TEQSA | ANU Timeline

Question

Senator KOVACIC: Okay. The way I see it is that TEQSA decided that a chancellor should not be appointed by the ANU Council last year and then decided that they needed to appoint a chancellor this year, which was justified by seeking and accepting a voluntary undertaking, and the difference between those two is that we now see TEQSA controlling the appointment process, and the chair of that process is now someone who was also formerly a senior person at TEQSA. Is that correct? Dr Russell: That's not correct in several respects. The request for the agreement not to progress those appointments last year was on the basis that the council proceeding in the usual way might pose significant risks in the context of a current compliance assessment. The chancellor at that time agreed, after we had reasonable exchanges and discussions on that matter. TEQSA is not controlling the selection process for the incoming chancellor. We have, by agreement with the ANU, put in place appropriate guardrails for a process that is open and is based on skill and merit, where there can be a high degree of confidence in the propriety of that process. It is being conducted at arm's length from TEQSA. Senator KOVACIC: When was the decision made to seek the voluntary undertaking? When was it agreed and why was this decision made? Dr Russell: I will tell you the time at which discussions with Dr Marshall began. On 28 November 2025, I attended the ANU Council meeting-there's a great deal on our timeline in relation to the ANU-and we engaged with Dr Marshall, the pro-chancellor, over the period of March and April 2026. Senator KOVACIC: If you could please table the timeline. Dr Russell: Yes.

Answer

Please see the attached PDF.

Documents

• Question with answer (PDF) (opens in a new tab)
• SQ26-000738.pdf (opens in a new tab)