Vice-chancellor Scott Bowman needs to improve Charles Darwin University’s teaching and research, rather than be an activist on controversial political and social issues, outside the level of expertise of senior management, which quashes the academic right to freedom of thought and expression, writes Don Fuller.

The last available annual report on Charles Darwin University was presented to the then NT Education Minister by chancellor Paul Henderson, relatively recently, in June 2024.

In an accompanying statement, Bowman made some telling comments. Telling, in the sense that they make clear why there has been a marked decline in university standards, as universities such as CDU, have vacated the field of intellectual thought for leadership that can be best described as basic management and political involvement.

Perhaps the first hint at this is given by Bowman’s statement: “If you asked me what 2023 was like for the university on a scale of one to five, with one being awful and five being an excellent year, then I would put this year at four. A good year. I call this scorecard the Bowman Scale.”

That the vice-chancellor would want to celebrate such a simple scale as a Bowman Scale invention says much about the power of intellectual and analytical ability from the head of such an important organisation.

University higher education should be in a position to provide through its teaching and learning activities, an increase in knowledge and skills. In turn, this should prove to be important in improving labour force participation and productivity in the workforce and hence benefit the economy of the Northern Territory as a whole.

Alternatively, this statement may be an attempt at clichéd humour. If so, it would most probably find itself at a level that would befit a young primary school student rather than serving to inspire those associated with an organisation committed to providing higher level standards of education and research.

The vice-chancellor then proceeds to blunder on into areas that for many people, would be regarded as highly controversial, at best.

This occurs when he states that the university firmly adopted a political position on the proposed Voice to Parliament.

“There have been some setbacks. When Australians were asked to consider enshrining First Nations voices in the constitution, the university made a firm commitment to stand with our First Nations people in wanting a Voice to Parliament,” he wrote.

“While it was not the outcome we wanted, and the university came under fire from certain community groups, I wouldn’t change a thing about our stance. Universities need to be places where change is nurtured and the hard questions are asked, and there is no harder topic than social inequality.”

Is it any wonder the Voice lost the confidence of a large proportion of the population, not only in the Northern Territory but every other state in Australia?

Unfortunately, the vice-chancellor seems unaware that there has been a substantial on-going debate for many years, on how best to reduce the inequality faced by many Aboriginal people, particularly in remote regions.

A clear majority of Australians thought that the Voice would do little to reduce inequality in key areas, and would most likely result in the further funnelling of high levels of government expenditure for purposes of self-interest.

Bowman concludes his annual statement by asserting that, “a university needs to be a change leader for its community”.

However, a number of people would argue that this suggests the vice-chancellor is seriously confused about what his main role and focus should be as head of a higher education, training and research institution.

While he claims to be very interested in politics, should not the vice-chancellor be focusing on the key roles of education, training and research rather than politics? Indeed, if he is so interested in politics, which side of politics does he favour? Will this cause problems with the sudden shift in power arrangements following the recent elections in the Territory?

Many would argue that a university head should not be using the platform of such an important Institution for this purpose.

The danger of adopting such political positions is that the organisation loses the confidence of the majority of the Northern Territory, particularly when the positions adopted are so at variance with those adopted by the majority of the population.

This is the essence of how a democracy works. It does not depend on wealthy, well-placed elites instructing people on what they should do. One can imagine the disappointed responses at senior levels of the university: “If only the masses had been able to make an informed decision”.

READ: ‘Not bankrupt or anything’: CDU blows budget by $18m, claims no job cuts to follow

READ: Opinion: CDU medical school an unnecessary duplication and a distraction

READ: Opinion: Should the CDU city campus be built?

Bowman appears to like being regarded as a ‘knock-about sort of bloke’, seemingly proud of the fact that he is the only vice-chancellor without a university degree in possibly the western world. This might explain why outside of polite company, he is often referred to as Professor Bo Bo.

However, he might need to familiarise himself with the sharp changes that are occurring with respect to involvement in political positions by university leaders in top universities elsewhere in the world.

For example, in recent weeks debate has intensified over the proper role of United States universities in political and social affairs. At the centre of this debate is whether universities should remain neutral on controversial political matters.

After grappling with a polarising debate over the Israel-Hamas war, Harvard announced on Tuesday that the university and its leadership will refrain from taking official positions on controversial public policy issues.

While some universities in Australia have been slow to appreciate this movement, there is little doubt that they will be forced to follow.

The neutrality of the university as an institution arises not from a lack of courage, nor out of indifference and insensitivity to important political and social issues.

Rather, it arises out of respect for free inquiry, and the obligation to encourage, and allow a diversity of viewpoints for what is known as academic freedom of inquiry; a cornerstone of university intellectual thought and debate since the early nineteenth century.

This is something that senior managers of CDU need to appreciate, and it is a priority that has been lost as the value of intellectual thought, debate and inquiry at senior levels in many Australian universities has given way to maximising international student intakes and management for money making.

As reported in NT Independent, Bowman was exposed at the federal Senate inquiry into the proposed Middle Arm industrial precinct recently for attempting to stifle academic freedom and failing to disclose glaring conflicts of interest with major Middle Arm gas proponents in the university’s submission to the inquiry, which appears to have breached academic policies and marred the university’s reputation.

Bowman faced the inquiry in Darwin where the public at times laughed at his responses, and later applauded after independent ACT Senator David Pocock told the vice-chancellor he expected a university leader paid more than $600,000 a year to better understand basic concepts of academic freedom and the need to declare conflicts of interest.

The vice-chancellor was forced to publicly admit his failure to disclose conflicts of interest – including that Henderson is a gas lobbyist and one of the architects of Middle Arm – as well as his failure to disclose the cash and gifts supplied to the university by the gas industry and Middle Arm proponents.

This is an ironic example of the decline in respect that can occur for such an important position.

The vice-chancellor would do well to re-focus, if not too late, and try to understand the key roles of senior staff in a high quality university.

While all sorts of spin are used to suggest CDU is a highly ranked university, the real ranking test is how it stands up against other Australian universities. Out of 35 Australian universities, CDU ranked at 29, which suggests a good deal more is required by senior management to improve its core functions of teaching and research.

This would benefit the Northern Territory far more than having a vice-chancellor who sees himself as an activist on controversial political and social issues, outside the level of expertise of senior management, and which quashes a fundamental tenet of a university; the right to academic freedom of thought and expression.

Dr Don Fuller holds a first class Honours degree and PhD in economics from the University of Adelaide. He has worked as a senior public servant in the Territory and as Professor of Governance and Head of the Schools of Law and Business at Charles Darwin University. He grew up in Darwin and attended Darwin High School.

Dr Fuller was also involved with the establishment of the first NT medical school under the leadership of Flinders University vice-chancellor Professor Ian Chubb, 27 years ago.

Dr Fuller was also an adviser to the former CLP MLA Maralampuwi Francis Xavier, was briefly the senior private secretary to Chief Minister Paul Everingham, and is a former member of the CLP and the ALP.