University Cuts Ties with Broadspectrum Reports of Physical and Sexual Abuse in Detention Centres on Nauru and Manus Island

As Universities become corporatised they are increasingly contracting with business interests as profit becomes increasingly the goal as the Federal Government cuts funds in relation to its agenda of privatisation.  This is often worded as ‘small government’ or less government interference.  The issue appears to be governments privatising the public sector and this topic has implications for universities and refugees in this case as detention centres are run by private multinational companies.  The key issue as highlighted in the heading is universities associating with companies that have been reported to be engaging in physical and sexual abuse.  I have been to refugee meetings and seen the footage and heard personal testimonials of abuse.  The issue appears to be profit over people and the detachment from the moral conscience that drives how people are treated. There appears to be a disconnect particularly evident in the cases of vulnerable people who cannot defend themselves or do not have access to human rights provisions in legislation.  The case overtime I believe is building for a Bill of Rights here in Australia with legal provisions to protect people from abuses from those in power. Vulnerable people are particularly in harms way as they do not have the money or influence to stop the abuse.  They have to suffer greatly before people of conscience respond to their plight.  It seems to take years for any ethical or values based action to be taken. That should be concerning.  
It is very important that universities do not undertake business with organisations who are unethical as this impacts their reputation and brings into question their ethics.  I would prefer to reword that sentence and simply say not to do business with organisations as they are harming or killing people (suicide included) but unfortunately the business vernacular requires self interest as business interest to be placed first (reputation, brand image, profits, legal action) as this is heard rather than simple care for people as a statement of who a leader or organisation is!  The fact this needs to be spelled out reveals we have serious ethical problems that are not directly addressed as lawyers rush into protect interests and assets rather than creating forums to discuss these issues and awaken the humanity in leaders so that people’s lives are saved.  Imagine if the person on Manus or Nauru was your child, mother, father, grandparent – would you remain indifferent or act!   
On a positive note it was good to learn that staff and students of the University of Newcastle were active on the issue of abuse in the detention centres on Nauru and Manus Island. This impacted their decision.  So for the moment democracy is still occurring but for how long I am not sure.  I believe people must speak up if they have ethical concerns and desire a democracy to live in.  The alternative is not in their interests.A few questions stimulated by the article:

  • Why are universities becoming corporate rather than educational?
  • Is corporatisation in the public interest?
  • Are corporate interests likely to distort educational delivery of courses favouring them?
  • Are the redundancy of staff unrelated issues?  What are future education delivery formats?
  • How can a university maintain an ethical investment and procurement policy without significant changes in personal ethics of decision makers?
  • Should humanities be brought back to universities combining ethics and empathy?
  • Should the ethical clause adoption say they will not be involved in unethical business?
  • Why would the Federal government be involved in a deal with Ferrovial (owner of Broadspectrum)?  Is this ethical?
  • Why is the company working closely with the university to support a smooth transition (to what?)  This appears to be managing the public image?

 

https://www.theherald.com.au/story/4667563/university-of-newcastle-cuts-ties-with-broadspectrum/

University of Newcastle cuts ties with Broadspectrum

ANGER: The $88 million contract between the University of Newcastle and Broadspectrum sparked outrage among students and staff when it was announced in 2015.

 ANGER: The $88 million contract between the University of Newcastle and Broadspectrum sparked outrage among students and staff when it was announced in 2015.

The Newcastle Herald can reveal that the deal with Broadspectrum – previously Transfield – will be torn up before the end of the year. It comes less than two years after the university signed a five-year, $88 million management and maintenance contract for its campuses, prompting widespread protest from students and staff.

Reports of physical and sexual abuse suffered by asylum seekers and refugees at both detention centres are common. Last year a report by Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International claimed asylum seekers held in Nauru were suffering “severe abuse”.

The university did not comment on why the contract had been cancelled, but Tim Buchanan, a University of Newcastle student and spokesman for campus activist group Students Against Detention, said he believed the university had “bowed to student pressure”.

“Staff and students have been very active on this issue, and we’re told on a regular basis that the university is quite fearful of the brand damage they’ve suffered,” he said.

“I think them cutting the contract with Broadspectrum is a really great step forward.”

A university spokeswoman confirmed it had “reached agreement” with Broadspectrum to “progressively transition out of the current maintenance and facilities services contract before the end of the year as part of its revised estate management strategy”.

The spokeswoman said the decision was “about the future of our Estate Management Strategy”.

“Our priority is to ensure that we continue to deliver high-quality and efficient maintenance and facilities services for the benefit of our staff and students,” the university spokeswoman said.

She said “the only payment to Broadspectrum will be for its continued service provision as we transition out of the contract”.

The union claims 170 of the more than 1700 full-time and casual professional staff could face redundancy.

However the university criticised the union for raising “a suite of disconnected issues in an attempt to detract from the great achievements of staff and students, which was the focus of [the] launch of UON’s new brand campaign”.

The university spokeswoman said the decision to cut short its contract with Broadspectrum “is not part of the broader organisational design project at the university”.

While Mr Buchanan welcomed the news that the university had cut its ties with Broadspectrum, she aid students on campus would continue to campaign for it to adopt an “ethical investment and procurement policy” that would see it refuse to be involved in the detention industry.

“We’d like the university to adopt an ethical clause saying they will not be involved in the offshore detention centre industry,” he said.

Broadspectrum’s contracts on Manus Island and Nauru are due to end in October this year.

Ferrovial had signaled that it would seek to end the contract in February, however the federal government exercised it right to extend the deal.

A spokeswoman for Broadspectrum said the company would “work closely with the university to support a smooth transition”.

Mohandas Gandhi

“The weak can never forgive. Forgiveness is the attribute of the strong.”

Archives
Categories