On 27 May at 8 am, ANU’s facilities and services director arrived at the ANU solidarity encampment’s initial location at Kambri lawns with at least 20 security guards, as I understand it. They woke students up and ordered them to pack up immediately, threatening to call the AFP if this order was not immediately acted upon. The reason given was that the encampment was on a primary evacuation point. Did the ANU attempt to directly communicate this ask to the encampment in any form prior to sending in the security guards at 8 am?
Senator FARUQI: On 27 May at 8 am, ANU’s facilities and services director arrived at the ANU solidarity encampment’s initial location at Kambri lawns with at least 20 security guards, as I understand it. They woke students up and ordered them to pack up immediately, threatening to call the AFP if this order was not immediately acted upon. The reason given was that the encampment was on a primary evacuation point. Did the ANU attempt to directly communicate this ask to the encampment in any form prior to sending in the security guards at 8 am?
Prof. Bell : To answer that question, I need to take you back a little bit in time, if I may. The encampment began on 29 April and at that point when the encampment began it was a small encampment, five to six tents and a marquee from a student association. At that point, we were made aware that the encampment was adjacent to and in the area of a primary fire evacuation zone for the Kambri precinct, where you have been. We notified people in the area that people should be alert because there was now something in that space. From 29 April to 8 May, the encampment increased in size and in density of things. So there were more tents. There were banners, signage tables, milk crates; many things started to appear there, and by Wednesday 8 May our facilities and services at Kambri operations manager observed that the encampment had now expanded in size. And where it expanded into was a primary evacuation route for the surrounding buildings. At that point we initiated a replanning of the emergency evacuation points and worked out to have communications to go to everyone in that area, so that they were not evacuating into the middle of that space because, to Senator Grogan’s question earlier, it is also important for us about how we maintain the safety of all of our community. We sent out an email on 10 May notifying people that there were now secondary evacuation assembly areas in play. On 21 May, there was a fire alarm triggered in the Kambri building Cultural Centre, and also in a neighbouring building and there was an evacuation. And the evacuation was chaotic, to say the least. There were people in all kinds of places. As a result of that, our facilities and services people logged a work health and safety hazard and an email was sent suggesting that we had a problem because our fire evacuation zone was impeded. We then commenced an investigation to determine if the fire evacuation zone was indeed impeded. On 24 May, that Friday, I receive an email that included a chain about the investigation and everything else. That email made clear that we had an encampment in a primary fire evacuation zone and the secondary evacuation zones had not been as successful as we would have hoped. We agreed that was a problem. I took the position that not being able to evacuate all of our students and staff and people was an intolerable risk, and, frankly, it became a problem in terms of fire laws and fire codes, and that we needed to make the campus whole again and remove the encampment out of that fire zone.
Facilities and services and security commenced a plan to think about how best to do that. Because we were talking about an encampment and because we were cognisant of the broader context of that, we consulted, as we do on many issues, with the ACT police. We consulted the ACT police, in order to be with us as we did that, because always when you are thinking about these things you are thinking about what is the best case and the worst case scenario. They notified us that they couldn’t participate with us until the following Monday. That, of course, meant that we then had a knowable fire problem in a knowable fire zone, so over the next 72 hours we rostered on additional staff, we gave all those staff the additional information to let them know about what was to happen if there was a fire or a fire alarm in that period. And, as you rightly point out, Senator Faruqi, at 8 am on that Monday morning we notified the encampment that they were in a primary fire zone—
Senator FARUQI: But you never, before security guards went in, actually communicated to them or wrote to them to say, ‘Listen, this is the problem. Would you please move.’
Prof. Bell : We notified them at 8 am that morning and we asked them—
Senator FARUQI: That is exactly what I am asking, and with threats of all the AFP. Do you accept that students felt intimidated, threatened, by this, and repeated references to disciplinary action, or the presence of police?
Prof. Bell : I think I need to reject the characterisation of threat that was there. We had a head of facilities and services with a written instruction. It is a direct order from a delegate.
Senator FARUQI: More than 20 security guards?
Prof. Bell : We had security personnel present because we also were clear that we would help people move their pieces, so—
Senator FARUQI: When were police called in?
Prof. Bell : The police were present at the time, but they were not—
Senator FARUQI: You don’t think that is threatening? I’m threatened by police if—
CHAIR: I just want to say that Professor Bell is giving fulsome answers here, Senator Faruqi, that you continue to interrupt. I think the professor should be allowed to give an answer. The Chair is giving you the call every time, but I think the answers should be allowed to be given in full.
Prof. Bell : We issued a notification to members of the encampment, along with our saying that they needed to move because they were in a fire zone. We also, in addition to the printed note giving them that notification, sent an email to the email address that we had been using at that point and had correspondence from. In that email, not only did we ask people to vacate a primary fire zone, but we also offered multiple other sites on campus for the encampment to move to. Those sites were determined not to be in a fire zone and not to be an evacuation point. So we were very clear when we were doing this that this was about managing a fire risk, not about putting an end to the encampment. We had personnel on hand to help people move their belongings, because after several weeks there’d been an accumulation of belongings, so some of the 20 people you characterised as security were actually there from facilities and grounds to help take down tents and move the tents and put them somewhere else. At that point, Senator, our students not only didn’t move but called on social media for a range of other people. The police then gave them a direct order, because, again, at this point we were dealing with people in a primary fire zone. The police came. The police negotiated. The students were given a deadline, until 12 pm the next day. They made it clear they would not leave. We then notified the rest of the precinct that there was an ongoing issue here, in order to minimise any possible risk if there’d been a fire that evening. We were very concerned about what would happen, because we still had an encampment there. However, at 11 pm on the night of 27 May, members of the encampment chose to move. They picked up their tents and belongings and they migrated—Senator O’Sullivan, for you—down University Avenue, closer to the city.
Senator Faruqi, they were extraordinary in their moving. They left a beautifully clean space, they were very good about doing that in a respectful manner, and they appeared, again, further down the end of University Avenue. And on 27 May, in the morning, we returned to them to make sure that they were safe, that they were in a place that was not in a fire zone and not in and evacuation zone.
Senator FARUQI: Professor Bell, you paint a very rosy picture, but what I have heard is that students did feel intimidated, and they did feel threatened. Have any steps been taken to ensure the wellbeing of those students who felt threatened and intimidated?
Prof. Bell : Senator Faruqi, our staff meet with members of the encampment regularly. There are members of ANU Safe that are present every day, and we continue to work with our community. Do you want to add anything to that?
Prof. Venville : Yes. We have a student safety and wellbeing team who are available to the encampment members at any time, as they are to anyone in our community. We would be very happy to, and we do, support any of our community who are not feeling safe or are feeling unwell.
Senator FARUQI: What services have been set up to support Palestinian students and staff at the university, many of whom have family and friends in Gaza and the West Bank. Have you reached out to that community and provided support?
Prof. Venville : It is quite difficult for us to identify students who have family or people that they know in the general area.
Senator FARUQI: You could put out a broad call and say, ‘People who have this, we are here to help you.’ Has that happened?
Prof. Venville : Yes, it has.
Senator FARUQI: Specifically for Palestinian—
Prof. Venville : For anyone who is—
Senator FARUQI: Students?
Prof. Venville : Yes, we’ve sent out emails, and through our Tuesday newsletter we have invited and asked people to come forward, saying that we are here to support and help anyone, absolutely—
Senator FARUQI: Palestinian students and staff?
Prof. Venville : We have reached out to all of our people who might be affected in that area, yes, absolutely.
CHAIR: Senator Faruqi, I’ll now rotate the call and come back to you. Senator Grogan.