The "open" universities – supported by Stellenbosch University – have rejected far-reaching government proposals to clamp down on campus political activities by changing the rules governing the allocation of state subsidies.
Weekly Mail has ascertained that the University of Cape Town has rejected the government proposals and the other open universities – of the Witwatersrand, Rhodes, Natal and the Western Cape – have adopted a similar, if not identical, stance. The universities were given until the end of August to respond to the proposals but they have kept an official silence on the contents of their responses.
UCT is understood to have proposed that the Committee of University Principals (CUP), an officially recognised statutory body representing the 16 autonomous universities, be asked to investigate the matter, enabling administrators to put their own houses in order, where necessary. It is further understood to have urged the government to address itself to the root causes of the conflict in South African society.
Wits University is understood to have asked the Minister of National Education, FW De Klerk, to withdraw his proposals in a carefully worded document that does not go quite as far as UCT's rejection. It has not included the proposal involving the CUP. Support for the position of the "open" universities is said to have come from Stellenbosch University, the oldest and least conservative of the five Afrikaans-medium campuses.
Informed sources this week told the Weekly Mail rejection of the proposals by UCT and the University of the Western Cape was "total" among academics and students as well as governing bodies such as senates and councils, and that there was "significant opposition" among Stellenbosch academics. While the government claims it wants to ensure "good order" and "undisturbed tuition and study" on campuses, the proposals – to which universities had to respond by Monday this week – are seen to be aimed at crushing campus dissent and attacking universities' autonomy and academic freedom: their right to decide for themselves who may teach, what may be taught, how it should be taught and to whom.
Most at risk are universities such as UWC. Its rector, Professor Jakes Gerwel has said he wants it to become an intellectual home of the Left serving its community in a direct and meaningful way. Liberal universities such as UCT and Wits are also endangered They are actively trying to make their mainly-white campuses more of a reflection of South African society as a whole; more attune to the broader community's needs and concerns.
A major thrust of the universities' argument is understood to be that the proposals will effectively replace the existing mechanism governing the allocation of subsidies, in terms of which universities failing to adequately perform their research and teaching functions already face having their subsidies cut. The major difference between the proposals and the present system – introduced in 1986 after four years' discussion between the government and universities – is that currently criteria are applied objectively, whereas the new proposals hinge on the subjective opinion of the minister.
If he decides a university has failed to "take all reasonable steps" he can slash its subsidies. Known as the SAPSE formula, the existing system governs subsidy allocations according to student numbers and success rate. A university which loses students or whose success rate drops as a result of boycotts, for example, will automatically be financially penalised.
However, because the test is an objective one, any subsidy cut cannot be seen as punitive action by the state. The new proposals, however, open the way for subsidies to be cut as a result of political decisions on the part of the government and would almost certainly be seen as punitive action, creating a new area of conflict. In addition, the universities are understood to have pointed out that:
-
Being part of a wider society, they are not immune to the conflicts which beset it. A more appropriate response by government would be to address the causes of those conflicts.
-
The new rules would be more likely to increase the problems they are ostensibly intended to prevent, and would create an atmosphere of distrust between academics and students.
Scores of UWC academics endorsed a statement in which they rejected "with contempt" what they described as "this latest attempt by the state to legalise and extend its autocracy and repression". If implemented, the new rules would result in universities becoming "an extension of the state's intelligence and military apparatus, thus serving the total onslaught of the regime" and would create conflict between UWC and the community from which it drew its students.
This article originally appeared in the Weekly Mail.
