Statements, Policies and Open Letters

13 July 2026

Dear Professors Seaton and Blackford, Doctor Frame and Members of Senate,

The Executive Committee of the Australasian Society for Continental Philosophy (ASCP) is shocked and dismayed to learn of the University of Dundee’s plan to discontinue Philosophy as a named degree from 2027. While we acknowledge the financial challenges faced by modern universities, we urge you in the strongest possible terms to reconsider this proposal.

The staff of the Philosophy Programme at the University of Dundee, and its associated Scottish Centre for Continental Philosophy, are very well known to our Society. Collectively and individually, they have had, and continue to have, an enormous impact on the work of ASCP members. They are research leaders who have shaped and continue to shape the areas of inquiry our Society was set up to promote.

Philosophy at Dundee also has a stellar reputation for the quality of its teaching. It is the only programme specializing in Continental European Philosophy in Scotland, making its offerings unique. As the University Executive will be aware, it is also highly ranked against key metrics in the Complete University Guide, the Guardian University Guide and the Times University Rankings. Finally, the programme is highly cost effective. According to the Guardian University Guide 2026, its student-to-staff ratio is 19.8, one of the highest in the UK, even as it produces graduates who ascend to key social and intellectual roles, such as Amanda Askell, an AI Ethicist and one of Time magazine’s Top 100 most influential people in the world in 2024. Given these facts, we find it incomprehensible that the programme is currently under threat.

We express our unreserved support of the Petition to Save the Philosophy Programme at Dundee University. We are deeply concerned about the negative repercussions the proposed closure will have on students and staff, as well as on our discipline as a whole. We firmly believe the closure, should it go ahead, we will do lasting harm to the reputation of the University of Dundee. Finally, we fear that, should the University proceed with its proposal, a vital public good will be undermined. At a time of political, technological, economic and ecological upheaval, tackling the major cultural and social challenges of our time will require the kind of critical and engaged thought nurtured by the Philosophy Programme at the University of Dundee.

Sincerely,

A/Prof. Charles Barbour, Chair of the ASCP

On behalf of the ASCP executive.

Download the letter as a PDF

9 April 2026

Dear Committee Members,

The Executive Committee of the Australasian Society for Continental Philosophy (ASCP) welcomes the opportunity to make a submission to the Senate Education and Employment Legislation Committee’s Inquiry into the Higher Education Support Amendment (Reverse Job-Ready Graduates Fee Hikes and End 50k Arts Degrees) Bill 2025.

The ASCP, established in 1995, represents researchers working with the Continental European philosophical tradition across Australia, New Zealand, the South Pacific and Southeast Asia, and in disciplines ranging across the full breadth of the Humanities and Social Sciences. Our Society promotes the interdisciplinary exchange of ideas inspired by the diverse traditions of European Philosophy, and the development of productive links with educational institutions, government bodies, and marginalized communities within the wider Australasian public. We have a longstanding commitment to advance gender equity in academia and to foster dialogue between diverse philosophical and cultural traditions, both within Australia and internationally.

Calls to reverse the Job-Ready Graduates (JRG) package have been intensifying for some time. On behalf of our diverse membership and in line with our Society’s aims, the ASCP Executive Committee echoes many of the well-established concerns related to the JRG. In particular, we are concerned with how: (i) the JRG undermines equity of participation in higher education, of the kind the ASCP strives to promote; and (ii) the JRG works against our national interests by undermining the capacity for research in the Humanities and Social Sciences, including philosophical research, to address the major challenges of our time.

As the Australian Universities Accord Final Report recognizes, the JRG’s “purpose of providing price signals to influence student choices has failed.”(1) In the lowest student-contribution band, Bachelor commencements in Agriculture, Maths, Education and Nursing actually declined overall between 2020 and 2024.(2) Meanwhile, the JRG continues to encumber many students with extremely large debts that are not aligned with their earning potential. A three-year Arts degree now costs approximately $52,000. The burden of this very large increase in fees for those studying Humanities and Social Sciences has also disproportionately impacted women, Indigenous and first-in-family university students, as well as students from low socioeconomic backgrounds, who are more likely to commence higher education in disciplines focused on society and culture. The JRG clearly undermines the ASCP’s and the Universities Accord’s goal related to equity of participation in higher education.(3)

