Greenwich University

It seems that I have raised some hackles in posting my comments. I will try to answer some of the issues raised. Consider me as an interested bystander without personal interest in the debate. Simply as someone who wants to keep the record straight and factual.

For those of you who asked, I am not a lawyer, but I can read simple legal documents. I am an Australian citizen and for my own reasons wish to remain anonymous. As far as I can see that is no different from other postings.

To Poster Linyard, sorry but the Act specifically says that both the Commonwealth AND Norfolk must pass the legislation. Norfolk is specifically prohibited to pass legislation relating to education. The latitude you speak of is specifically prohibited by the Act. With regards to acceptance that is a separate issue and that is up to potential employers more than anything else. To the best of my knowledge no one has ever passed a law regarding education enforcing acceptance.

Poster George Brown cannot find any Commonwealth official. I am not privy to private documents but it is in the public domain that the then Commonwealth Minister with responsibility for the administration of the Norfolk Island Act (I think it was Senator MacDonald) who signed the Greenwich University Act. To proclaim the Act, the Administrator (Commonwealth appointed official on Norfolk Island) in a meeting of the executive council also signed the Act prior to gazettal. I would add that not a single elected member of the Commonwealth Government has come forward to criticize Greenwich University. Only a member of the opposition has.

To Poster Bill Dayson. The only way an Australian University can be accredited is by Act of Parliament. The Norfolk Island Act specifically prohibits Norfolk Island from passing legislation regarding education. The Greenwich University Act is joint Commonwealth and Norfolk Island legislation. No “credible quality assurance process” is used to establish any Australian university. Accreditation is bestowed on each university through it’s own Act.

To Poster Kane, I like you have a right to express my views. It is my view that, and legal opinion will back that, that the assertion that Greenwich is not accredited is wrong.

With regards to the AQF, the Commonwealth parliamentary records (Hansard) show that Greenwich University has been invited to re-apply. I do not know when (or indeed if) they will do so.

To Poster cdhale, please don’t jump to conclusions. I have other things to do with my life. I simply tried to express my personal views. As this is getting very time consuming, and of necessity rather longwinded, I will gracefully withdraw from further debate and go back to my previous role as an interested bystander.

I am not sure what a “slickster” is. It is not in my Oxford English dictionary, however I suspect from your usage it is something undesirable.

 

Fred:

Slickster: (uniquely American colloquialism) noun, an individual who is crafty or sly, full of wiles. Generally, referring to someone who is selling something of inferior quality, whether product or service.

You used the term "hackles". Is this the "erectile hairs along the neck and back especially of a dog" or the "dander"?

Many of us, in my humble opinion, prefer that colleges and universities be accredited and widely accepted, not excepted.
Therefore, until such time as Greenwich receives something more substantial than self-accreditation, it will be a "hard sell" here.

 

What I find fascinating about this information is that your two posts were only made 47 minutes apart. So if Mr. Walsh had already gotten calls from up to three of his associates, and then had time to call you, that means that all of them were monitoring this group as you made your post. Why were they doing that? And is it realistic to assume that they would be showing that much interest without posting anything? I notice that "Fred" reappeared two minutes after your second post. Just a coincidence, I'm sure.

 

Re: Apology to Dr. John Walsh of Brannagh of Greenwich University

Now, that is funny

 

Good ol' fred, we'll miss him so.
Jack

 

Thank you Fred

I appreciate your explanation and if Australia has "Simple" legal documents they are a legal step ahead of the world *S*

It was admitted the Greenwich U was invited to re-apply to the AQF. Why would they care about doing that if they are fully accredited already?

Could we be confusing "state-approved" with "accreditation?"

 

Re: Apology to Dr. John Walsh of Brannagh of Greenwich University

It must have been Fred calling.....

John

 

Fred wrote:

Poster George Brown cannot find any Commonwealth official

There are plenty, but none that will talk about the Greenwich University Act.

I am not privy to private documents but it is in the public domain that the then Commonwealth Minister with responsibility for the administration of the Norfolk Island Act (I think it was Senator MacDonald) who signed the Greenwich University Act[I/]

Yes, common knowledge, however this was not my question. You claimed that the Commonwealth was party to the *drafting* of the bill. This is new information, and I am sure there would be many people interested in learning who was part of this. Your 'interested bystander' information is quite ground-breaking.

To proclaim the Act, the Administrator (Commonwealth appointed official on Norfolk Island) in a meeting of the executive council also signed the Act prior to gazettal

Again, common knowledge. *However* it is my understanding (and this is fully accesible through Hansard and media articles) that Senator McDonald was assured that Greenwich's operations were to be restricted to Norfolk Island only. It is when automatic listing on the AQF, assumed by Greenwich, was challenged and the furore erupted.

I would add that not a single elected member of the Commonwealth Government has come forward to criticize Greenwich University. Only a member of the opposition has

Yep, that's politics mate. And isn't parliamentary privilege grand!

Cheers,

George

 

Wow, this thread has had a flurry of activity since I was last here.

David (linyard) - Thanks for handling the definition for me. I assumed that by putting it in quotes, people would realize that I understood it to be a slang term.

Fred (if you are still around ) - know that I am not jumping to conclusions about anything. I am just calling them as I see them. As I mentioned earlier, you are certainly welcome to post your views here. I will whole-heartedly support your right to do so. As I support your right, I will exercise my own.

Good luck in your legal studies (so that you can defend 'ole Greenwich

clint

 

I'm sorry but I can't help it...

Fred commented that Greenwich U. received approval by the Norfolk Island Act of 1979, in which both Norfolk Island and Australia would have played an integral part in its' approval.

The Legislative Assembly consists of nine members. Its powers to legislate are restricted by the Norfolk Island Act: it may not pass bills authorising the coinage of money, nor any bills involving fishing, customs, immigration, education, quarantine, industrial relations, movable cultural objects and social security; these must be approved not only by the Australian Administrator, but also by Australia's Minister for Territories. Where any legislation is in conflict with ordinances made by Australia's Governor-General, the Norfolk Island legislation is deemed null and void. Please note the word "Bills", it says nothing about "Acts."

According to the Greenwich University Act of 1998, the authority lies solely on Norfolk Island through the enactment of the Legislative Assembly. The Act states that Greenwich is granted the authority to "operate" citing the Education Act of 1931 and the Companies Act of 1985.

What is interesting is that I was unable to locate the Education Act of 1931, however, there is an Education Act of 1937. Under this law, Norfolk has the authority under Part 3, section 20(d) to register "public tertiary institutions". All they need to do is post in the Gazette their actions.

The Companies Act 1985, section 89, permits a corporation the rights and privileges that any other domestic company would enjoy.

Since Greenwich sees fit to file suits against any institution that casts this university (their term, not mine) in a negative light, maybe I should get a lawyer. But first, they need to fix their Greenich University Act of 1998, correcting the 1931 with 1937.

It's just a thought... but hell, that's just my opinion.

 

Good Points

Greenwich U may be state-approved and is allowed to operate legally by state (or provincial, territorial etc...) law. However, International and Century University have such status, would you get a degree from them?

HUGE!!! difference between "State-Approved" to operate and "Accredited"