We invite all current and former residents of the ANU Halls of Residence to sign this petition.

We demand that the University:

1. Halt any ResComm reform until 2026;
2. Engage with the IHC with greater transparency and respect;
3. Officially commit to an elected Residents’ Committee model;
4. Officially commit to democratic, unique terms of references for each individual ResComm;
5. Acknowledge that ResComm fees are student money and we have a right to spend that on our communities.
6. Release a full and transparent change proposal before the implementation of any reform to the ResCom structure.

The only information RED have provided in relation to the proposal includes these three alarming reforms: 

1. Two-thirds of positions will be unelected.
2. All Halls — regardless of their separate needs — will be forced to have the same model.
3. All Halls will lose budgetary autonomy with a finance committee controlled by staff. 

Residents’ Committees (ResComms) are integral to the student experience of those living on campus at ANU. These elected student representatives work tirelessly to build community at our Residential Halls through democratic leadership, events, peer support and wellbeing initiatives. Their service-driven students establish and sustain the unique culture of each Hall, ensure residents are safe, and advocate for their interests as autonomous self-governed bodies. These ResComms deserve respect, support and autonomy from the ANU — not interference.

Yet the ANU’s Residential Experience Division (RED) is proposing major reforms to the operation of our ResComms. The proposed changes would drastically undermine our ResComms’ independence and democratic legitimacy; they would diminish residents' representation; and they would force residents’ events underground. 

The way that RED has engaged in this process has been extremely disrespectful:

• RED gave notice of their initial proposal to the Inter-Hall Council (IHC) on Wednesday 27 August 2025 in the form of a powerpoint presentation. 
• This information was released on the eve of the mid-semester break, and is set to take effect immediately on 15 September 2025, when the break ends.
• The IHC — or any of our residential communities — are yet to see a detailed copy this proposal, which is set to take effect in less than two weeks. 

This puts our communities in an extremely difficult position: with residents home for the holidays, and without a written proposal to circulate, Presidents appear to have been deliberately prevented from consulting thoroughly with their communities, and are working with no meaningful detail of this proposal.

The process of student ‘consultation’ has been unacceptable.

The survey was poorly made with leading questions. They lied to us in the feedback groups – we were promised that the rescomms would not be standardised across halls… but that’s exactly what they’ve done. 

This treatment also demonstrates a wider trend of contempt for student interests by the University. History shows that ANU has repeatedly failed to meaningfully consult with residents on proposed changes, many of which carried the potential for serious consequences for our communities. The CSO review, the abolition of SRs, the proposed removal of Deputy Heads in 2019, and the rate rises in 2014 all highlight a consistent pattern: consultation is treated as a tokenistic, box-ticking exercise, with little intention of student-informed decisions. This approach reflects a University that lacks insight into the lived experience inside our halls and underestimates the importance of resident-led communities.

RED have failed to foresee the extraordinary risk their proposal would create.

ResComm events — run by elected student leaders — are the most effective facilitator of safe drinking culture and are crucial for residents’ wellbeing. ResComm members are elected to represent student interests and are therefore uniquely positioned to take ownership of their residences' culture. If the ResComm was not elected by its peers, they would be unable to adequately run events that appeal to their community – this just leads to shadow committees and unsafe drinking practices.

These are our communities and our money. We deserve a say over how they are run. Save our ResComms.