Australian National University (ANU) Chancellor Julie Bishop and Vice-Chancellor Genevieve Bell remain in their positions despite increasing pressure and controversy surrounding the institution. This situation persists not because the challenges facing Australia’s premier research university have subsided, but rather due to a lack of willingness from those in power to enforce a leadership change.
The university council, which holds formal governance responsibility, along with senior figures in the Albanese government, have shown reluctance to take the unprecedented step of removing an ANU chancellor or vice-chancellor. For over a year, Bishop and Bell have struggled to address the uproar from staff and students over the $250 million restructuring and cost-cutting initiative known as Renew ANU. This plan has sparked staff no-confidence votes, allegations of financial mismanagement, and, most recently, damaging bullying claims from Dr. Liz Allen, a former member of the university’s governing council.
Allegations and Testimonies
In a Senate inquiry this week, Dr. Allen provided stark and emotional testimony, revealing that she had contemplated suicide after Bishop accused her of “improper and illegal activity.” Allen claimed that Bishop laughed at her and blocked her from leaving a room during a heated exchange.
“During a lengthy, near two-hour disciplinary-like lecture in February, the chancellor made significant allegations of improper and illegal activity relating to leaking of confidential matters, specifically naming me and the undergraduate student representative,” Allen told the inquiry.
Allen described a distressing encounter where Bishop allegedly berated her further in a private room, leading to a traumatic experience that deeply affected her mental health. Following the meeting, Allen tragically miscarried her “much-wanted baby.”
Bishop has categorically denied the allegations, stating, “I reject any suggestion that I have engaged with Council members, staff, students and observers in any way other than with respect, courtesy and civility.”
Political and Institutional Ramifications
The allegations against Bishop add to a series of crises at ANU since the Renew ANU program was launched last October. Despite these challenges, the university’s governing council and the federal government show little inclination to halt the program or remove key staff. The decision is as much political as it is procedural, with senior government figures acknowledging that forcing a leadership change could trigger legal disputes and further damage the university’s reputation.
Education Minister Jason Clare has referred complaints about ANU’s leadership to the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA), which is expected to appoint an independent investigator soon. Clare emphasized the importance of strengthening university governance and ensuring safe environments for work and study.
TEQSA’s Role and Investigations
TEQSA has been conducting a live compliance process with ANU since October last year, focusing on the university’s adherence to the Higher Education Standards Framework. In June 2025, this engagement was escalated to a formal compliance assessment due to the seriousness and complexity of the concerns.
“As part of the compliance assessment, TEQSA is directing ANU to provide a self-assurance report by Tuesday 19 August 2025,” a TEQSA spokesperson stated. “This report will inform our ongoing compliance work.”
The self-assurance report is a critical document that will evaluate how the university manages risks and maintains academic standards, potentially leading to further intervention if governance systems are found lacking.
Historical Context and Future Implications
Shortly after Genevieve Bell assumed the role of vice-chancellor in January 2024, it was revealed that ANU faced a significant financial deficit. The Renew ANU program, aimed at saving $250 million by 2026, has been a focal point of discontent, with staff and student groups expressing anger over perceived mismanagement and lack of transparency.
In March this year, the National Tertiary Education Union passed a no-confidence motion against Bishop and Bell, citing financial mismanagement and a toxic workplace culture. Further criticisms have emerged over the reliance on external consultants and significant expenses incurred by Bishop’s office.
The ongoing investigations by TEQSA and the self-assurance report offer a potential avenue for external scrutiny. However, regulatory processes are slow, and any enforcement actions could take months or even years to materialize.
Meanwhile, discontent among staff and students remains high. A recent survey by the ANU Governance Project revealed that 97% of respondents believe the university’s current governance is inadequate and requires overhaul.
The coming months will be crucial in determining whether the current leadership can weather the storm or if external intervention will become necessary. Until then, Bishop and Bell’s positions rely on a fragile consensus that intervention might cause more harm than allowing them to complete their terms.
