University of Auckland Council Meeting 2023-10-16

Mon Oct 16 2023 13:00:00 GMT+1300 (New Zealand Daylight Time)

Transcript

Note: transcription and dioarization are automated and may contain errors.

00:00 Speaker 1: already opened with a karakia before the briefings. So I'm now going to move that the apologies be noted. And we have apologies from Rajan and Julia Arnot-Nene, and I think we must, and we have one from Jonathan Mason as well.

00:24 Speaker 1: All right. Okay. So, um, well, move that those be, um, those apologies be noted. Perhaps I could ask, uh, Dawn to second that please. Thank you.

00:36 Speaker 1: Okay.

00:37 Speaker 1: Now, um, then I'm now disclosures of interest by members. I'd like to draw members attention to the conflicts of interest policy and ask that anybody that needs to disclose any interest in any of the items on the agenda would do so now, please.

00:54 Speaker 1: So Kath and Hala, you're both raising your hands.

01:00 Speaker 2: So current family members and future family members studying at the university.

01:06 Thank

01:06 Speaker 1: you.

01:07 Hala? I am

01:08 Speaker 3: currently studying at the university.

01:11 Great.

01:12 Speaker 1: Anybody else? Obviously, that is one of the main papers we will be considering today. Is there anybody else who has a conflict in respect of that?

01:20 No,

01:21 Speaker 4: I've paid the last of my Auckland University fees.

01:24 Speaker 4: at the beginning of the year. Oh, well, congratulations. I take it. Congratulations,

01:30 Speaker 1: not that you've stopped paying Auckland University. Congratulations that I take it that that means that your child is no longer needs to,

01:37 is

01:38 Speaker 4: no longer attending university. Graduates on the 12th, but I've paid up. So I don't think I have a conflict. Excellent. Excellent. Excellent.

01:47 Speaker 1: No, no intention to pay any fees next year. Very good. All right. Well, I will move that.

01:54 Speaker 1: those disclosures be noted and I don't I mean those with that disclosure and we're comfortable having you as part of the council meeting and I'm going to ask Kathy to second that please thank you all right so now in terms of conferment of degrees we have a number of degrees that need to be conferred so by the authority vested in by resolution of the University of Auckland Council, I, Cecilia Tarrant, Chancellor, confer the degrees stated upon those who, within their several faculties, have satisfied the requirements of this university.

02:38 Speaker 1: All right, now we'll move on to the next matter of business, which is the minutes. We have the minutes from Part A from the last meeting of the 21st of August. We'll take those minutes as And are there any comments on those minutes from anyone?

03:03 Okay,

03:04 Speaker 5: if there are, Jan? Sorry, really minor point on page 11 under the report of Senate, I think where it says this item was presented by Pro Vice Chancellor Education Professor, she drew Senate's attention to the following, this probably should be Council's attention.

03:23 Speaker 1: So Wendy, I

03:23 Speaker 5: should have emailed you.

03:25 Yeah,

03:26 Speaker 1: no, no, no. Good catch. Thank you. Yeah. Very good catch. Okay. Right. So with that change, if there are no other comments to the minutes, I will move that the minutes be taken as confirmed. And I'll ask Jan to second that.

03:48 Speaker 1: Thank you very much. Now, matters arising.

03:53 Speaker 1: Not elsewhere.

03:55 Speaker 1: We've got a note here about the Knowledge Equity Network and we understand that there will be an update provided to the Council in the December meeting.

04:06 Speaker 1: Thank you.

04:08 Speaker 1: So now we'll move to the Vice-Chancellor's report.

04:13 Kia

04:14 Speaker 6: ora. Thank you, Chancellor and good afternoon, everyone. So I'll take the report as read as usual and I'll be happy I'm happy to answer any questions on that report but as I always do I'll just supplement with a few additional comments since the report was submitted.

04:33 Speaker 6: So I won't talk too much about the Senate review because that will come up as part of our item under the Senate.

04:41 Speaker 6: I do want to congratulate everybody who was engaged and involved in the award of the posthumous degree at the weekend in the Farley.

04:50 Speaker 6: It was a wonderful ceremony and it was, of course, the second ceremony in a series of three. And we have the third one coming up very soon. But it was a really well attended event. And I really want to acknowledge our Tommen students, who did fantastically well with both dance and celebration on Saturday. So congratulations to everyone involved in that. You will, of course, be aware of a number of things that I've been talking about recently. We've just initiated the refresh of Tome Atatete, the strategy.

05:22 Speaker 6: So the vision goes until 2030. The strategy is a five-year strategy and it runs into four years now. So we'll be starting to look at that strategy and understand over the next three-year cycle what we need to do in order to really accelerate elements of that, including the curriculum transformation, but also, of course, enhancing the support for the research centres and institutes that we've built into that programme, along with the engagement strategy.

05:52 Speaker 6: and supporting the learner success plan. You will, I know that council's aware of this, but you will have seen that the students held a protest on campus quite recently, just over a week ago last Friday around student accommodation and costs associated with that.

06:10 Speaker 6: I was really pleased that the students really conducted a very well-maintained protest and we had visitors from a number of parliamentary parties.

06:22 Speaker 6: And I have to say that I think the students and the university work really together in order to execute the students right to protest during that afternoon.

06:33 Speaker 6: In addition to that, I received a letter from the free speech union. This was in relation to a engagement strategy that has been put in place through the science faculty. So the science faculty have really pleasingly decided that they're going to run a a series of dialogues in the science faculty and set that engagement plan in place and the free speech union wrote to me about that not really understanding what that process was about and so I've spoken to the dean of science and we've responded to that letter and the dean of science has been engaged in responding to that letter given that it's actually led through the science faculty.

07:17 Speaker 6: I attended the university's New Zealand vice chancellors meeting on Thursday last week. And of course, as you will understand, lots of focus on briefings to incoming ministers.

07:29 Speaker 6: That's a bit on hold at the moment for obvious reasons, but really also trying to understand what the higher education review might look like in the future.

07:39 Speaker 6: And of course, two key areas for us there, not just thinking about the future funding for higher education, but also the size and shape of it as a nation.

