tax, designed badly, and not enough of it, to the detriment of working people and young people, and distorting the economy. And that's before even mentioning corporate tax, fuel tax or cigarette tax — all of which are the subject of their own lively debates. All of that is enough to be overwhelming. But a wealth of problems means a wealth of possible answers. All of the "big ticket" items that feature prominently in political debate — negative gearing, capital gains tax, super tax, raising the GST, ending bracket creep, taxing land — are efforts to address one or another of these agreed shortcomings of the tax system. While Chalmers insists he is happy for all of these to be on the table and is keen not to rule things out, his press club appearance — where journalists tried valiantly to tempt him to do just that — left the impression he wants to avoid ideas with too much baggage. If he chose negative gearing, he would be accused of reheating leftovers and presented with a highlight reel of all the times he or the PM has promised not to revisit it, with the Coalition likely opposed and the Greens likely taking credit. If he chose the GST, he would risk creating "sticker shock" and be the treasurer who delivers a temporary price rise on everything, an option unlikely to appeal so soon after a nasty bout of inflation, especially since the states would get to keep all the money. And if he chose to go further on super tax concessions, he would embolden the scare campaign already amassing against his current push to lift the tax on earnings, which visibly irritates him every time he is asked about it. None of these seems especially likely. But if the treasurer is searching for a defining reform, there are options on the shelf with more dust but fewer enemies. Perhaps the most popular among economists — and yet still fairly obscure to the general public — is a dual income tax. That tax, common in Scandinavia, treats wages and salaries ("active" or "labour" income) differently to investments and capital gains ("passive" or "savings" income). Australia currently treats some investment income the same way as wages but other types completely differently. A dual tax could close loopholes and treat investment more consistently on the one hand, and lower taxes on wage earners on the other hand, while still being revenue neutral or even raising money. It's an idea with a long lineage, discussed at length in the famous Henry tax review in the early days of the Rudd government. Ken Henry, the treasury secretary who gave that review its name and who helped Chalmers with a draft of his press club speech this week, has become something of a "godfather of tax reform", and his hefty report still carries authority. But there's little to show for that reputation — 15 years on, politicians have intoned their reverence for the Henry review while politely ignoring almost all its recommendations. The reason? Because there is no such thing as meaningful tax reform that does not create both winners and losers. And for some time now, governments skirting on the edges of electoral defeat have been nervous about losers, preferring instead to promise higher spending and lower taxes. The Morrison government made an artform of this "double carrot", carefully designing its tax cuts to ensure no taxpayer was ever made worse off by even a cent. For this it was rewarded, winning a 2019 election against a Labor opposition with a substantial and controversial tax reform agenda who told the losers that if they didn't like it, they could vote for someone else, which they did. That's the price tag of reform. But with its colossal majority, the Albanese government could decide it can afford it. Chalmers, at least, thinks so. Perhaps his most pointed comment this week was that he did not believe the media narrative that Labor was assured of a third term. Translation: time is of the essence.

The Advertiser

10 hours ago

• The Advertiser

If you're going for a home loan but still have a HECS debt, you might want to wait

