Greg Craven Chosen After No Bids Received in Tender Process
Greg Craven, former vice-chancellor of Australian Catholic University, was appointed to lead the assessment of university antisemitism report cards after no other bids were received during an open tender.
Documents released under freedom of information laws reveal that Jillian Segal’s office initially approached three independent consulting firms and two law firms to conduct the assessment of how universities were addressing antisemitism on campus. However, all five firms declined to submit bids.
It is understood that conflicts of interest, due to ties with the university sector, prevented these firms from participating in the tender.
Following this, Segal’s office created a shortlist of five individual candidates for the role.
Craven, a constitutional lawyer and former Australian Catholic University vice-chancellor who frequently writes for News Corp’s The Australian, was at the top of this list. Documents indicate he was the first candidate approached, with others to be contacted only if he declined.
The special envoy announced Craven’s appointment to the role in November last year.
Background of the Report Card System
Segal developed the report card system as part of a strategy proposed to the federal government aimed at combating antisemitism. The proposal included withholding government funding from universities that “facilitate, enable or fail to act against antisemitism.”
According to the documents, an assistant secretary at the Department of Home Affairs emailed Segal’s chief of staff in October, requesting a “strong and well-documented business case” explaining how a “particular individual … was identified and providing justification as to why they are … able to provide the necessary skills.”
“From our earlier discussion I understand that you and Jillian had developed a shortlist of potential candidates. The thought process by which you arrived at that list and from that to your preferred candidate would greatly assist,” the email stated.
In response, Segal’s chief of staff confirmed that the original tender, which lasted two weeks, received “no official bids” and that the office had “re-thought the process.”
“We … believe that the project could be equally well delivered … by a credentialed, eminent Australian,” they said. “Typical individuals would be retired jurists or university vice-chancellors.”
The office provided a list of five individuals, starting with Craven, and explained that due to the “nature of these individuals” it would be “inappropriate” to approach all simultaneously or have them compete.
“The most appropriate method, in our opinion, is to work our way down the list one individual at a time,” they added.
“We would consider Greg Craven to be first choice for this project given his standing both as a former university administrator and as a respected jurist.”
Three weeks later, Craven was sent a Commonwealth contract for the $232,466 role, with his term set to last until 30 June 2027.
Criticism of Appointment
In 2023, Craven described Group of Eight (Go8) universities in The Australian as “greedy” institutions that have “minimised antisemitism and genuflected to Trotskyist student unions.”
Following the Bondi shooting, he stated that universities had been a “major factor in making antisemitism respectful” and referred to campus protesters as “mutant radical groups.”
Dr Alison Barnes of the National Tertiary Education Union (NTEU) criticised Craven’s appointment, stating he had “spent years using his platform to attack the very institutions and people he is now supposed to be assessing impartially.”
“We agree entirely with the assistant secretary – there should be a strong, well-documented business case for this appointment.”
Details of the Report Card System
Documents obtained by Australia last month detail how universities are assessed on their handling of protests, encampments, and the display of flags as part of the report card system, which was adopted by the Albanese government following the 2023 review.
The criteria outline four “priority areas” for assessment, including whether policies “effectively address access to campus grounds” and regulate outdoor protests.
Universities are also evaluated on their responses to “all protests, encampments and display of flags, imagery and promotional materials within university campuses and buildings.”
The first set of reports was expected to be provided to universities in May.
Both Segal and Craven were approached for comment.