07:50 Speaker 6: We are aware that there's going to be a collaboration fund made available from the government for the universities to work together to support some of those areas where we're already collaborating, such as languages.

08:03 Speaker 6: So we're involved in working with a number of universities around creating a language center.

08:09 Speaker 6: So nationally trying to make sure we don't lose that capacity and capability.

08:14 Speaker 6: And education is another area where we're doing that and there'll be opportunities to think more about that as well.

08:21 Speaker 6: I think I'll leave it there. There's plenty more I could talk about in response to the report. Lots of very exciting things happening and most recently engaged in the India Business Summit, which of course is also leading to some further engagement in February where we'll be hosting the QS India Summit in Chennai.

08:43 Speaker 6: Happy to take questions Chancellor.

08:46 Speaker 1: Thank you. Thank you. Are there questions for the Vice Chancellor on her report? I've got

08:58 Speaker 7: one. Thanks,

09:00 Speaker 5: Cecilia. The Times High Education, it's really good that we stayed at 150, or we're at 150.

09:13 Speaker 5: I think that they've changed the analysis to now 18 performance indicators. A little while ago we did a project to look at what the indicators were and how we could specifically target activities to make sure that we were best that we could be in each of the categories. I presume that we'll do the similar exercise with the additional five performance indicators.

09:43 Speaker 5: I think it would be quite useful to come back to council and say here's the 18 and here's how we're targeting our efforts towards each of the new ones and the existing ones.

09:56 Thanks

09:56 Speaker 6: Jan and thank you for prompting that discussion because you'll recall at December meeting of council last year we briefed the council on the overall ranking strategy. There is now in the university a ranking strategy group. We meet frequently and we work with the academic across different component parts of the university, faculties and disciplines.

10:19 Speaker 6: And we're working on the QS, the Times Higher Education and the Shanghai Jatong rankings.

10:24 Speaker 6: That's the ARWU, the three that we want to bring into the top 100.

10:30 Speaker 6: We're obviously doing very well in the QS in a number of ways, both in the future 17, where we remain, as you know, in the top 10 and in 68.

10:40 Speaker 6: In the Times High, changing that methodology.

10:42 Speaker 6: So it's as a result of a change methodology that we've been able to push up in the QS.

10:48 Speaker 6: They're bringing in things like sustainability and a whole range of international outlook measures. We're watching the Times High one and part of engagement with them through some of the summits that I attend and others attend is understanding how this is going to impact us. So we've got a meeting, I think, in two weeks with our ranking strategy group to look at the Times High.

11:10 Speaker 6: high methodology unfortunately for the time side i didn't actually tell people that they were changing the methodology this year and so all of the australian group of eight universities went down many of well all of the new zealand ones either stayed static or went down and many of the the ones on the continent too in terms of europe uh so so i think they know they need to do a bit better engagement the other area we're looking at is with the arwu which is our high-size strategy and looking to ensure that we retain and recruit really high-quality researchers and research teams. And we've just been working through our strategic hire process and are able to start looking at clusters of people that we can bring in now to support the areas of strength we want to grow. And particularly doing this in order to make sure we don't lose the science base in New Zealand right now with some of the changes in other universities happening.

12:10 Speaker 6: So the rankings group is looking at that also. So taking the Stanford 2 % top researcher list that's just been published and ensuring that we don't lose people on that list and seeing where we have opportunities to ensure that New Zealand doesn't lose people on that list.

12:28 Speaker 6: So it's a multi-pronged approach. We'll bring the briefing to council in December to show where we're going and what we've got in terms of resourcing that.

12:40 Speaker 6: that strategy.

12:42 Thanks. Are

12:45 Speaker 1: there any other questions or comments that people would like to make?

12:49 Yeah,

12:50 Speaker 3: I just have two quick questions if that's all right Dawn. The first one is just double checking, it says the completion of the Recreation Wellness Centre remains at June 2024.

13:00 Speaker 6: Is this still accurate just because it contradicts somewhere else in the later papers?

13:05 Speaker 6: Yeah, yeah well this course it's a moving feast, Harlow, it could And considering where we started with this during COVID, that we're probably talking about minimal changes to that timeline, I think we should be really thrilled. Adrienne, what's the latest, because I know Simon's been working on trying to get that pin down.

13:26 Speaker 8: Yes, Simon is concerned about June. We're certainly not, we haven't come to an agreement about additional days with the contractor as yet, but he does, he is concerned about perhaps a potential delay to August.

13:45 Yeah, I

13:47 Speaker 3: think that was in the capital expenditure and that's what I brought

13:49 Speaker 6: it up.

13:50 Speaker 3: Not

13:51 Speaker 6: clear about that yet, Harla, but I think we should anticipate,

13:55 Yeah,

13:56 Speaker 3: understandable. And the second one is, you mentioned the student protests. I was just wondering how the university is looking to respond to the students' concerns.

14:05 Yeah,

14:05 Speaker 6: and so you'll be aware, Harrah, that we have. I have, and so has Adrian and Brendan, responded to the students' concerns and engaged quite extensively with the students in this regard. Adrian, I don't know if you want to make any comments in response to the communications, but also the meetings that we've been having.

14:24 Yeah.

14:25 Speaker 8: Or briefly, we have responded in writing around costs for accommodation and reassured students that we are not looking to make a significant surplus from accommodation, actually breaking even is more of our goal. And also just provided a comparison about actually the costs at the University of Auckland accommodation, which are I think for catered accommodation, we might be almost the lowest priced provider in New Zealand. Not by a lot, but lower. And certainly very competitive in the non-catered space.

15:15 Speaker 6: Thanks, Adrian. And Hala, actually you do give me the opportunity just to make a comment, but it is unfortunate that the media decided to report that we were the highest cost in catered accommodation across New Zealand when in fact we're not and as Adrian's pointed out as the opposite so you know we've managed to get that corrected but it's a bit too late once it's been published I have written to the media outlet concerned and expressed my concern that there was no fact checking with us in terms of understanding you know what was being said on that day and how it was portrayed to the media. I think it's really important to get those sorts of information pieces into the media so that people understand how universities work and how we're funded and how students have to manage and maintain their costs. But I think it is important also to get the facts correct.