People with outstanding student loans will have an easier time getting a mortgage from September, when new lending rules will take effect. Banks will be able to disregard higher education loan program (HELP) debts, which include HECS debt, when assessing a homebuyer for a mortgage. The changes were finalised this week, after the Albanese government made a pre-election pledge in February to level the playing field for people with student debts. The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority has advised banks to remove HELP debt from debt-to-income reporting, a metric used to determine a person's capacity to repay a mortgage. The regulator has also clarified that it may be reasonable for banks to completely disregard a person's HELP debt from serviceability assessments, where it's expected the loan will be paid off within 12 months. Treasurer Jim Chalmers said the changes would make lending rules fairer. "We're making sure young people with a HELP debt are treated fairly and supporting them to get into the property market," he said. The changes mean a dual-income household with two student debts could borrow an additional $50,000 in the year they expect to pay off their student loan, according to the government's own analysis. APRA has written to lenders and the industry to advise them of the changes and their new obligations. The revised standards for banks will come into effect on September 30, 2025. In its letter to lenders, APRA said the changes would provide regulatory clarity and reaffirm the flexibility banks had in considering borrowers' individual circumstances. The regulator expects the changes will allow some borrowers with student debts to secure a home loan sooner. Education Minister Jason Clare said the Universities Accord found that banks' assessments of student debt made it harder for young Australians to buy a home. "HECS was never meant to be a handbrake on owning a home," he said. "That's not fair and we're fixing it." The federal government will also move ahead with its plan to reduce student debts by 20 per cent, something it committed to before the May election. During the election campaign, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese promised the legislative changes would be his first priority if his government was to be re-elected. The government has reaffirmed this, saying it will be the first piece of legislation introduced when Parliament returns on July 22, 2025. The 20 per cent reduction will occur once the legislation passes Parliament. However, the government has clarified the discount will be calculated based on a person's HELP debt amount as at June 1, 2025, before indexation was applied. This means the 2025 indexation will only apply to the remaining balance after the 20 per cent reduction. People with outstanding student loans will have an easier time getting a mortgage from September, when new lending rules will take effect. Banks will be able to disregard higher education loan program (HELP) debts, which include HECS debt, when assessing a homebuyer for a mortgage. The changes were finalised this week, after the Albanese government made a pre-election pledge in February to level the playing field for people with student debts. The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority has advised banks to remove HELP debt from debt-to-income reporting, a metric used to determine a person's capacity to repay a mortgage. The regulator has also clarified that it may be reasonable for banks to completely disregard a person's HELP debt from serviceability assessments, where it's expected the loan will be paid off within 12 months. Treasurer Jim Chalmers said the changes would make lending rules fairer. "We're making sure young people with a HELP debt are treated fairly and supporting them to get into the property market," he said. The changes mean a dual-income household with two student debts could borrow an additional $50,000 in the year they expect to pay off their student loan, according to the government's own analysis. APRA has written to lenders and the industry to advise them of the changes and their new obligations. The revised standards for banks will come into effect on September 30, 2025. In its letter to lenders, APRA said the changes would provide regulatory clarity and reaffirm the flexibility banks had in considering borrowers' individual circumstances. The regulator expects the changes will allow some borrowers with student debts to secure a home loan sooner. Education Minister Jason Clare said the Universities Accord found that banks' assessments of student debt made it harder for young Australians to buy a home. "HECS was never meant to be a handbrake on owning a home," he said. "That's not fair and we're fixing it." The federal government will also move ahead with its plan to reduce student debts by 20 per cent, something it committed to before the May election. During the election campaign, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese promised the legislative changes would be his first priority if his government was to be re-elected. The government has reaffirmed this, saying it will be the first piece of legislation introduced when Parliament returns on July 22, 2025. The 20 per cent reduction will occur once the legislation passes Parliament. However, the government has clarified the discount will be calculated based on a person's HELP debt amount as at June 1, 2025, before indexation was applied. This means the 2025 indexation will only apply to the remaining balance after the 20 per cent reduction. People with outstanding student loans will have an easier time getting a mortgage from September, when new lending rules will take effect. Banks will be able to disregard higher education loan program (HELP) debts, which include HECS debt, when assessing a homebuyer for a mortgage. The changes were finalised this week, after the Albanese government made a pre-election pledge in February to level the playing field for people with student debts. The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority has advised banks to remove HELP debt from debt-to-income reporting, a metric used to determine a person's capacity to repay a mortgage. The regulator has also clarified that it may be reasonable for banks to completely disregard a person's HELP debt from serviceability assessments, where it's expected the loan will be paid off within 12 months. Treasurer Jim Chalmers said the changes would make lending rules fairer. "We're making sure young people with a HELP debt are treated fairly and supporting them to get into the property market," he said. The changes mean a dual-income household with two student debts could borrow an additional $50,000 in the year they expect to pay off their student loan, according to the government's own analysis. APRA has written to lenders and the industry to advise them of the changes and their new obligations. The revised standards for banks will come into effect on September 30, 2025. In its letter to lenders, APRA said the changes would provide regulatory clarity and reaffirm the flexibility banks had in considering borrowers' individual circumstances. The regulator expects the changes will allow some borrowers with student debts to secure a home loan sooner. Education Minister Jason Clare said the Universities Accord found that banks' assessments of student debt made it harder for young Australians to buy a home. "HECS was never meant to be a handbrake on owning a home," he said. "That's not fair and we're fixing it." The federal government will also move ahead with its plan to reduce student debts by 20 per cent, something it committed to before the May election. During the election campaign, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese promised the legislative changes would be his first priority if his government was to be re-elected. The government has reaffirmed this, saying it will be the first piece of legislation introduced when Parliament returns on July 22, 2025. The 20 per cent reduction will occur once the legislation passes Parliament. However, the government has clarified the discount will be calculated based on a person's HELP debt amount as at June 1, 2025, before indexation was applied. This means the 2025 indexation will only apply to the remaining balance after the 20 per cent reduction. People with outstanding student loans will have an easier time getting a mortgage from September, when new lending rules will take effect. Banks will be able to disregard higher education loan program (HELP) debts, which include HECS debt, when assessing a homebuyer for a mortgage. The changes were finalised this week, after the Albanese government made a pre-election pledge in February to level the playing field for people with student debts. The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority has advised banks to remove HELP debt from debt-to-income reporting, a metric used to determine a person's capacity to repay a mortgage. The regulator has also clarified that it may be reasonable for banks to completely disregard a person's HELP debt from serviceability assessments, where it's expected the loan will be paid off within 12 months. Treasurer Jim Chalmers said the changes would make lending rules fairer. "We're making sure young people with a HELP debt are treated fairly and supporting them to get into the property market," he said. The changes mean a dual-income household with two student debts could borrow an additional $50,000 in the year they expect to pay off their student loan, according to the government's own analysis. APRA has written to lenders and the industry to advise them of the changes and their new obligations. The revised standards for banks will come into effect on September 30, 2025. In its letter to lenders, APRA said the changes would provide regulatory clarity and reaffirm the flexibility banks had in considering borrowers' individual circumstances. The regulator expects the changes will allow some borrowers with student debts to secure a home loan sooner. Education Minister Jason Clare said the Universities Accord found that banks' assessments of student debt made it harder for young Australians to buy a home. "HECS was never meant to be a handbrake on owning a home," he said. "That's not fair and we're fixing it." The federal government will also move ahead with its plan to reduce student debts by 20 per cent, something it committed to before the May election. During the election campaign, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese promised the legislative changes would be his first priority if his government was to be re-elected. The government has reaffirmed this, saying it will be the first piece of legislation introduced when Parliament returns on July 22, 2025. The 20 per cent reduction will occur once the legislation passes Parliament. However, the government has clarified the discount will be calculated based on a person's HELP debt amount as at June 1, 2025, before indexation was applied. This means the 2025 indexation will only apply to the remaining balance after the 20 per cent reduction.