South Australia’s two largest universities will need to overcome significant obstacles to a union that has now won support from the state government and the institutions’ governing councils.
The universities of Adelaide and South Australia have??to join forces as the new “Adelaide University” from 2026. The prospective institution has already been invited to join the research-intensive Group of Eight, while the state government has??A$445 million (?233 million) for research and scholarship funds, land purchases and international promotion.
However, the merger still requires the consent of state parliament, regulatory approval from the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (Teqsa) and amendment of the federal act governing higher education funding.
State legislative endorsement looms as perhaps the largest obstacle, with shadow education minister John Gardner confirming that his Liberal Party will support a parliamentary inquiry into the proposal. “We need to work through the implications for staff, student choice [and] campus closures,” he explained in a?. “We need to look closely at the evidence behind the government’s big claims about what it means for our state.”
The Labor government’s claims include predictions that the new institution will add A$500 million (?262 million) to the state economy by 2034, employing 1,200 more academics and enrolling 13,000 more South Australians.
The constituent institutions have promised to retain current programmes, partnerships and regional facilities and to eschew compulsory retrenchments for the institution’s first 18 months. Adelaide University will require a new act, modelled largely on the 1990 legislation drawn up for the University of South Australia (UniSA).
While passage appears assured in the lower house, where Labor holds most seats, the bill also requires endorsement in an upper house dominated by the Liberal and minor parties.
South Australia premier Peter Malinauskas said he was happy to support a parliamentary inquiry but wanted the legislation passed “”. Greens member Robert Simms bristled at the premier’s attempt to set a “time limit” on the inquiry. “The parliament will work through its own processes,” he told the?ABC. “That said, I see no reason to try and hold the matter up if we can get access to the information that is relevant.”
The timeline matters to the constituent institutions’ vice-chancellors. The January 2026 launch deadline requires them to be able to promote Adelaide University by July 2024 to give prospective international students time to consider their options, apply for admittance, be accepted, confirm their acceptance and secure visas.
This requires not only a new university act but also an amendment to the key federal legislation, the?, to have the new institution listed as a “Table A” provider eligible for commonwealth teaching grants.?
Both steps are prerequisites for Teqsa accreditation, which is needed before the institution can obtain the??code required to market itself overseas.?
UniSA vice-chancellor David Lloyd said Teqsa had not previously been asked to register a new institution formed from existing universities. “We are absolutely blazing a trail here,” he told?Times Higher Education.
Registration is a “big deal”, said the University of Adelaide’s Peter H?j. “We would like to have the legislation through the state parliament quite early – hopefully at the end of this year.”
That?might prove challenging, with the proposal opposed on many fronts. Polling released last month by the National Tertiary Education Union found that only one in four South Australian university staff supported the proposal, with most doubting its benefits for teaching, research or the public interest.
Lobby group Public Universities Australia has??that a merger would erode academic standards and student satisfaction. A??started by an Adelaide adjunct professor says the proposal lacks a clear rationale or due process and risks dozens of “well-known” downsides.?
Many commentators worry that Australia’s institutional diversity will be undermined by the formation of yet another large metropolitan university. “This will be a very, very differentiated institution,” Professor Lloyd countered.
“I don’t think a vice-chancellor in the country…wouldn’t look with envy at the ability to reset the curriculum from scratch, which is what we are about to do, and to have the wherewithal and the means to focus on delivering research in key domains germane to state and national needs and the global economy.”
Professor H?j said he agreed with the “bigger is not necessarily better” sentiment, “but better is better, and that’s what we’ve been working on”.
