January 15, 2026
Senate Education and Employment Legislation Committee
The Go8 recognises the establishment of the Australian Tertiary Education Commission (ATEC) as a significant opportunity to provide long-term, evidence-based policy advice and funding recommendations for the higher education sector and steward the sector towards the objectives of the Australian Universities Accord.
This is a generational moment to design an enduring higher education system that serves Australia’s interests for decades to come – a system that underpins Australia’s future economic and social prosperity. It should build on the strengths of our current framework while moving beyond outdated practices to meet future aspirations.
Australia needs an ATEC that restores public confidence in higher education and becomes a long-standing and trusted source of tertiary policy expertise and stewardship. It should draw on the best features of respected public bodies such as Jobs and Skills Australia, the Australian Bureau of Statistics, the Productivity Commission and CSIRO.
Our vision for ATEC is of a strong, independent body operating under the strategic direction of Government, enabling universities to fulfill their diverse and distinctive missions in alignment with the Accord. To succeed, ATEC must be established with robust governance, representation, accountability, transparency and resources required to ensure it can fulfill its remit and promote public trust in our higher education sector.
ATEC must provide impartial advice to address critical challenges – such as the negative impact of the Job-ready Graduates (JRG) funding changes – and operate under a mandate that values teaching, learning, research and research training as integral components of the sector.
For mission-based compacts to work effectively, ATEC should facilitate alignment between Government and universities on shared objectives, leveraging the autonomy and diverse capabilities of institutions to advance knowledge, innovation, and respond to student and industry needs.
Without sufficient independence, authority, and resources, ATEC risks becoming another layer of bureaucracy—distracting from the sector’s commitment to deliver for the public good. If it cannot address pressing issues like JRG and plan strategically for the future, it will lack credibility and fail to deliver meaningful change.
Our vision for ATEC
A strong, independent voice and steward
ATEC must serve as the primary mechanism for delivering long-term, evidence-based policy advice and funding recommendations for the higher education sector. It should operate with a clear strategic direction and remit, independent of short-term political cycles, to ensure stability and enable long-term planning. Robust governance structures and mechanisms for ongoing consultation with universities and stakeholders are essential, supported by adequate resourcing and staffing to fulfill its remit effectively.
Alignment with the Universities Accord objectives
ATEC should reflect our shared commitment to the Accord’s goals of equity, excellence, and sustainability in higher education. It must recognise the critical role of research-intensive universities in driving innovation and national productivity, while developing transparent and predictable funding models that support both teaching and research. ATEC should incentivise diversity across the sector and foster collaboration between universities, industry, and governments. Maintaining Australia’s global reputation and competitiveness in international education markets must remain a priority.
Robust governance, representation, accountability and transparency
To build public trust and sector confidence, ATEC must have robust reporting and performance measures. Decision-making should be data-driven, underpinned by deep and structured consultation with stakeholders, and accompanied by the publication of advice provided to Government. As a steward of funding frameworks, ATEC should ensure these frameworks incentivise collaboration between universities, industry, and governments.
In summary:
- ATEC must be established as a long-term, evidence-based and independent policy body if we are to achieve decadal targets for tertiary education.
- ATEC must be able to ensure appropriate funding by making recommendations for ongoing funding changes, including recalibrated Commonwealth and student contributions.
- Research and research training must be reflected as integral elements of our higher education system and included in the powers and remit of ATEC.
- ATEC must have the powers needed to steward the higher education sector through the development of effective mission-based compacts at the same time as reducing regulatory burden.
- ATEC should be the trusted and authoritative body through which the public, the Government and the higher education sector realise the goals of the Universities Accord.
Recommendations
1. Section 41 of the bill should be amended to allow ATEC to make independent inquiries into important matters.
ATEC’s primary function should be the transparent provision of independent and long-term policy advice to the Commonwealth Government and the tertiary education and research sector. This is how ATEC will extend beyond the role of the current Department of Education rather than being a new entity performing the same functions.
