UCT was ranked 156th on the latest Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) World University Rankings, released at the beginning of September. It is the only South African university to appear on this list of the world’s 300 top universities. For this fact, it deserves to be congratulated. However, as with last year’s rankings, the obvious question is: Why, after 17 years of democracy, is only one South African university able to reach the top 300? And, in turn, what are the implications that flow from that?

The answer to this question is a complex one. It has to do, on the one hand, with excellence and its pursuit and, on the other hand, with the amount of money universities are able to fundraise and, perhaps more importantly, are allocated by the state.

With regards to funding, a proper study needs to be done to get the full picture but, by way of illustration, in absolute terms, the amount paid out to universities by the state has increased from R6.6 billion in 1999 to R15.9 billion in 2009. In real terms, however, it has declined, both as a percentage of GDP and of total state expenditure (the latter representing a massive decline of -22.6%). We cannot expect our universities to be able to pursue excellence or compete with the best if we do not allocate the necessary resources to them.

Just to be clear, the Democratic Alliance (DA) is not advocating that national government take a defining role in shaping universities, only that they provide more financial support. Even weighed against the wide range of pressing needs in South Africa, it is inarguable that the government - in the form of more financial support (and not more intervention) - can play a greater role in improving our universities. Indeed, it has an obligation in this regard. One it is failing to meet.

With regards to the pursuit of excellence, it is primarily our universities, but also the state, that are responsible for embracing this ideal and championing what it represents. A good place to start is by recognising that, in order to determine what is excellent and what is not, one needs some sort of measurement. The QS rankings are not definitive, neither are the Times Higher Education rankings (which will be released on 6 October), but they are helpful guides as to what works and what does not, and where best practice can be identified and learnt from.

Unfortunately, as with all international ratings, the government tends to take a hostile approach, which sometimes borders on denial. In a 2009 parliamentary reply to a DA question on the subject, for example, the Minister for Higher Education and Training, Blade Nzimande, argued that such rankings are biased, because they are based on “Westernised notions of what a university is or ought to be” and that they only apply to rich, English-speaking, first-world universities.

This is, of course, nonsense. If UCT has consistently broken into the top 200, so can other South African universities. It is a matter of determining what works and what does not.

We underestimate the importance of tertiary education to our peril. If we are to overcome the huge skills deficit we face (essential to generating real economic growth and jobs) its not going to happen until we have a greater number of excellent universities able to deliver excellent outcomes.