16:11 Yeah,

16:12 Speaker 3: I did read those media articles, so it's good that you touched on those. Thank you.

16:18 Sorry,

16:19 Speaker 2: just picking up on another thing in relation to the accommodation.

16:23 Speaker 2: I'm wondering, some students came to us last week talking about the change in the residential advisor subsidy and the impact that they'd had on their ability to be residential advisors and was wondering whether or not that was part of the protest as well.

16:40 Speaker 2: No, it

16:40 Speaker 6: wasn't part of the protest, but I don't, and I couldn't respond to it just now, Kath, I don't know enough about it to make a response, I don't know whether Adrian would, but it wasn't a big feature of the protest at all.

16:53 I

16:53 Speaker 3: think it hadn't been decided by the time of the protest that's why it may not have been part of the protest but I know that they've been very vocal about it but I guess for context to everyone else typically residential advisors who live on site with accommodation get a 25% off discount because part of the requirement of the job is they have to live on site but next year they're looking at a 0% reduction and that's where the conflict comes from.

17:46 Speaker 2: impact on their ability to provide services residential advisors.

17:51 Speaker 2: That was a concern that was raised.

17:54 Speaker 2: No, thank

17:54 Speaker 8: you for that. I mean, I think we are, it's a very complex employment environment. And so we've been following advice, working through how we provide on-call services, which we are likely to provide in a different way than we have in the past in terms of using residential advisors.

18:18 Speaker 8: So the services provided are likely to be different and we will separate out payment for those services from charging for accommodation. So

18:29 Speaker 7: it's keeping those two transactions quite distinct.

18:37 Okay. All

18:40 Speaker 1: right. But obviously something that along with the increase in accommodation that the executive needs to Keep an eye on. Okay. Anything else? Sorry, just

18:51 Speaker 2: it would be quite useful if we could have an update on that at the next meeting just to understand that distinction that you've raised, if

18:59 Speaker 7: that's possible.

19:01 Speaker 7: Thank you.

19:05 Yep. Okay.

19:11 Speaker 1: Okay. Anything from anybody else?

19:17 Speaker 1: Okay, just a couple of things for me just to really add on to what you've said, Dawn. I attended the Blues Awards. They were fabulous. It was a great evening. Just the range of things that our students are doing in the arts, in the community, in innovation and in sport, they're always inspiring and they were fabulous, absolutely fabulous.

19:44 Speaker 1: And obviously with Matatini having been here, you know, having been this year, there were a number of Kapahaka performers that we were able to recognise. So that was fabulous. I think also you mentioned the new Poe. I don't know if everybody's seen it. It's on the corner of Grafton Road and Simon Street. It's fabulous. And I think we should record our thanks to Scott and Vicky St. John who sponsored the Creation of the POE I think is probably the best way to express that but you know absolutely fabulous.

20:24 Speaker 1: So all right with that I will move that the report of the Vice-Chancellor be noted and perhaps Kath I could have you second that.

20:38 Speaker 1: Good thank you very much. Okay now we're going to the reports of the Council committees.

20:44 Speaker 1: in part A and the first report is from the Audit and Risk Committee. Unfortunately we do not have the chair of Audit and Risk with us but obviously Adrian and Tim are here and I am here we were all at that. So are there any questions around the minutes in part A of the Audit and Risk Committee?

21:10 Speaker 1: Okay radio. I'm going to move that those minutes be received and perhaps Jan I'll ask you to second that since you were at the committee. Now I'll move to the capital expenditure committee.

21:23 Speaker 1: Now you see the minutes there and as I quite rightly pointed out yeah oh that's like that's in part B. So anyway minutes the capital expenditure committee are there. Are there any questions on the part A minutes? Nope okay I'll move that they received and perhaps Kathy I could have you second that since you were at the meeting and then we have the terms of reference obviously this is part of the annual review of the terms of reference of the capital expenditure committee are there any questions around the essentially there was really the changes really related to a change in titles and then there were just a couple of typos that we fixed up. So are there any questions or concerns around those terms of reference?

22:24 Speaker 1: Okay.

22:26 Speaker 1: I'm going to move that they be adopted and I'm going to ask Rob to second those.

22:33 Speaker 1: Good.

22:33 Speaker 1: Okay. So now I'll move to the minutes of the Finance Committee.

22:41 Speaker 1: And the minutes the Finance Committee are there.

22:44 Speaker 1: Was there anything that Rob or Tim that you wanted to point out relative to the minutes?

22:51 Well,

22:52 Speaker 9: certainly not the part A minutes. Obviously, in part B, we did discuss the student fee setting and that paper's

23:02 now

23:02 Speaker 1: in front of us. Yeah, I think that is part A. Anyway, that's all right. It's all good. Yep.

23:09 Can

23:09 Speaker 10: I just say, Cecilia, I emailed, I got the email here, Jackie, to say that to tender my apologies for that meeting, but it wasn't recorded. Sorry, I missed that when you went through it.

23:26 Speaker 1: Okay. Yep. No, no. That's the finance committee, John. Yeah. Yes. Okay. Adrian, if we could just, Wendy, if we could just note that.

23:41 Speaker 1: Oh, no, there is, we do, we have, do you have you noted as an apology?

23:45 Speaker 1: Okay.

23:46 Speaker 1: Kathy Quinn, John Paitai, and Julia Anot-Nene were noted as apologies.

23:52 Speaker 1: On page 38 of Diligent.

23:55 Oh,

23:56 Speaker 9: sorry. Okay.

23:57 That's

23:58 Speaker 1: all good. That's all good. Good. So I'm going to move that those minutes be received, and then I'm going to, and then we'll go on to the paper on the fees.

24:17 Speaker 1: Okay, so I'm going to move that they be received.

24:19 Speaker 1: And John, I'll ask you just a second.

24:22 Speaker 1: Those minutes?

24:24 Speaker 1: Okay.

24:25 Speaker 1: We then move to the report on domestic student fees.

24:32 Speaker 1: And obviously it's the report on the fees.

24:35 Speaker 1: Actually, I think that's incorrect.

24:37 Speaker 1: I see in my agenda.

24:38 Speaker 1: It says report on the fees 23 and the student fees 24.

