We thank Lee Duffield, the graduate representative in the University of Queensland senate, for his report about the Gaza student encampment at that university, the only one in Queensland to have a tents set up during the genocide in Gaza. If the Australian governments won’t recognise 🇵🇸 perhaps Palestinians need a tent emabassy? Ian Curr ed., 3 June 2024
–oOo–
The Senate has had three meetings this year including one conducted on line on 16 May to discuss the protest activity on campus. I have four articles, (a) about the Gaza protests; (b) pressure coming from the student Union for progress in rebuilding the Union precinct, plus concerns they have about funding the union; (c) a new initiative by UQ to make-good past underpayment of casual staff, and (d) questions about inflation of the value of marks and gradings in universities. These have been getting lengthy, around 700 words each, so the first two are posted here as Newsletter #2 for this year, and the other two reports will come a little later as #3. Thank you for attention to these messages and to those who have been in touch appreciating the content.
Lee Duffield
3 June 2024
Four or five messages are sent each year; if not required please reply “stop messages”.
“GAZA” PROTEST CAMPS ON UQ GREAT COURT
The conflict in Gaza came home to UQ at the end of April with the setting up of the students4palestine encampment, and a rival one, Shalom, in the Great Court – running through to early June.
Talking it out
Under an agreement struck on 1.6.24 among UQ, UQU, and the protest group, UQ Muslim Students for Palestine, the university undertook to publish information that was demanded on its investments and research, related to the Middle East conflict, conditional on the tent city closing down; which had taken place by the morning of 3rd June.
Wording provided by the Vice Chancellor, Debbie Terry, who was actively engaged in the process, included: “The University will publish a statement on its approach to sensitive research and, where possible, compile a list of its research and holdings in agreed areas as part of its annual disclosures.” It was also noted that not all protestors would feel bound by the agreement, but as of this date appear to have gone along with it also.
I had visited the tent lines, and on the day of a university Senate meeting to discuss the issue, 16.5.24, followed a “pro-Palestine” march around the campus to the Advanced Engineering building – all to be better informed.
Students had been campaigning actively, and about 100 were involved; there was shouting inside the building foyer, overall not much to write about in terms of disruptions.
The university management have been typically conscientious throughout the episode about safety issues or protecting ordinary study activity, and also allowing for free speech. See statements released by the Chancellor and Vice Chancellor on 17.5.24.
There were incidents during May, such as an assault on a security officer, and police being brought in to get two protestors off the roof of one building. A university statement said those two persons who were arrested were not from the university community, i.e. not students, staff or alumni.
Is UQ a public place for protests?
That points to an issue, as to whether the university campus is a public place where demonstrations that might be led by non-university groups can go on uninterrupted. Legal advice seems to be that UQ is not the same as a private body corporate, as it has been formed under specific legislation, and so has limitations on banning members of the general public – but can call on the police to intervene where there is trouble.
Talks started early among student representatives of the protest groups and student Union (UQU), and university officials wanting to take precautions, such as asking for a register of who was in camp, and also pressing hard for the camps to be removed after a short time, pointing to the coming examinations period, from 1.6.24.
It was thankfully all a pale shadow of the police raids on American campuses, to take down the encampments; students demonstrating over “Gaza” were suspended at Columbia and Princeton universities and evicted from dormitories, their residential colleges.
Commentary
Some comments:
The “Palestine” side at UQ had strong off-campus affiliations, as with the Make Peace organisation that focuses on research and investments that might benefit Israel’s war capacity, and the Greens political party, most visible on the ground. One of that party’s leadership, Jonathan Sriranganathan, published a treatment of the camp experience as a democratic idyll, and reported demands of the protest:
Shut down the Boeing on-campus research centre and get all weapons companies off campus; refuse business with any companies or educational institutions “complicit in the genocide”; transparently disclose all UQ investments and divest from any companies that might be profiting from the Gaza invasion.
A meeting of over 500 students called by the Union on 29.5.24 overwhelmingly carried a motion on the same lines, and the agreement of 1st June, above, should be seen as encouraging.
The Shalom group, formed by Jewish students, had taken up a conservative line throughout: that they had been forced to put up a counter-presence but thought the campus should be for study not activism.
Is this 1968, or ‘77, or ‘84?
Parallels with previous periods of protest activity on the campus are not that strong. UQ has been the site of many movements getting started, initiated by people within the university community, with friends and allies brought in to take part. The institution itself has not so much been tackled by activist movements from outside its walls, and to the recollection of several people asked about this, has not had tent camps set up — least of all in the Great Court. [Editor’s Note: I can remember tents being set up during the July 1971 anti-apartheid ‘Springbok’ strike at the University of Queensland. UQ Registrar Sam Raynor personally took down the tents. Also in 1977 there’s UQ Student Union Civil Liberties Campaign Group set up a tent in the great court. ]
Past forums and activist work usually would be concentrated in the student Union precinct, a democratic centre, or sanctuary set apart from “official” university real estate, and this year it is the centre of efforts to guarantee that it keeps that status.