The JRG also works against our national interests. As analysis by the Innovative Research Universities shows, Bachelor commencements in the Humanities and Social Sciences declined significantly between 2020 and 2024.4 In turn, this has increased the financial strain felt by Arts Faculties across Australia, resulting in course cutting and job losses at the University of Wollongong, Macquarie University and the University of Tasmania, among others. At a time of major political, technological, economic and ecological upheaval, the loss of large numbers of teachers and researchers in the Humanities and Social Sciences reduces our national capacity to tackle the major cultural and social challenges of our time. Declining enrolments and the ensuing loss of courses and even whole disciplines also greatly restrict the benefits that flow from the existence of a high degree of cultural and social literacy in our community. Australia needs a widespread capacity to interrogate and engage in thoughtful debate around the ideas, beliefs and values that structure and guide our individual and collective lives. Moreover, as the Australian Academy of the Humanities has noted, Humanities and Social Sciences research is essential for the development of the “cultural and social expertise” Australia needs “to design, deploy, evaluate and govern AI in ways that are trustworthy, inclusive and aligned with Australian values and contexts.”5 In short, the critical, analytical and creative competencies developed and exercised through study and research in the Humanities and Social Sciences are a crucial public good that ought to be safeguarded and appropriately funded.

In light of the above, the ASCP Executive Committee wholeheartedly supports, and as a matter of extreme urgency, the Universities Accord’s Recommendation 16(a), which involves “reducing student contributions to address the most significant impacts of the Job-ready Graduates (JRG) package starting with students in humanities, other society and culture, communications and human movement.”

Sincerely,
A/Prof. Charles Barbour, Chair of the ASCP
On behalf of the ASCP executive.

Download the letter as a PDF

8 December 2025

Dear Professors Dowton and Dixon,

The Executive Committee of the Australasian Society for Continental Philosophy (ASCP) is shocked to learn of the forced redundancy of Dr Joanne Faulkner, Senior Lecturer in Media and Communications at Macquarie University, in the School of Communication, Society and Culture. Dr Faulkner is a leading scholar in the fields of Critical Child Studies, Settler Colonial Studies and Feminist Theory and Philosophy, with a stellar international and national reputation. She publishes regularly in top-ranked journals (Scimago Q1), and with leading academic presses (SENSE A). She has also held prestigious ARC DECRA and Future Fellowships. Finally, we understand that Dr Faulkner is a vital teaching member of staff, charged with a large second-year unit in the coming semester that her Faculty will need to cover.

Our Society, established in 1995, represents researchers working in the field of Continental European philosophy across Australia, New Zealand, the South Pacific and Southeast Asia, and in disciplines ranging across the humanities and social sciences. Dr Faulkner is well known and highly respected by our large membership. She was a keynote at our annual conference at the University of Sydney in 2023. She has also held numerous positions on the ASCP Executive Committee, including Chair (2014-2017), and has mentored scores of postgraduate and early career researchers, shaping a generation of scholars.

We find it incomprehensible that Dr Faulkner could have been made redundant on performance grounds. To outside observers, the perception is that she was likely sacked due to her work with the NTEU. In fact, the breakdown of staff who were made redundant at Macquarie University presents observers with a recurring pattern: they appear to be mostly women with excellent track records, but associated either with the union or other political causes – in short, staff who are well-respected by their peers and students, but who may be a source of discomfort for their managers. We thus feel that this action against Dr Faulkner will do lasting harm to the reputation of Macquarie University, which should be of concern to the Senior Leadership Team and University Council. We urge you in the strongest possible terms to reverse this decision.

Sincerely,

A/Prof. Charles Barbour, Chair of the ASCP

On behalf of the ASCP executive.

Download Statement as a PDF

ASCP Statement on Academic Freedom

In accordance with its aims as outlined in its Constitution, and in a manner consistent with its relevant policies and governing documents, the Australasian Society for Continental Philosophy (ASCP) supports the principle of academic freedom. We also support the use of academic freedom that empowers, advances, and promotes minoritised knowledges. The ASCP defends the right of its members to conduct research and engage in scholarly debate, including on topics that are controversial, where such research and debate are informed by rigorous scholarship and the highest ethical standards, including principles of academic integrity and honesty. The ASCP recognises that such a right is to be exercised respectfully, inclusively, and with epistemic humility, and does not include a right to act unlawfully, including, but not limited to, vilification, harassment, or intimidation.