24:42 Speaker 1: It should be 24 and 25.

24:45 Speaker 1: is what actually the paper is. And so just note that for the minutes.

24:53 Speaker 1: Yeah, so this is the paper and I'm going to invite, let's see, Dawn, whether you wanted to start by making a comment. And then obviously we have Tim and Adrian with us in respect of this document.

25:13 Just trying

25:14 Speaker 6: to get the page number up. Sorry.

25:16 Speaker 1: I said page 41. This is page 41 of Diligent.

25:21 Speaker 1: The paper on the domestic student fees 2024 and international student fees 2025.

25:32 Sorry,

25:33 Speaker 6: my iPad is not taking me there.

25:37 Speaker 6: Would you like me to kick off? Do you want to

25:39 Speaker 8: start, Agent? Yes, I'm happy to do that.

25:43 Speaker 8: So I'm happy to introduce the recommendations for fees and I thought I could do this in kind of four parts. So we've got domestic fees, international fees, the compulsory student services fee and university general fees. So moving first to domestic fees in terms of the context and our regulatory environment, the university is regulated with respect to the amount of fees that The annual maximum fee movement for 2024 is 2.8%. We are recommending that domestic tuition fees are increased by the maximum of 2.8% as this will enable us to address underlying cost movements and in conjunction with the additional that the government has announced for 2024. We'll also address some of the underfunding that we have been challenged with in 2023, and is certainly apparent across the sector, with many universities needing now to seriously address their cost base. The other aspects of domestic tuition fees, we need to separately set fees for micro-credentials. This is a very new We have only three approved micro-credentials where we receive a government subsidy for those.

27:23 Speaker 8: And we have one approved micro-credential where we can charge the market price. Our recommendation is that we charge the maximum allowable under the regulations for the micro-credentials where we receive a subsidy. We haven't had an increase since 2020.

27:43 Speaker 8: and we see this is important to keep pace with cost increases. And for the micro-credentials with no subsidy, we are recommending that this be delegated to the Vice-Chancellor to set a fee and that we would then report this back to Council.

28:05 Speaker 8: I'll pause there in case there are any questions or in case Dawn wants to make a comment.

28:09 Speaker 6: I think you've jumped in at the right place really.

28:13 Speaker 6: I think in the preamble to the paper, Council can see some of the background context, which of course is changing constantly, but some of the context to the rationale for both the projected movements in the domestic and in the international. And I'm happy when we get to those points to answer any questions, but I think from the domestic student movement that we're just looking at at the moment around the micro-credentials and the the fee maxima. I think Adrian's pointed to that.

28:48 Yeah,

28:49 Speaker 1: and obviously there's a summary of the expected increase in costs and the necessity for increasing fees and that sort of thing on page 45 of Diligent.

29:06 Speaker 7: Yeah.

29:07 Speaker 1: I don't know whether Tim or Rob, whether you want to make any further comment on that or whether we'll just open it up to question specifically on the domestic fees. Rob?

29:18 Speaker 9: Yes, I will make a few comments. And they're in the context of the forecast that we discussed in Part B of the Finance Committee. But fair to say the outlook is more subdued as we get more challenged with student numbers. And so I just don't think there's any choices here for us in respect of revenue.

29:42 Speaker 9: because we're going to be quite challenged in the coming years on costs as well.

29:49 Speaker 9: The forecast still shows the surplus, but it's clearly not in the levels that we were previously seeing. And we're still well below the 3%.

30:02 Right,

30:04 Speaker 1: that's right. The 3% that the TUC requires that we operate at.

30:42 Speaker 1: reducing surplus, so to speak, compared to 2022 and 2021.

30:53 Speaker 1: So are there any questions?

30:57 Speaker 1: As I say, there's a good sort of summary on page 45 of Diligent on the domestic tuition fees.

31:05 Speaker 1: Are there any questions for Adrian, Dawn, Rob or Tim as in respect of the recommendation which is we have the attached domestic fee schedule in the paper but essentially the recommendation is that we increase domestic fees by 2.8% which is the maximum allowed by the government.

31:35 Should

31:35 Speaker 8: I move on to international fees?

31:38 Speaker 1: I think that I might I'm just looking at this whether I will do each of these separately Okay so I think what I'd like to do is I would like to move that we approve the attached domestic fees schedule for 2024 and if that could be Rob if I could ask you to second that Thank you Domestic fee schedule, I guess we have the micro -credentials that have got a set number that is regulated. And then we also, you raised this thing about the authorising the Vice-Chancellor to set fees for the non-government funded micro-credentials and those delivered offshore.

32:30 Speaker 1: I think

32:31 Speaker 8: we've put that in a resolution coming up because we combined it with a delegation for international as well.

32:39 Speaker 1: Okay, okay right here then I'll stop that then. We'll just go to international then right we'll just yeah.

32:49 Okay,

32:50 Speaker 8: thank you. So with international fees, we are setting fees for 2025 and the recommendation is that for international that we adopt a 4% increase. This is set somewhat below CPI and there was some discussion earlier around whether in fact the increase should be for a greater amount. However, on discussion, our view from management is that we should be recommending 4% and increasing by that amount at this stage as our markets are still quite variable. We are seeing different policies being implemented in different jurisdictions and quite significant movements in international student kind of mobility and attractiveness of different countries. And we are currently taking a good look at our future strategy and will be bringing back an international strategy for Council to view in 2024.

33:59 Speaker 8: So at this time, our recommendation is to keep the increase at the 4% level for tuition fees.

34:09 Speaker 8: I'll move to study abroad. Study abroad is a very different market. It's a one semester market that for this university generally relates to students from the US coming for one semester.

34:24 Speaker 8: It's particularly important for our Faculty of Arts.

34:29 Speaker 8: in that many of these students are coming from liberal arts colleges and are very keen to study various subjects in social sciences and humanities. It's also competitive on price and we sort of bid for these agreements with study abroad partners and are bidding against Australian and New Zealand universities. We've shown where we sit in the midst of the other providers.

34:59 Speaker 8: And our view is that we should hold our fee for 2025 for this market. So we are recommending no increase to the study abroad fee. We then also set fees for our pathway partner. So we have subcontracted to UP Education, the teaching of our foundation program.