For ATEC to achieve these goals, it must have the ability to initiate its own policy and research work like the Productivity Commission, rather than only being able to act on the Minister’s request. It should be able to publish this work without seeking the permission of the Minister.
As it stands, section 41 requires ATEC to give “advice and recommendations to the Minister” but it neither enables ATEC to provide this advice to the public (or require the Minister to make it public) or enables ATEC to provide advice on its own initiative. ATEC must prepare and publish a Tertiary Education System report in which it can independently raise a limited variety of topics, but even this may be tightly restricted and controlled by section 70 (see below).
2. Sections 69 and 70 of the bill should be removed or amended so that ATEC can independently publish reports, advice and recommendations.
One of ATEC’s functions is to “report and publish information in relation to the tertiary education system and higher education providers” (section 11) but this does not appear to be a strong mandate for ATEC to pursue its own inquiries and publish robust advice and recommendations.
These kinds of restrictions do not apply to other government bodies like Jobs and Skills Australia and the Productivity Commission.
Jobs and Skills Australia is empowered to inform the public and collect, analyse, share and publish data and other information about of wide range of matters to inform policy development and program delivery (section 9 of the Jobs and Skills Australia Act 2022).
The Productivity Commission does report to the Minister when it has been requested by the Minister to undertake that work (and it is up to the Minister whether this is published), but its functions also include “to undertake, on its own initiative, research about matters relating to industry, industry development and productivity [and promote public understanding of these matters]”.
As it stands, section 69 requires ATEC to “seek and obtain the agreement of the Minister before publishing any advice or recommendations given by the ATEC to any person”.
Section 70 is too vague and open to misinterpretation – it prevents ATEC from publishing any information or data that “would be contrary to the public interest” including that it may be “reasonably be expected to prejudice relations between the Commonwealth and the Government of a State or Territory” or “would involve disclosing deliberations or decisions of the Cabinet”. It is not stated who determines what is contrary to the public interest and similar provisions have been open to misuse in the past.
These two sections unreasonably comprise ATEC’s ability to provide independent policy and evidence to the sector and similar restrictions are not placed on similar bodies (like Jobs and Skills Australia and the Productivity Commission).
3. The bill should be amended to require ATEC and the Department of Education to enter into an enforceable agreement to guarantee its minimum standards of access to staff, data, resources and services.
The Go8 understands from the Explanatory Memorandum that ATEC and the Department will have a memorandum of understanding – at a minimum, the basis and general terms of this agreement must be specified in the legislation (e.g. “agreement will specify minimum staffing levels and standards”).
4. ATEC must have the authority to examine the relationship between Commonwealth and student contributions and recommend appropriate funding clusters and rates. To achieve this, section 11 of the bill should be amended to make it clear that ATEC’s remit extends beyond Commonwealth contributions to include student contributions.
Job-ready Graduates has entrenched inequity in the system. It disproportionately penalises students in disciplines such as humanities and social sciences—fields critical for understanding society, shaping policy, and building the very civic fabric that underpins democracy.
If we are serious about equity and about building a system that serves both students and the nation, funding reform is essential to ensure that: (a) all disciplines are valued equally; (b) lifelong learning is supported; and (c) our graduates are prepared for a future we cannot fully predict.
Preliminary work has already begun through the Interim ATEC’s Pricing and Costing Working Group. However, the substantive ATEC must have the ability to complete this work and take it to its logical conclusion. This means ATEC should be empowered to: (a) initiate policy and research funding reviews; and (b) publish findings and recommendations independently when ready.
Under the current bill, ATEC may advise the Minister – on request – about the “efficient cost of higher education across disciplines and student cohorts and in relation to the Commonwealth contribution amounts for places in funding clusters” (section 11). For the avoidance of doubt, this provision should explicitly include student contributions.
5. Research and research training must be explicitly recognised as integral elements of Australia’s higher education system and embedded within ATEC’s powers and remit.