Download Letter as a PDF

Response to Policy Review of the National Competitive Grants Program
Discussion Paper: A New Plan for ARC-Funded Research

6 April 2025

To whom it may concern:

The ASCP welcomes the opportunity to respond to the new Policy Review of the NCGP by the ARC and the Department of Education. The ASCP is an academic society that promotes the interdisciplinary exchange of ideas inspired by diverse philosophical traditions, including phenomenology, existentialism, critical theory, hermeneutics, feminism, deconstruction, and poststructuralism. Equally it fosters productive relationships with educational institutions, government bodies, and marginalized communities within the wider Australasian public. In order to promote critical thought in the face of global challenges, the ASCP shares the sense of urgency conveyed in the discussion paper “A New Plan for ARC-funded Research.” We believe it is of the utmost importance that Australia adopts a new competitive grants framework that not only consolidates and further supports local talent and expertise, but also rises to meet new concerns as they emerge and affect our communities.

With these general comments in the background, the ASCP would like to focus its response to the current proposals on three issues, chosen for their significance to our membership in particular and to philosophical research more generally: 1) the effort to provide new avenues of support for ECRs and MCRs; 2) the question of internationalisation and global research; and 3) the relationship between basic and applied research.

1) The established ARC fellowship schemes (DECRA, FF, LF) were designed to cultivate individual researchers across the course of their careers. They also tended to privilege a smaller number of research leaders. The new 2-year fellowships will clearly support a larger total number of scholars and offer more opportunities to ECRs and MCRs. This is an aspect of the proposal that the ASCP applauds in principle, and that would be very welcome for its members, most of whom are ECRs and MCRs. However, the new fellowships seem to be directed towards applicants who already have ongoing academic positions, rather than offering a path for entry into such a position, as was often the case with DECRAs and FFs. Similarly, the effort to avoid “removing researchers from the workforce” suggests that teaching relief will very rarely be funded. In conjunction with the 2-year limit, this would make it difficult for an ECR to complete any substantial amount of research, much less establish the kind of research profile required to advance an academic career. It would also make it much less inviting to international candidates, who would have to relocate for a very short period of guaranteed employment. We believe that more thought needs to be given to how the new grant schemes will work in practice, and whether they will improve or impede opportunities for new scholars to emerge and flourish.

2) On occasion, the proposal notes the importance of internationalisation and globalised research. At the same time, it seems to be focused on developing specifically Australian capacities. It also somewhat curiously suggests that Australia’s impact on global research should be pursued through the promotion of local, Australia-based and -focused research. We believe that this approach could have a significant negative impact on ASCP members, whose research is international by definition, and who frequently rely on international networks to advance their careers and research goals. It could also cause difficulties for Australia-trained ECRs seeking to enter international job markets, which is often the case for ASCP members as well. The proposal thus requires a much clearer articulation of the ARC’s internationalisation agenda, and how it will encourage new contributions to global research. How will the ARC grant schemes be mobilised to generate authentic collaborations with international scholars and constituencies? How will new modes of international research be not only recognised but encouraged? Moreover, given that our society is explicitly Australasian rather than Australian, some explanation of how the new schemes will develop regional opportunities would also be welcome.

3) Finally, while the ASCP is primarily a philosophy organisation, and thus committed to the value of abstract theoretical reflection, it recognises the importance of research impact, and the need to collaborate with non-academic stakeholders. At the same time, there is a tendency in the proposal to dismantle if not entirely collapse established distinctions between basic and applied research, as was previously reflected in the difference between Discovery and Linkage grant schemes. The emphasis on “end-user collaborations” also runs the risk of promoting a relatively narrow instrumental understanding of research impact and adopting a STEM and market-oriented model that could severely curtail the critical projects often pursued in philosophy and by ASCP members. We would encourage the ARC to do more to protect the realm of pure research and to conceive of impact in a more expansive fashion, such that things like informed democratic deliberation or the fostering of a diverse, critically attuned, and inclusive civil society could be understood as valuable research outcomes. A commitment of this nature is particularly pertinent in an atmosphere of dramatic social, political, and especially technological upheaval.

The ASCP would be happy to elaborate on any of the points made here, and to explain our reasoning in more detail, as required. We once again thank the ARC for the opportunity to contribute to this consultation process and look forward to the unfolding of a new and robust research funding model.

Sincerely,
Charles Barbour

Download the Letter as a PDF

Addressed to the Vice-Chancellor and Provost of Kingston University, and the Dean of the Kingston School of Art

2 April 2025

Dear Professors Spier, Laville, and Ure,

We are shocked and dismayed to learn of the proposed closure of the Centre for Research in Modern European Philosophy (CRMEP). While we acknowledge the financial challenges faced by all modern universities, we urge you in the strongest possible terms to reconsider this proposal.