Our localised concerns here in Queensland look less important where the dominating fact is the horrific death toll in Gaza, and callousness of the conflict, especially destruction of the lives of so many children, in a “youthful” population where there has been a high birth rate over many years. It is far away but all parties need to try and contribute to a just peace in the Middle East, even while intransigents among the protagonists there still look determined to continue with the violence.
REBUILDING AND MANAGING THE UNION COMPLEX – ONGOING STORY
The student organisation, the University of Queensland Union (UQU), has stepped up demands for certainty over the redevelopment of the Union precinct, and over future funding.
Principles of the Union space
It has published a statement outlining its concerns, saying the university needs to adhere to a 1961 agreement putting management of the complex in the Union’s hands:
“The Union Complex opened in 1961. Its intent then was to provide a space that allowed students to gather and share their ideas and learnings, adding to the holistic university experience. There was a noticeably clear value placed on the role the student union played in providing students with a ‘whole’ education and developing a true sense of community on campus.
“Today, more than sixty years later, the Union Complex remains a student-centric hub that creates a sense of community and vitality on campus that is maintained and driven by UQU, who provide the services, facilities, and social opportunities provided for students within the complex. Without a physical location for your student union to operate out of, there is a direct threat to the ongoing provision of these services, student spaces, and social activities that thousands of students benefit from. Everyday thousands of students pass through the complex, engaging with equity.”
The current rebuilding program was announced by UQ in 2022, after cancellation of a plan that would have involved its demolition and transfer of its management to the university administration.
Rebuilding
The new scheme, to date, will require the demolition of the Building 21A North (North branch of the Union Building) and 21D (Student Services), with extensive reconstruction of other buildings, and mothballing of the Schonell Theatre for a future time – one of the main factors being finding funds for the project overall.
Its ground rules promise continuity with the 1961 principles, of creating a space for learning and a democratic culture — except for the absence of a guarantee on UQU being responsible for management. There is a consultative process with Union representation.
A UQ communique states:
“The redeveloped complex will maintain its legacy as a space where students can connect and feel safe and supported, and will remain a home for debate and activism on campus.
“The Union Complex name will be kept, as will the village-style design. Where possible, existing elements of the Union Complex will be retained, including the Schonell Theatre, Forum and Union Building (21A).
“Our community will be kept up to date throughout each phase of the project.
“The redevelopment of the Union Complex will be carried out in stages over the coming years – helping to minimise the disruption to the community. A timeline for the redevelopment works will be confirmed in the second half of 2024.”
Current concerns of the students’ Union
The UQU leadership have outlined concerns about the way it has been going, pressing for:
- More detailing of the plan, including timetabling;
- Satisfactory consultation and agreement on the temporary relocation of Union services, continuance of its business outlets, and arrangements for private businesses that also will be displaced while the rebuilding goes on;
- Affirmation of the continuation of the complex under UQU management.
They have researched and dismissed a story that a previous Union administration signed over control of the complex to university management, arguing that it would not have been possible to change the contract, that whatever might have taken place lacks documentation, and that in any event, key personnel from that time aver such a hand-over did not happen.
Funding the Union
They have also attached the case to the funding issue, as it coincides with renewal-time for a three-year Union budget. Proceeds from the transfer of a building to university administration, for which the UQU received $1.3-million p.a., are set to run out, while they are seeking a bigger share of UQ’s SSAF (Student Services and Amenities Fee). (The SSAF, collected from students and passed to universities by the federal government, replaces fees that formerly went directly to the Union. Universities around the country have been taking much of the money for themselves to provide a range of student services which they decide on, not the student body. UQ says the Union currently receives half the university’s total allocation from SSAF, which including a commitment for buildings upkeep would go into a total transfer of $8.3-million p.a.).
All the above concerns were addressed in a dedicated issue of the newspaper, Semper Floreat, and presented to the university Senate on 30.4.24 by the elected student representatives, Richard Lee and Josh Marsh, both former Treasurers of UQU, and by the Union President, Angus McRae, who has observer status and was invited to speak.
I had asked for a report to Senate on the Union precinct development and was impressed to hear cogent and well-informed statements from these representatives.
It demonstrated the importance of representation of key interest groups on governing bodies of the universities, because they will get the benefit of a wide range of expertise, specific to Higher Education. A concerted campaign over more than ten years, by conservative interests, to get university Senates or Councils cut down to the small size of company boards, to be populated mainly by company directors or managers, may have run its course. Ensuring these bodies include knowledge of Higher Education is one of the principles listed in the federal government’s Higher Education Accord last year.
Lee Duffield
3 June 2024