process prevents the right decision
When institutions of learning become entangled in questions of power and process, the departure of those at their helm can feel both inevitable and instructive. Michael Still, Chancellor of the University of Wollongong, resigned effective immediately on Thursday as the state's Independent Commission Against Corruption continued its examination of governance decisions made under his watch — decisions touching on recruitment, consultancy, and the quiet reshaping of executive authority. He framed his exit as an act of protection for the university, though the timing, coinciding with his scheduled appearance before the inquiry panel, suggested the weight of scrutiny had become impossible to carry. In the space his departure leaves, questions about how institutions govern themselves — and who they truly serve — remain very much alive.
- A corruption watchdog's deepening inquiry into governance failures at the University of Wollongong has claimed its most senior casualty, with Chancellor Michael Still resigning effective immediately rather than allow the investigation to paralyse the institution.
- Still had been scheduled to testify before the ICAC panel on the very morning he resigned, but his name had quietly disappeared from the witness list in the days prior — a detail that sharpened scrutiny of his departure's true motivation.
- The inquiry has exposed a pattern of concern: draft reports allegedly revised after conversations between Still and a governance officer, a senior role reportedly designed for a specific individual without open advertisement, and a chancellor said to have warned that 'process prevents the right decision.'
- Consulting firms Aspiral and KordaMentha, the appointment of interim vice-chancellor John Dewar, and Still's professional relationship with consultant Tanya Diesel have all become focal points for investigators examining whether proper protocols were followed or quietly circumvented.
- Greg West has stepped into the acting chancellor role as the university begins its search for a permanent successor, while the ICAC inquiry presses forward — with Professor Dewar among those still expected to give evidence.
Michael Still resigned as Chancellor of the University of Wollongong on Thursday morning, stepping down effective immediately as the state's corruption watchdog continued its investigation into his conduct at the institution. In a statement, Still said he was leaving to ensure his involvement in the ICAC inquiry would not distract or burden the university's staff, students, and operations — framing the decision as one that would allow leadership renewal to proceed unimpeded. The University Council responded with a statement expressing respect for the move.
The resignation carried pointed timing. Still had been listed to give evidence before the inquiry panel that morning, but his name had been removed from the witness schedule in the preceding days. He had first announced on June 5 that he would step aside pending the inquiry's outcome; his full resignation came nine days later, appearing to preempt whatever findings might have followed his testimony.
The ICAC inquiry has been examining a range of governance and personnel decisions made during Still's tenure. Investigators have scrutinised his role in restructuring the university's leadership framework, the recruitment of senior staff, and the engagement of external consultants including the firms Aspiral and KordaMentha. His professional relationship with consultant Tanya Diesel — whose firm assisted with vice-chancellor recruitment and governance matters — has drawn particular attention, with testimony focusing on whether draft reports from her firm were revised at Still's direction. Diesel herself denied that Still had dictated her work's content, though the amendments remained a point of inquiry.
Other testimony painted a broader picture of governance under strain. Human resources executive Alison Bourke told the panel that Still had opposed advertising a senior executive position worth four hundred thousand dollars that appeared tailored for a specific individual, and that he had cautioned that 'process prevents the right decision' — a remark that suggested established procedures were viewed as obstacles. The inquiry has also examined whether conflict-of-interest and procurement protocols were consistently observed.
Greg West has assumed the acting chancellor role while the university searches for a permanent successor. The inquiry continues, with Professor John Dewar — the interim vice-chancellor whose appointment has featured prominently in the evidence — among those still expected to appear before the panel.
Michael Still stepped down as Chancellor of the University of Wollongong on Thursday morning, withdrawing from his position as the state's corruption watchdog pressed forward with an investigation into his conduct at the institution. In a statement released by the university, Still said he had made the decision to resign effective immediately so that his involvement in the Independent Commission Against Corruption inquiry would not become a distraction or burden to the university's staff, students, and broader operations. He framed the move as necessary to allow the institution to pursue leadership renewal without the shadow of his legal entanglement.