The Australasian Society for Continental Philosophy (ASCP), established in 1995, represents researchers working in the field of Continental European philosophy across Australia, New Zealand, the South Pacific and Southeast Asia, and in disciplines ranging across the humanities and social sciences. Our Society promotes the interdisciplinary exchange of ideas inspired by the diverse traditions of European thought (such as phenomenology, existentialism, critical theory, hermeneutics, deconstruction and poststructuralism), and the development of productive links with educational institutions, government bodies, and marginalized communities within the wider Australasian public.

The CRMEP and its staff are well known to our Society. Collectively and individually, they have had, and continue to have, an enormous impact on the work of our members. Indeed, the CRMEP has perhaps the strongest concentration of research leaders in the field of Continental European philosophy anywhere in the world. They are not only highly cited, they have indelibly shaped the areas of inquiry in which they participate. Their contributions to the philosophical and broader intellectual landscape in the UK and internationally are unique and invaluable.

We express our unreserved support of the Open Letter from CRMEP researchers and students. We are deeply concerned about the negative repercussions the proposed closure of the CRMEP will have on the students and staff in your care, as well as on our discipline as a whole. We firmly believe the closure, should it go ahead, we will do lasting harm to the reputation of Kingston University, which should be of concern to the Board of Governors, Senior Leadership Team and Academic Council. Finally, we fear that, should the University proceed with its proposal, an absolutely vital public good will be further undermined at a crucial moment in our collective history. At a time of political, technological, economic and ecological upheaval, we need the kind of critical thought nurtured by CRMEP more than ever.

Sincerely,
A/Prof. Charles Barbour, Chair of the ASCP
On behalf of the ASCP executive.

The Australasian Society for Continental Philosophy (ASCP) views with concern Education Minister Tehan’s announcement of 19 June 2020 about the restructure of University funding.

The purpose of this restructuring is to support degrees that prepare graduates to be “job ready” while creating more Commonwealth funded places. This will be achieved by decreasing the Commonwealth contribution to Humanities and Social Science (HASS) degrees, including philosophy, whilst increasing the Commonwealth contribution to select degrees, such as teaching, nursing and IT.

We recognize that the present COVID-19 crisis raises profound challenges for higher education in this country. We acknowledge the vital need for higher education reform, as the nation tries to recover.

However, the ASCP joins other parties in questioning whether the proposed policies will achieve the government’s stated aims, on their own terms.

As educators, we also question whether artificially interfering in students’ educational choices by devaluing humanities degrees will lastingly benefit the country in a time of rapidly growing instability and socio-technological change. In such troubled times the Humanities are especially significant to think through our shared as well as contested values and to open up new horizons in thought.

The government and its supporters claim a passionate concern to preserve imperiled cultural memory and tradition. Yet using “price signals” to redirect students away from non-vocational higher education represents a startling break with the educational history Australia inherits, from classical antiquity, Indigenous cultures and diverse traditions in the great Arts Faculties at the core of the universities.

The government and its supporters claim to be promoting the larger national interest. Yet using market signals to effectively repackage humanities degrees as luxury goods turns its back on the vital role the universities have long played in nation-building, in Australia as elsewhere.

Mr Tehan's proposal reflects an increasing loss of any sense of Australians as more than economic agents who live to work, but also citizens whose higher education was long considered vital to enriching Australian democracy, across party lines.

Australia is moving into a deeply troubled time. When we look overseas, we can see the dangers that attend societies wherein economic inequality, and social and racial divides have developed to unprecedented levels. We are witnessing nearly-daily the perverse public health and security effects that follow when populations elect leaders who advertise their scorn for science, civility and culture as a badge of authenticity.

In such times, the importance of humanities degrees which preserve (but also question) our shared histories (proud and shameful), analyze (but also critique) social and political ideologies and institutions (Left and Right), and open students to the diverse cultural heritage of not simply the Western, but the other great cultures of the world, is increasing.

In the years ahead, the importance of humanities degrees in educating citizens how to read, interpret, and think for themselves, and to intelligently question the reliability of the information new media floods them with, will be paramount for the continuing health of Australia as a democracy in which informed discussions about a good life holds sway over demagogic pandering.

The ASCP therefore joins with the Australian Academy of the Humanities and the Australasian Council of Deans of Arts, Social Science and Humanities in urging the government to urgently reconsider this proposal.

ASCP Executive Committee

Statements, Policies and Open Letters

In Support of Dundee Philosophy

Submission to Higher Education Support Amendment (Reverse Job-Ready Graduates Fee Hikes and End 50k Arts Degrees) Bill 2025

Letter in support of Joanne Faulkner

Statement on Academic Freedom

Response to Policy Review of the National Competitive Grants Program

Letter in support of the CRMEP at Kingston University

ASCP statement regarding the announced restructure of University funding