Cape Town - The University of Cape Town (UCT) on Tuesday said amendments to the Higher Education Act could not be made on the assumption that the minister would remain objective.
“You may have a minister today who shares the same goals but in the case of post-liberation African countries, there is a history of encroachment with great detriment,” said UCT’s Vice-Chancellor Max Price.
Price was addressing Parliament’s Portfolio Committee on Higher Education and Training during a two-day public hearing into the Higher Education Amendment (HEA) bill.
Consultations on the HEA bill began in 2013 and the bill was initially tabled in Parliament in 2015.
Among the aims of the amendments is the insertion of new definitions, provision for transformation goals and oversight mechanisms, further provision for the issuing of Ministerial directives, and to provide for indemnification of an independent assessor.
Price said there were many aspects to the HEA bill that were welcome.
“However, we believe that a number of adjustments are still needed,” he said.
Among UCT’s concerns was the detrimental effect widened scope for ministerial interference would have on institutional autonomy and academic freedom.
Price also addressed the proposal of new institutional types such as university colleges and higher education colleges.
“We think these are very interesting ideas which we will probably support,” he said.
However, said Price, there was concern that this proposal had not undergone the necessary processes.
He also expressed UCT’s concern with the amendment that the minister could issue a directive to the university council if he or she deemed their actions unfair.
Price said this would lead to ongoing court cases whereas there already existed the option for recourse to law if one felt they were treated unfairly.
He added that he did not believe judgement on fairness or lack thereof was something a minister should take on.
Price was the second presenter of the day, following the South African Parastatal and Tertiary Institutions Union (Saptu).
Earlier Saptu made its verbal submission.
Speaking on behalf of Saptu as an independent consultant was Professor Derek van der Merwe, emeritus professor of Law at the University of Johannesburg who addressed the Portfolio Committee on Higher Education and Training.
Over two days, the committee would conduct public hearings into the HEA bill.
Van der Merwe addressed the three concerns Saptu had with the HEA bill.
These were transformation goals and oversight mechanisms, ministerial directives and the appointment of an independent assessor and administrator, and increased administrative burden on public higher education institutions.
Van der Merwe stated that the HEA bill tilted the balance too heavily toward public accountability, “to the detriment of institutional autonomy”.
He said that in terms of transformation goals, the HEA bill addressed the matter with a “broad-brushed stroke” and that there was definitional vagueness.
Equally, said Van der Merwe, “oversight mechanisms” had no legal definition and thus needed to be given content.
“In the absence of more detail, the conclusion is inevitable that the ‘appropriateness’ of the oversight mechanisms is determined by the Minister alone,” said Van der Merwe.
“The dearth of detail is cause for real concern”.
He added that the grounds on which the Minister could appoint an independent assessor or an administrator could be questioned.
As it stood within the HEA bill, Van der Merwe said there existed “ample opportunity for intrusion of political ideology”.
He added that the HEA bill would also present an increased administrative burden on higher education institutions.
The Higher Education Transformation Network, the Council on Higher Education, and the Catholic Institute of Education would also address the committee on Tuesday.
African News Agency