Prior to the meeting, DVC (International), Anna Ciccarelli, gave an overview of the international student market and prospects for UQ. A nation-wide downturn is upon us, but is coming off historical highs, and UQ is likely to fare a little better than others. Whether the downturn is only for a year or two remains to be seen.
As a member of the Steering Committee overseeing this project to offer opportunities for staff to enhance their health and well-being and achieve a better work-life balance, I rose to speak of the success of the trial of this program over the past months. A report of the trial is imminent. A February staff survey revealed strong support for the initiative, and this has been followed up with high participation rates in the limited range of activities that have been offered. I said that I would like to see continued, proper resourcing of the program, which I think is not only good for the staff as individuals, but good for the corporate health of the institution.
The response of the Executive Director (Operations) was that the initiative had already been judged a success and ongoing funding would be provided. I now await the details of that.
The report was commended for its presentation, particularly the graphs and stats. Members commented on improvements in the number of women staff occupying higher-level positions (with still some way to go in places) and lamented the low indigenous participation rates.
Related to this latter point, the review of the ATSI Unit was included in the agenda papers and discussed. It was acknowledged that UQ had, in effect, marginalised the unit by leaving it too much to its own devices for too long (my words). A raft of recommendations is to be acted on.
One of the Audit Committee's roles is to oversee Assurance & Risk Management Services' investigations of fraud and misconduct by staff. Senate has always received brief summaries of these investigations (no names in order to protect privacy) and individual senators have had the opportunity to view reports of the investigations off-line. I have on a couple of occasions viewed such reports, to satisfy myself that staff being investigated for misconduct are being treated similarly, regardless of their rank in the organisation.
The new chair of the Audit Committee proposed that the summaries stop coming to Senate and that instead Senate get a statement of assurance that matters are being dealt with appropriately. I spoke against this, saying that openness and transparency is important and that under the National Governance Protocols, Senate is meant to monitor systems of control and accountability. I received support from Andrew Bonnell, fellow elected staff member.
The Chancellor claimed that normal governance procedure (presumably at the big end of town) is to delegate such minutiae . External senator and lawyer, Margaret Brown suggested a compromise whereby Senate get a report "highlighting exceptions" (presumably investigations that are deemed to be noteworthy). This was endorsed. The Chair of the Audit Committee, external senator Grant Murdoch, reminded me that I could ask questions on notice about the flavour, number, etc of investigations and he would of course answer them. Looks like I'll have to add that to the annual 'to-do' list.
Routine reports of sub-committees, Academic Board, HUPP changes, rule changes, etc.