35:29 Speaker 8: an increase of 4%, which we agree with and are recommending that we adopt that fee increase for up. And English Language Academy, which is managed, operated through Uni Services, is proposing several fee increases. They're similar around 4% overall, but it's 4% for one of the programmes, 4.4 for another and 3.3 for the last, aligns with their market conditions and cost increases.

36:02 So

36:03 Speaker 1: that's on page 51, the pathway in the English Language Academy. You see the comparison for the study abroad on page 50. And then we've got more about the international tuition fees starting on page 47. Everybody's just following that through the papers.

36:25 Speaker 6: Yeah, thank you, Chancellor, with a comparison on page 49, which I think is a really useful one to look at, particularly in the context of the question that Jan asked earlier about rankings, because if you look at the comparison with international tuition fees in New Zealand, really what we're missing is the fact that we are the research intensive university that's in the top 100 universities in the world.

36:53 Speaker 6: And of course we're now at 68 not 87 and if you do that comparison across Australia which is where we do most of our comparisons and look at the fees there then that's really where

37:03 we were asking people to point their attention to.

37:22 Speaker 8: this might be through TNE that we seek a delegation for the Vice Chancellor to set those fees and they would be reported back to Council at the future meeting.

37:34 Okay,

37:35 Speaker 1: great. Should I pause?

37:37 Speaker 1: I'd say pause there. Thank you. Are there any questions for Adrian around the international students or study abroad or the funded and non-funded micro-credentials and then the international online thing?

37:53 Speaker 1: Jan.

37:54 Speaker 5: Yeah.

37:55 Speaker 5: It's not really about the fees per se, but I note that the second partner for the foundation course has been terminate or not renewed.

38:08 Speaker 5: And I just wonder if it's sensible to explore whether or not we should have a new second partner to give a bit of tension and pricing and delivery as opposed to just having one foundation partner.

38:25 You

38:26 Speaker 8: know that's interesting feedback.

38:30 Speaker 8: The international office is looking at the entire strategy and I'm sure they are looking at those pathway foundation programs as part of their strategy. They're very important for us. And I'm sure they'll be looking at whether we've got we need other providers in the mix. Certainly important in which countries they also can operate and support us in terms of feeder students. So I'm sure you'll see commentary about that when the

38:59 Speaker 1: strategy comes through.

39:04 Speaker 1: Right.

39:05 Speaker 1: Thank you very much, Adrian.

39:07 Speaker 1: Okay, we've got any other questions? All right. If that's the case, no further questions, what I'm going to do is I'm going to move that council approve the attached international fee schedule, and that will be the, for 2025, that will be the 4 % and then the no increase for the study abroad, and at the same time, authorize the Vice Chancellor to assign any new programs, including SAC funded micro-credentials or programs becoming newly available to international students in 2025 to an appropriate ban to an ABLE office to be made during the recruitment cycle and report these decisions back to Council.

39:51 Speaker 1: And then we can authorize the Vice-Chancellor to set fees for the non-government funded micro-credentials and for university programs delivered offshore subject to such fees being reported to the Council meeting immediately following. So I'm going to those resolutions and I'm going to ask Jan to second them. If you would Jan, thank you very much. All those in favour?

40:20 Speaker 1: I'm not sure if I, I don't recall if I said that all those in favour for the domestic fee schedule, if I could just make sure that I hadn't forgotten that. If all those in favour, just make sure that I have that. That's unanimous. Thank you very much. Right, unanimous in both cases.

40:36 Speaker 1: Now we're on to the compulsory student services fee, which and the paper in respect of this starts on page 52 of Diligent. And perhaps, Tim, this is something that, you know, Adrian or Tim, either of you like to speak to this? I'm happy to introduce it and then I'll pass it over to Tim to talk about this

41:00 Speaker 8: amazing graph that we have on page 52.

41:06 Speaker 8: So with the compulsory student services fee, we are operating in a different regulatory environment. So this, the regulatory environment requires significant consultation with students about the fee, what we spend the fee on and the preferences that students have. And you'll see in the papers some commentary around our approach this year to surveying students and also the Consulting with students. Students are generally supportive of continuing the services that we have on offer. And to do that, we see that we need to address significant cost increases in these services, which in some areas outstrip inflation. But our recommendation is that we increase the fee by 6% for 2024.

42:06 Speaker 8: On page 52, we have shown some examples of the cost increases being incurred across some of the cost categories in the compulsory student services area. And before going back to Tim's graph, you can see on the next page, on page 53 of Diligent, a comparison of the compulsory student services fee that is charged at Auckland compared to Other universities to date only two other universities have set their fee for 2024 but our proposed fee as you can see would be lower than both those universities at this current time. That's probably all I need to say right at the moment I'll hand over to you Tim in terms of explaining the different cost trajectories.

43:07 Thank you. So

43:10 Speaker 11: the chart we're talking about on page 52 is indexed against 2021. So we're showing the relative movements in the impulsory student services fee across all the universities up to 23 and for the two that we know about for 24. And I think also if we just bear in mind the table on page 52, which just shows the actual amount of fees charged across the various universities from 2021 to date. You know, just noting that Auckland is not the highest. There are three other universities currently that are charging more for this fee than us. And I think you can also see from the graph, if I return to that, that the increase between 23 and 2021, for the University of Auckland is actually the lowest across the piece and quite considerably lower than some of the other universities. And this reflects the fact that in the last two years we've made a decision to really keep the fee and the increase rather to the fee as minimal as possible, reflecting the disruption that student experiences during the COVID period.

44:37 Speaker 11: So, you know, we made a deliberate decision in the last two years to do that. So I think we followed from memory the annual maximum fee movement in those two years, which is 1.7% and 2.75% in the last two years, respectively. But as Adrian says, obviously, our costs have shifted quite considerably, and we still need to acknowledge that.

45:05 Speaker 11: The inflationary environment, we're looking at probably a 4% inflationary environment for the next financial year. So that's the year we're talking about for the increase here. Off the back of, you know, 6% plus, 7% plus last year and this year.

