Muldoon Statements Under Fire

By Bob Dey. NZSPA

Contentious statements on tertiary education made in February by the Minister of Finance, Mr. Muldoon, were criticised by Professor I. A. McDougall, president of the New Zealand Association of University Teachers, in the opening plenary at the Easter Council meeting of NZUSA at Massey University.

"I am not for one moment suggesting that I am providing all the answers," said Professor McDougall. "Several of the issues require a great deal of further investigation," he said.

"We can but agree with the Minister that 'no one should underestimate the importance of education in the economy'."

But he said one also had to agree that because economic resources were limited and because education was only one of the claimants for these resources, "it is necessary to closely scrutinise the development of higher education and the direction in which it is heading, and whether we are getting a return commensurate with this type of increased financial obligation.''

Professor McDougall said Mr. Muldoon's conclusion on the brain drain was an incorrect one.

He said Mr. Muldoon's opinion rested on a belief that "headlines tend to obscure the facts"- the Minister had cried figures supplied by the Government statistician "which purport to show that during the 1966-1967 year the number of trained people arriving in New Zealand exceeded considerably those departing to take up permanent residence overseas."

This had led Mr. Muldoon to conclude that "overall then we are not getting a brain drain."

"For two reasons I consider this to be a quite incorrect conclusion drawn from an all too inadequate consideration of the statistics involved."

Of outgoing passengers, "it is certain that a number would be post graduate students going abroad to further their education." As students they were not recorded as trained people when departing. But when they returned they could by that time be trained.

"Mr. Muldoon's statistics indicate a net inflow of 62 scientists in 1967. In 1966 however there were 258 science honours graduates and at least 70 of these would normally have departed from New Zealand in 1967 to continue their studies overseas.

"This would reduce the healthy inflow of scientists to a net outflow in the year concerned."

"The Minister conveniently chose to ignore the fact that a growing economy must rely upon a net inflow of trained personnel. To cope with the increased demands placed upon it by an expanding population and the increased importance of tertiary and technical education, the New Zealand university system has had to recruit two-fifths of its new staff from overseas.

"What is important, therefore, is not whether a net inflow of trained personnel exists in any given time period but whether this net inflow is increasing or decreasing in a relative sense. If a decrease is occurring a brain drain is in fact taking place."

"Australian universities currently pay their lecturers at the top of the scale more than a large number of professors receive in New Zealand.

"The average level of their professional salaries is $4,000 in excess of those in New Zealand."

Superannuation and greater assistance given as far as housing was concerned, more liberal housing loans available to all staff and interest charges lower, a lighter income tax structure - these factors all aided the Australian universities in comparison with New Zealand.

"It will be a sad day for New Zealand if conclusive evidence becomes available of a decline in the quality of our universities because it will lake a decade or more to eliminate the weaknesses introduced by appointing poor quality and inexperienced staff to senior positions.

"A Government which refused to act before such conclusive evidence was to hand would bear a heavy responsibility."

The professor said Mr. Muldoon has selected a period, 1966-1967, when the New Zealand universities had been as competitively placed as they had ever been, regarding salaries. Australian universities had had a major salary increase since then and the devaluation of the New Zealand dollar had helped to place New Zealand university salaries in their worst position in the post-war period.

"It is therefore to the movements of academic staff subsequent to March 1967 to which the Minister should have addressed himself."

"The net inflow of university staff to New Zealand has not only been arrested but reversed by the drastic deterioration in the relative conditions of appointments offered by the New Zealand universities."

Four possible courses were open if the Government did not act.

The universities could:

• Apply quotas and reduce the student intake;

• Increase the work load per stall member;

• Reduce the amount of tuition given to each student;

• Recruit inferior quality staff.

"In practice the universities are already resorting to all four measures and can be expected to do so increasingly as the position becomes aggravated.

"The last (inferior staff) is both the most likely and the most to be feared."

Professor McDougall took issue with Mr. Muldoon's statement that "the costs of failure of a student, consisting of income foregone, teaching costs at university, both revenue and capital, can be assessed at $3,000 per full-time student failing three subjects, or $1,000 per unit."

The assumption was taken that Mr. Muldoon defined cost of educating a student who scores 49 per cent as $1,000 for a failure, but a student scoring 50 per cent would later justify the expense.

"Obviously, in an economic sense, the ability to contribute to society of the individual who has failed has still been increased.

"Finally, there is a real danger of economic loss to the community if low failure rates are attained by passing graduates who are ill-qualified to deal with the task in their particular vocation."