National Tertiary Education Union SA state secretary Andrew Miller told InDaily that university staff were “cynical” that their feedback would be properly considered by the universities and state government in the wake of Malinauskas’ comments last week.

He said staff were being asked to provide feedback on a proposed merger without having an “actual proposal” outlining what the amalgamated institution would look like or how it would run.

The universities of Adelaide and South Australia announced in December that they had agreed to investigate a merger with a feasibility study and business case – but said that any new institution would be called Adelaide University and open on January 1, 2026.

Students, staff and graduates were last week invited to provide feedback, with the universities’ Vice-Chancellors assuring them no final decision would be made until the end of June.

But Premier Peter Malinauskas last week said that regardless of the universities’ decision, the state government would “make” the merger happen: “It’s not a done deal, but we are going to make this happen. That’s my government’s policy,” he said.

National Tertiary Education Union SA state secretary Andrew Miller described the comments as disappointing and unhelpful.

He said the union was yet to decide whether it supported the proposed merger, but it was concerned that the government had “pre-determined” the outcome of the feasibility study.

“The Premier hasn’t been helpful by… saying one way or another it will happen,” he said.

“It’s hard to have faith in due process if an outcome is already pre-determined. 

“We would like the Premier to back off that kind of language and allow there to be some semblance of due process and good faith.”

A government spokesperson said Labor took a “clear policy” to the March state election to establish a commission to “chart a path” to university amalgamation.

They said the signing of an agreement with the universities and federal government in December led to a “formal pathway to pursue the creation of the new university”.

“As a result of this agreement, we have deferred the establishment of a commission until at least mid-2023. However, as South Australians would rightly expect, if the outcome of the current feasibility process is not successful, we will deliver on our commitment and press ahead with the commission.”

Meanwhile, Miller said staff were “alarmed” by the way in which the universities had gone about consulting stakeholders, giving them one month to provide formal feedback, three months before the business case was due.

He said staff were also in “no position to assess something in the absence of an actual proposal”.

The universities last week released a “vision statement for a South Australian university for the future” outlining the “ambitions and aspirations for a potential new university” if the proposed merger goes ahead.

According to the six-page document, the proposed amalgamated university would have three “strategic pillars”: teaching and learning, research, and engagement.

It would aim to deliver the best “student employment outcomes” in Australia and be ranked among the top five universities in the country for “student experience”.

But Miller said the vision statement offered a “very vague idea of a merger” and did not outline the pros and cons.

“What does it do for research diversity, what does it do for course offering diversity, what does it do for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students and their pathways?,” he said.

“Universities are supposed to be the engine-rooms of critical inquiry, they’re supposed to do due diligence on whatever it may be that they’re looking into, so if you’re not going to go into a robust inquiry process where you interrogate everything – the good, the bad, the ugly – then how can you know it’s in the best interest?

“There are a lot of holes there and that’s why we’re in no position to say good, bad or otherwise.”

Miller said the broader South Australian public should also have the opportunity to express their opinion as part of the feasibility study.

“Universities are public entities there to serve the public interest,” he said.

“Of course, students and staff should have a say, alumni should have a say, but then ultimately all South Australians need to be proud of and involved in what their universities do and stand for.”

In a joint statement to InDaily, University of Adelaide Vice-Chancellor Peter Høj and University of South Australia Vice-Chancellor David Lloyd said any member of staff, student, graduate, industry partner or member of the public was welcome to provide comment on the vision statement, with submissions at this stage closing on April 21.

They said meetings with staff, students, alumni, industry partners and unions were occurring across both universities as part of the feasibility assessment period.

“The universities take engagement with their constituencies on this matter extremely seriously and dedicated meetings with the union have also been held,” they said.

“At this stage, it is too early to provide much information on the detailed operations of the prospective new ‘Adelaide University’ – that is not the key focus of the due diligence phase, which is concentrated on determining whether the vision outlined in the public statement can be realised.

“If the Councils decide later in the year to support a merger, then much of the detailed design of the future university will be subject to intensive consultation and input from its communities. Summaries of the feedback received will be placed on the universities’ websites.”

Høj and Lloyd said if their university councils decided to proceed with the merger, a “significant period of ongoing co-creation” with staff and students would commence.

“Both university Councils will carefully review the detailed information provided as part of the business case when making their determinations in late June,” they said.