The PM and "Fat"

How do you react to the Prime Minister's comment on Budget night that there is still "fat" in the university system ?

I'm sure there isn't fat in the university system. We have calculated that inflationary costs have put the universities down about $44 million. And the rise in rolls have been higher than we anticipated.

The Budget also stated that universities represent an area where significant savings can be made. How do you react to that?

If the policy is for an open university system, we can't make those savings. But if there are to be increasing restrictions on courses.....They would have to make such restrictions to tailor the expenditure to the amount of income, by cutting back on activities.

"If it (open entry) means that a student can go to a tertiary institution of his/her choice and take the choice of his/her own choice, then we don't have open entry."

Do you think that is now the thrust of the Government's policy? To end the open entry system?

I don't.....1 don't know. They certainly want to save money in the education field. I think their policy is that people have the right to go to university but [unclear: tha] they can't necessarily take the course of their choice. That is what I would interpret at the present time.

Aside from course entry restrictions, what else could be involved in further savings?

I think all savings come back to reducing the number of students. The problem is, you can make quite a number of reductions without really making any savings at all. While you keep the same bumber of buildings going, for example, you still have the same overheads. So once you've tightened your belt as much as you can, then you've got to start almost closing down a building or two before you start saving anything.

Could that be an argument that private overseas students don't cost the taxpayer very much?

Yes; within certain limits you can always take a few more students. Some areas, like Accountancy, are already stretched to the limit. They couldn't take any more. Similarly if you start cutting back you don't save much money.

On the question of open entry, do you think there is any potential conflict between National Party policy and practice ?

It is a matter of how you interpret "open entry". If it means that a student can go to a tertiary institution of his choice and take the course of his choice, then we don't have open entry. But if they have to take their second or third choice of courses, if that's the interpretation, then we have it. But the "openness" has certainly declined.

"Once you've tightened your belt as much as you can, then you've got to start almost closing down a building or two before you start saving anything."

Do you think the university libraries are likely to be in for a critical time?

Well, the index we used in costing books has moved from 100 to 290 since 1974. Nearly a threefold increase. We would hope that this can be alleviated in the amount of money going to libraries, but of course the individual universities have the choice as to how much they put into this area out of their total clock allocation. There is no doubt that nothing like the anticipated volume of books has gone into the libraries. And there have been cubacks in the numbers of periodicals as well.

The Minister has said the $3m cut is to be made in the salary area. Can you envisage possible changes to the tenure system ?

The individual university councils are the employers. I know some of the universities are looking at this. You are thinking of how they might reduce staff?

Yes.

Well there are ways of doing this. People retiring early perhaps, or moving sideways. Certainly with the more static roll numbers there will be less opportunity for the recruitment of younger staff. The people vital to the life of the university.