The timing of the resignation was notable. Still had been scheduled to give evidence before the ICAC panel that very morning, but his name had been removed from the witness list in the days before the hearing commenced. The University of Wollongong Council issued its own statement expressing respect for his decision, characterizing it as one made with the institution's interests at heart.
The inquiry that prompted Still's departure has been examining a series of governance decisions and personnel matters at the university over recent weeks. Investigators have focused on his role in a significant restructuring of the university's leadership framework, the processes used to recruit senior staff, and the engagement of external consultancy firms. The evidence heard so far has touched on his involvement in the appointment of interim vice-chancellor John Dewar, work undertaken by consulting firms Aspiral and KordaMentha, and attempts to reshape how the university's executive operates.
A particular thread running through the inquiry concerns Still's professional relationship with consultant Tanya Diesel, whose firm was brought in to assist with vice-chancellor recruitment and governance matters. The panel has heard testimony that draft reports prepared by Diesel's firm were revised following conversations between Still and Alyssa White, the university's former chief governance officer. Diesel herself appeared before the inquiry and pushed back against suggestions that Still had dictated the content of her work, though the amendments themselves became a point of scrutiny.
Other witnesses have provided accounts of governance decisions that may not have followed standard processes. Alison Bourke, a senior human resources executive, testified that Still had opposed advertising a proposed executive position worth four hundred thousand dollars that appeared intended for White. According to Bourke's evidence, Still warned that "process prevents the right decision"—a remark that seemed to suggest he viewed established procedures as obstacles rather than safeguards. The inquiry has also examined whether recruitment, procurement, and conflict-of-interest protocols were consistently applied, and whether certain governance choices improperly benefited particular individuals.
Still had initially announced on June 5 that he would step aside pending the outcome of the investigation, a move that suggested he anticipated the inquiry might uncover matters requiring his removal. His full resignation nine days later, timed to coincide with his scheduled testimony, appeared to preempt that process. Greg West has assumed the role of Acting Chancellor while the university begins the search for a permanent successor.
The ICAC inquiry continues. On the morning Still resigned, the panel was preparing to hear further evidence from Professor Dewar, indicating that investigators still have ground to cover in their examination of governance and decision-making at the institution.
Notable Quotes
In order to best serve the interests of the University, its staff and students, and to ensure that leadership renewal can occur without interruption, I have decided that I should resign from council effective immediately— Michael Still, in his resignation statement
process prevents the right decision— Michael Still, according to testimony from HR executive Alison Bourke regarding his opposition to advertising a senior executive position
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
Why would someone resign just as they're about to testify? Doesn't that look worse?
It might, to some. But there's a logic to it—if you resign, you're no longer the Chancellor, so your testimony becomes historical rather than current. You're answering for what you did, not what you're doing. It also removes the distraction he cited, which is real: every day he stayed, the university had to manage the story.
What was he actually accused of doing?
The inquiry was looking at whether he bent processes to favor certain people. There's a consultant he had a long relationship with, Tanya Diesel, whose firm got hired for important work. Reports she wrote got changed after conversations with him. He also apparently opposed advertising a job that seemed designed for someone he favored. It's not embezzlement—it's the question of whether he used his power to bypass the normal rules.
Did he deny it?
He didn't testify, so we don't have his direct answers. But his consultant Diesel said he didn't dictate her reports. That's a limited defense—it doesn't address whether he improperly influenced decisions or circumvented process.
What happens now?
The inquiry keeps going. Other people are still testifying. The university has an acting chancellor and needs to find a permanent one. Whether the inquiry concludes he did anything that warrants formal charges—that's still ahead.
Does resigning protect him legally?
Not really. Resigning doesn't stop an investigation or shield you from findings. But it does remove you from the immediate line of fire and lets the institution move forward. Whether that's strategic or genuinely in the university's interest depends on what the inquiry ultimately finds.