45:25 Speaker 11: But obviously there's been quite an impact to some of our costs that make up the services that this fee contributes to. And those are outlined also on page 52. So I won't necessarily go through all of those. But I think the chart there is really designed just to show quite visually and simply just how the Auckland, the University of Auckland fee has moved against the rest of the sector. So maybe I'll pause there for any questions.

46:01 Yeah,

46:01 Speaker 1: and there's quite a good then chart on page 53 showing what the expenditure is used for. I guess that's the 22 one, but at least it gives some sense of categories to us.

46:15 Speaker 1: Are there any questions or comments that people would like to make about the compulsory student services fee? Obviously, the proposal is that we, a 6% increase to uplifted by 50 cents per point or $60 from a full-time student.

46:39 I

46:39 Speaker 3: have a few comments and questions. I think I brought up quite a few concerns from the Finance Committee about the 6%, and I thought my understanding was that there would be another paper between then and Council for it to be approved, because I didn't think we had approved it at Finance Committee.

46:57 Speaker 3: However, I think a few of the things that I did come across is like, for example, the chart on page 52. Although it shows that Auckland is increasing the least, that's because at 2021 it had the highest student services fee, I believe. So although it's increasing the least amount, it's still like very high compared. And also it's kind of difficult to compare with other universities when the services provided aren't necessarily always the same. I think I gave the example that I think Otago provides gym memberships as well as part of their student services fee, whereas Auckland does. So it's kind of difficult to provide that comparison. But yeah, I just think 6% is quite a lot compared to what we've seen in the past. And just wondering, you know, the rationale, if we could lower it, how that would actually affect the university in that sense.

48:51 Speaker 11: But the way it's actually applied in each institution is slightly different.

48:58 Speaker 11: And, you know, I think if we weren't to increase by 6%, then, you know, obviously we're talking a component of our total revenue for the university, which we need to balance against, you know, the total cost that we're bearing.

49:15 Speaker 11: So it may seem small, but there would be implications in terms of looking at our budget setting next year in terms of any potential areas that we might need to then review the funding for.

49:35 Yeah,

49:36 Speaker 3: I think another one of my concerns with like the 6% is, for example, a lot of scholarships, they provide fees free for like specific papers or for a degree, but they don't cover the student services fee. So for the people who do attain scholarships, they still have to pay out this amount. And so that's one of my bigger reasons of why I think 6% is quite extensive.

50:00 Speaker 3: So it's more of how do we provide support

50:02 Speaker 4: for them?

50:03 Speaker 4: I sort of I understand that you know your concern from a student perspective. I guess when I look at it I see on page 52 the significant increases that we're incurring and it's really difficult isn't it because of course we want to provide as much services as cheaply as possible to students but we also sort of as governors have to act really responsibly and you look at the trouble that the other universities and a number of them have gotten into trouble by not sort of the hard, nasty facts from time to time. So I guess for me, I really understand the issue, but I do think we have to pass on those increased costs that we're incurring.

50:50 Speaker 1: Can you give us some understanding of what we're talking about in terms of if we said we, if it was only being uplifted, I don't know if you can do this or not by you know by $50 instead of $60 you know what what does that what's that overall number do you have a sense of that Tim or is it just too difficult to do um like what what's what is what is this what's the amount this raises and let's say we you know 10% less was raised what what would be the what would be the number If I

51:33 Speaker 11: refer back to the annual report for last year in 2022, it's about $28 million was the revenue that was attributed or collected from the compulsory student services fee.

51:50 Speaker 4: Cecilia, I don't think we, to be honest, I don't think we should sort of horse trade about picking another number.

51:56 Speaker 4: I mean, I feel like we've got a recommendation here by our management team.

52:01 Speaker 4: I

52:01 Speaker 1: appreciate that, Candy. I was just asking the question whether he could, whether it was possible to understand what the, what the, you know, what we're talking about, right?

52:15 Speaker 1: Just understand the relevance. Hallar makes a good point about the scholarships. Perhaps that is something that if we pass this, that management could take away as an action to look at.

52:31 Speaker 1: how that is dealt with.

52:36 Speaker 3: Sorry to butt in again, but just another recommendation if this was to pass is, I think I mentioned it also in the Finance Committee, but letting the students know exactly where their money is going, because I think a lot of people don't actually understand what the student services fee does.

52:51 Speaker 3: And I know that the university has, you know, they do try to market it as much as they can.

52:55 Speaker 3: for example, when you're paying your students fees, having sort of an icon that can take you to a link, I think something like that would be very useful and that would just be a recommendation added on to what Cecilia just said.

53:06 Speaker 6: Thanks, Harla. I might just, of course, all these suggestions are useful, but I might just say that, you know, having spent quite a lot of time working with Valerie, who's not here today, Adrian and others, Anne-Marie and Brendan, on how we engage the students in understanding through their responses, to us, how they would like the student services fee to be spent and on what and the services that they value.

53:32 Speaker 6: I think we do try really hard to make sure that we're responding in that way. And it's useful to hear your comments because, of course, we don't always get sufficient responses from students. So I really appreciate what you're saying. But I think it's a very mixed bag in terms of those people who are really interested in that and those that actually aren't that interested and only see it after the fact when in fact of course students have the opportunity to contribute to that decision.

54:04 Yeah

54:05 Speaker 1: I think these are all good things for us to be thinking about. Is there any other questions or comments around this?

54:15 Speaker 6: Sorry I just want to understand what we're agreeing on the scholarships issue.

54:19 No

54:20 Speaker 1: we're not agreeing anything where I'm just saying We're not recommending anything. I think we're not, there's no recommendations, no resolution before council or anything like that. I think we're just asking that you, that management take on board the comments, comments that have been made.

54:38 Thanks,

54:39 Speaker 6: Chancellor.

54:40 Okay. Sorry,

54:41 Speaker 2: just clarifying because I noticed in the schedule that it's not a, it's a, what is it, a 6%, but it's not 8.88 for every student on every campus.

54:54 Speaker 2: That's correct, right? I just think we've got to make sure of that because I see that on Taitonga

54:59 it's

55:00 Speaker 8: 4.44.

55:01 Speaker 8: Yes, it's a 50% charge for students who are online or at Taitonga or Taitaukara. So they can't access the physical services on campus but they still have access to a number of services virtually.

