Staff exclusions from Court – Vice-Principal (Governance) responds

The Vice-Principal (Governance and Planning) has provided the following account of the University’s response to the issue of staff excluded from representation on Court:

15 December 2015

Dr Tom Jones
Branch President
UCU

VIA EMAIL

Dear Tom,

I note from last week’s “In the Loop” that the Branch has published on its website a “response” to the graduation address made by Jim Naismith, in which he criticised the Higher Education Governance (Scotland) Bill currently before the Scottish Parliament.

Whilst I would disagree with a number of the assertions made in the article (the University has not, for example, “extensively publicised” Prof Naismith’s address), I am particularly concerned at your claim that the University has been “reluctant to act” on the current situation whereby certain categories of staff are not eligible to participate in the elections for Senate assessors to Court. This is absolutely not the case.

In the past year, this issue has been discussed extensively by the Governance and Nominations Committee of the University Court, with a view to seeking an early resolution. The barrier to progress is not any reluctance on the part of the University, but quite simply the need to change the relevant ordinance governing Senatorial Assessor elections. Changing an ordinance is lengthy process, requiring formal consultation across the University and approval by the Privy Council. Our plans to embark on this process have had to be put on hold because of the uncertainty and confusion over future governance arrangements resulting from the Bill – the Scottish Government’s current proposals are impossible to reconcile with a whole range of ordinances dealing with the composition, size and functioning of the University Court. I should also add that the University has taken formal legal advice on the implications of the Bill, which has confirmed the governance challenges posed by the Bill when applied to the current ordinances.

Whilst we clearly have different views about the merits and demerits of the Bill and its implications for the autonomy and good governance of the HE sector in Scotland, I should be grateful if you would correct the article specifically to retract the allegation that the University has been reluctant to act in support of broadening the franchise for the election of Senatorial Assessors.

Yours sincerely

Alastair Merrill
Vice-Principal (Governance and Planning)