Research and research training are fundamental to universities’ missions and must be included in the mission-based compacts negotiated by ATEC. University research drives innovation and national productivity; if research is not properly represented in ATEC’s work, it cannot be an effective steward for higher education.
While the bill’s definition of higher education implicitly includes research, many provisions appear focused solely on teaching and learning. This must be corrected to reflect the full scope of university activity.
The Department of Education’s ATEC implementation consultation paper (June 2024) proposed that ATEC “administers funding for higher education teaching and research programs [not including grants administered by research councils].” This principle should be embedded in legislation. Mission-based compacts must explicitly include research and related funding as a condition for grants under the Higher Education Support Act 2003.
The bill should be amended to explicitly reference research and research training throughout, including: in relation to:
- ATEC’s functions and remit
- Advice and recommendations provided by ATEC
- Mission-based compacts
- The State of the Tertiary Education System report
6. ATEC must have the powers needed to steward the higher education sector through mission-based compacts
Under the current bill, ATEC does not have the authority to administer funding through mission-based compacts beyond their role in grants under the Higher Education Support Act 2003. While the Explanatory Memorandum indicates that further amendments will define ATEC’s role in implementing domestic managed growth, needs-based funding and allocating international student commencements, these changes appear limited.
As drafted, ATEC’s ability to facilitate development and diversity in the system seems to be limited to allocating places and endorsing providers’ strategies and plans. This risks reducing compacts to instruments focused narrowly on enrolment profiles or linking funding for other programs to student places—even when such links are ineffective or unwarranted.
ATEC should encourage diversity within the sector through mission-based compacts that:
- Support institutional autonomy and avoid undue intervention.
- Provide flexibility while ensuring transparent, predictable decision-making driven by data and evidence.
- Focus on outcomes rather than process or operational detail.
7. Amendments must clarify whether the Minister can cap domestic or international places at named providers.
Currently it is unclear whether the Minister sets total allocations for ATEC to negotiate and distribute through compacts or specifies provider-level allocations.
Section 11 states that ATEC will “allocate a maximum number of international student commencements to ESOS registered providers at the direction of the Minister.” If these maximums are set per provider, this appears inconsistent with section 71(2) which states that “the Minister must not give directions in relation to: … (c) a higher education provider.” This ambiguity must be resolved.
8. ATEC’s remit should explicitly include reducing regulatory burden and pursuing this goal through its advice, recommendations and administration of mission-based compacts.
Stewardship should be based on trust, transparency, and accountability—not over regulation. Mission-based compacts should guarantee that public investment delivers research and education outcomes aligned with the national interest, contributing to Australia’s prosperity. They should set agreed missions and goals, not impose compliance frameworks.
The Secretary of Education’s letter to the Treasurer (30 July 2025) confirmed that the Education Portfolio is “pursuing reduced regulatory burden on the higher education sector through the implementation of the [ATEC]” and that “part of its role will be to monitor and minimise the regulatory burden on the sector, to ensure the sector operates efficiently and in the national interest.”
This commitment must be reflected in ATEC’s legislative remit and operational practice.
Conclusion
In summary, ATEC must exemplify long-term, evidence-based policy advice and recommendations. If designed to operate independently of short-term political cycles and committed to enduring reform, ATEC will provide the sector with the stability and continuity it urgently needs. This requires clear governance structures, robust stakeholder engagement, and adequate resourcing to fulfil its remit effectively.
ATEC will stand as a testament to our shared commitment to equity, excellence, and sustainability. It should recognise the pivotal role of research-intensive universities in driving innovation and national productivity. Through evidence-based funding, ATEC can support both teaching and research while incentivising diversity and collaboration across universities – ensuring Australia maintains its global reputation and competitiveness.
Public trust and sector confidence must underpin ATEC’s work. As a repository of policy expertise and a steward of mission and funding, ATEC will foster collaboration and innovation, ensuring the sector remains inclusive, sustainable, and globally competitive.