55:21 Speaker 8: Yeah, just clarifying that.

55:23 Speaker 8: Yes.

55:25 Speaker 1: Okay, so perhaps in that case, is there a, in the same way that we've referred to a schedule that rather than approving it at $8.88 per point, we could, is it somewhere that's referenced? Adrian, can you help me there? No, nowhere.

55:49 Speaker 1: Where did you get that from, Kath?

55:51 Speaker 1: I think it's appendix something.

55:53 Speaker 1: It is

55:54 Speaker 8: in the resolution refers to the fee schedule A. So that does pick it up there.

56:03 Okay,

56:03 Speaker 1: but it says approve the compulsory student services fee at $8.88 per point and the associated changes to the fee schedule.

56:15 Speaker 1: It should probably be subject to the associated changes to the fee schedule.

56:20 Speaker 1: Yeah, that would be good.

56:22 Speaker 1: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Okay. That'd be helpful. Thank you, Kat. Is there any more questions or comments on this?

56:31 Speaker 1: Okay.

56:32 Speaker 1: Well, then I'm going to put the resolution that we approve the compulsory student services fee at $8.88 per point GST inclusive, subject to the associated changes to the fee schedule A all student. And I'm going to ask Kathy to I'll second that and could I ask everybody to vote on that please.

57:02 Speaker 1: Hala would you like to have your vote recorded as being against it or abstaining?

57:10 Speaker 3: I'll abstain please.

57:12 Speaker 1: Okay sure.

57:16 Speaker 1: Okay, but I think I saw everybody else was voting in favor. If anybody did not, just let me know. It's quite hard to keep it on everybody's screen. I apologize. Okay.

57:27 Speaker 1: All right, now we have the

57:29 Speaker 8: other fees schedule, which is just a... That's page 56 of Diligent in terms of the commentary. So we are recommending that these fees remain unchanged with one exception.

57:46 Speaker 8: We are recommending for the removal of the fee to apply for a reconsideration of academic standing. And the rationale is set out in the paper and that it is now being perceived as a barrier for students to apply. And given the low level of revenue that's generated from this fee, we feel that we'd be better off without it.

58:15 Speaker 8: So we're recommending that we remove that particular fee and all other fees remain as is.

58:24 Speaker 1: Any questions for Adrienne around that?

58:31 Speaker 1: All right. If not, then I'm going to move that we approve the attached other fees schedule for 2024.

58:40 Speaker 1: And could I ask John to second that, please?

58:44 Speaker 1: Thank you. All those in favour?

58:50 Speaker 1: Okay, it looks like I've got everybody there. Thank you very much.

58:55 Speaker 1: Okay. All right, we're now going to move on to the report

59:00 Speaker 6: of Senate.

59:03 Speaker 6: Thank you, Chancellor. And I'm going to hand over to Bridget very shortly.

59:07 Speaker 6: I just wanted to point to two things for Council's attention.

59:11 Speaker 6: The first is that you'll recall I initiated a review of Senate which Penny Matthew as the Dean of Law has undertaken. She has been engaged in a survey not just of Senate members but also non-Senate members about engagement with Senate. We've had a very very preliminary response to that and look at the initial data suggests that there's been quite a poor response to the survey and as you'll recall one of the things I was interested in was really creating a much more engaged dynamic senate on academic matters for the university.

59:46 Speaker 6: We haven't yet received the full qualitative data at the UEC. Once that arrives we'll have a look at it and understand what that means for us.

59:55 Speaker 6: And the second thing is just to remind council that the work that Peter Hunter was leading on free speech which has been going on for three years we received recommendations at a previous senate and we've been working on that next of the work which was agreed some time ago at senate which is to look at free speech alongside academic freedom and the code of conduct and so the first piece of work will be undertaken quite soon around that which will be looking at things like the collective instruments and issues that are arisen as part of contractual obligations and some of the work that's undertaken through our getting some legal advice on the on the issues related to the act and statute.

01:00:41 Speaker 6: as well as thinking about how that aligns with the free speech and academic freedom instruments we've been looking at. So all underway.

01:00:49 Speaker 6: They're the big picture items and then there are lots of other things that Bridget can speak to.

01:00:57 Speaker 6: Thank you. Thank you Dawn. Bridget over to

01:00:59 Speaker 7: you.

01:01:01 Speaker 12: Thank you Chancellor. Well hopefully brief for me now. You'll be sick of listening. But the Senate no had the usual. I actually wasn't at this.

01:01:11 Speaker 12: I was away so Valerie very kindly wore multiple hats of being herself, myself and Dawn. But there was a couple of reviews to be approved and then there were some academic matters and regulations. There's only really one in particular that I thought was noteworthy which is part A section 2 item 2 and this is examination of subdoctoral postgraduate research components of certain points and above procedures. And this is really some tidy ups and improving student experience that kind of completely align with what I've discussed earlier in the CFT overview. So it's tidying up with some responsibilities. And one area in particular, so removing the requirement for an external examiner or assessor for projects less than 60 points. So this is something that is an administrative burden for faculties. It's poor student experience, and it's out of step with what other institutions do. They don't require this external person.

01:02:10 Speaker 12: Often external person doesn't really understand research components of less than 60 points. And they can often quite harshly examine them, there's delays, plus we burden these people when really we want them to review our, examine our larger components. There's a new appeal clause in there because we've had a little bit of lack of clarity around how students appeal decisions, so that's been really useful to tidy that up.

01:02:40 Speaker 12: And then also a request for council to approve that the provost can approve subsequent future change to the procedures under a delegated authority from council would be really fabulous because obviously they're not major things to come to you and they're usually sort of tidying up.

01:02:59 Speaker 7: Have to take any questions.

01:03:04 Speaker 1: Any questions for Bridget on any of the senate papers, senate matters that have been put to us?

01:03:18 Speaker 1: One for you, Bridget, I see around the update of examination of subdoctoral research components of 30 points and above procedures, and you've got the following changes. A change to the approval process to allow the provost to approve subsequent future changes to the procedures under delegated authority from council, approved by council.

