While students rioted over fee increases, the acting CEO of Higher Education SA, Jeffrey Mabelebele, told parliament that universities were in a "precarious financial position". Chris Barron asks him ...

Given their financial constraints, can the salaries universities are paying their vice-chancellors and principals be justified?

I would say yes, they can be justified, because those are decisions that are taken by council.

But are they justified, given that universities say they don't have any money?

 I would think so, given the kind of expertise they [the vice-chancellors] are bringing.

What kind of expertise is that?

The vice-chancellor of Tshwane University of Technology was getting R2.2-million before he was fired and the university put under administration? I wouldn't want to get into that, but all I can say in broad terms is that those salaries were determined by the proper structures.

That's not the same as saying they're justified, is it?

They're justified because a number of considerations were made before they arrived at determining those salaries, including the competencies that those people are bringing.

The vice-chancellor of Tshwane University was considered competent, but then was fired. I'm not sure he was fired.

He was removed from office?

 I wouldn't want to get into the specifics of that case, but, in my view, his salary was justified because it was made by the right governance structures.

Should the salaries of vice-chancellors and principals be reviewed?

By whom?

Possibly by you?

No, HESA does not have a role to play in terms of that, because we should respect the autonomy of the institutions.

Shouldn't it concern you if universities are cash-strapped and paying salaries of up to R4-million?

 I'm not sure whether universities are cash-strapped.

Isn't that what you told parliament?

We were raising a concern that if universities are not getting sufficient funding from government, they will be forced to increase their fees.

You said most universities were in a precarious financial position?

 Yes.

How sustainable is the present situation?

All I'm going to say is that the quality of learning will be compromised if the situation is not addressed.

If government won't increase grants and students can't afford more fees, then the situation is reaching a crisis point, surely?

 There has to be a balance between the three categories of funding sources: government grants, tuition fees and private income.

Is there a balance?

 Since 2001, there's been a steady decline in government grants, but a steady increase of tuition fees and a 1% increase of private income. If government grants do not go up, then pressure will be put on tuition fees.

We've seen the results of this in KwaZulu-Natal. Students are refusing to pay more. What is the way out?

 We should engage government more to bring to the attention of cabinet the situation I've outlined.

Should universities be doing more to be profitable?

Higher education is a public good. Universities are not there to generate profits.

Haven't we reached a point where they're going to have to generate profits?

Some universities don't have the industrial base around which they can generate substantial private income. Their engagements with business have not developed to that extent.

Couldn't they be using their research more profitably?

Those with a strong focus on research are doing this, but some universities have a limited capacity for research.

Or they're not doing research that has any application outside?

 Even if they are doing it, it's not on the scale that would generate much income.

Isn't there a need for universities to be run more like businesses?

Universities are knowledge producers; they're not there to generate profits.

You say companies are reducing their donations. Why?

I wouldn't want to speculate on their reasons, but all I know is that they could be doing more.