01:03:39 Speaker 1: Do you think there should be some either I don't know report back on the use of that delegation or report back or have the provost notify, I think perhaps notify the vice-chancellor when that delegation is used

01:03:59 Speaker 6: So I do

01:03:59 Speaker 1: get a summary of when that's used Okay good, thank you Are there any other questions?

01:04:09 Speaker 1: on any of the Senate matters.

01:04:11 Speaker 1: All right. Then I will move that the recommendations in part A of the report of Senate be adopted and part C be noted. And I will ask Rob to second that.

01:04:29 Speaker 1: Thank you very much. All those in favour? Thank you.

01:04:37 Speaker 1: Now, the next item is correspondence referred by the Chancellor. We do have, we have received a letter.

01:04:46 Speaker 1: Dawn mentioned a letter to her from the Free Speech Union. I also received a letter from the Free Speech Union. I actually have put that letter into Part B. I have now received a request from a student that that letter go into Part A. It is in Part B. We can discuss when we get to the letter in Part B.

01:05:07 Speaker 1: as to whether or not we wish to move it into part A, which we would be able to do. So that's just for the understanding. Then other matters for decision or noting the seal. We have the items that the seal has been placed on since the last meeting.

01:05:34 Speaker 1: I'm going to move, unless if there's no questions about those, I'm going to move that the affixing of the seal to the listed document be noted and ask John to second that for me. All those in favour?

01:05:49 Speaker 1: Right, right. Then we have a rescindment where we've been asked by the graduation office to rescind the conferral of a Master of Engineering Studies degree that was awarded with no milestone and re-award it with the correct class of honors in accordance with the memorandum provided to us. So I'm just getting to that, the rescindment. Yeah, so this is on page 89 of diligent. You'll see that there going from no milestone to first class honors. So I'm going to move that council rescind the conferral of the Master of Engineering Studies awarded with no milestone and reward a re-award it with the correct class of honors in accordance with the memorandum. So that's from no milestone to first class honors. And Hala, could I ask you to second that? Thank you. All those in favor? Thank you. Okay. Now we have a note about the election of the student representative on council, about the decision has been, Adrian, I don't know if you wanted to just cover this. I mean, essentially, it's in the agenda.

01:07:04 Speaker 1: that we're rerunning the election because of certain procedures.

01:07:09 Yes,

01:07:10 Speaker 8: thank you, Chancellor. So unfortunately, we made some errors in running the election for student representative on council, and I have made the decision to rerun the election. We have called for notices of candidacy, which closed recently.

01:07:34 Speaker 8: and we will be on the 25th of October opening up for election again through to the 7th of November. It is very unfortunate that this has happened and is very disruptive for students and of course we're having to rerun the election at a time when students will be studying and for exams and into the exam period so I do deeply regret that we've made that error and apologise to any of those who've been impacted by that.

01:08:07 All

01:08:08 Speaker 1: right. Are there any questions for Adrian?

01:08:13 Speaker 1: Okay, well, then I'm just going to, I'm going to move at the returning officers advice regarding the election of the student representative on council be noted. And I think that we should, council should also note that we, we regret the disruption and inconvenience cause to candidates and student voters as a result of this.

01:08:32 Speaker 1: And I'm going to move that. And I'll ask Kath to second it. Thank you. All those in favour.

01:08:39 Speaker 1: All right.

01:08:42 Speaker 1: Now we come to the election of the Chancellor and the Pro-Chancellor. And as the Chancellor, I'm going to step down from the chair. And I think, Adrienne, you're going to take the chair. Yes. For the first part for the election of the Chancellor.

01:08:58 Speaker 1: So I'd like to

01:08:59 Speaker 8: call for nominations for the position of Chancellor.

01:09:04 I

01:09:05 Speaker 7: nominate Cecilia Tarrant.

01:09:08 Speaker 7: Thank you. And is there a second? Thank you, John. Are there any other nominations for the position of Chancellor?

01:09:21 Thank

01:09:21 Speaker 8: you. I therefore declare Cecilia Tarrant as the Chancellor.

01:09:27 Speaker 8: Thank you very much.

01:09:28 Speaker 8: Thank you for that,

01:09:30 Speaker 1: Adrian.

01:09:30 Speaker 1: I'm very pleased. So now we go to the election of pro-Chancellor, and I'm resuming the chair, and I will call for nominations for the election of pro-Chancellor.

01:09:51 I

01:09:51 Speaker 7: nominate Cathy.

01:09:54 Thank

01:09:55 Speaker 1: you very much, and I'm happy to second that nomination.

01:09:58 Speaker 1: Kathy is happy to accept that nomination.

01:10:03 Speaker 1: Yes, thumbs up. Very good. All right. Are there any other nominations?

01:10:08 Speaker 1: No. If not, then I will declare Kathy elected as pro-chancellor.

01:10:14 Speaker 1: All right. Deputy chairperson.

01:10:16 Speaker 1: Very good.

01:10:18 Speaker 1: Okay. Now, any general business?

01:10:20 Speaker 1: Is there anything that any of the members of council would like to raise as general business in Part A?

01:10:30 Speaker 1: No?

01:10:31 Speaker 1: All right. Does anybody require a leave of absence for the 11th of December?

01:10:38 Speaker 1: No?

01:10:39 Speaker 1: Okay. All right. Then I'm going to move that the public be excluded from part B of the meeting, given the general subject matter of each to be considered while the public's excluded. And the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter on the specific grounds are as follows. There's the general subject matter, and then there is also the protection of the interests below, namely around protecting privacy, enabling the university to carry on without prejudice or disadvantaged negotiations and to prevent disclosure or use of official information from proper gain or advantage. And that Adrian Clellon, Professors Linton and Bloomfield, Andrew Phipps, Tim Blewett, Simon Neal, Brian Tanek, Pamela Moss, Helen Katanach, Anthony Brandon, Matt Bowne, and Wendy Vasharan be permitted to remain for this part of part B of the meeting after the public has been excluded because of their knowledge of will need to be briefed about the matters to be discussed. The knowledge, this knowledge, which will be of assistance in relations to the matters to be discussed is relevant to those matters because they relate to aspects of the administration of the University of Auckland for which those persons are responsible. So I'm going to move that and I'm going to ask that Jan second that. Thank you. All those in favour?