Scottish universities attack SNP shake-up plans

Scotland's universities have attacked the ruling Scottish National party's plans to shake up the nation's higher education sector, calling on an increasingly activist parliament to scrap proposed legislation they say could damage their enviable international reputations.

The devolved government is planning to introduce a higher education governance bill in June that is expected to demand university governing bodies include trade union nominees, require the chair to be elected to the board, increase scrutiny by the Scottish parliament and redefine "academic freedom" and the titles of university heads.

Principals of some of Scotland's most prestigious universities said the proposals by the SNP, which has soared in opinion polls following the independence referendum in September and could hold the balance of power in Westminster after the general election on May 7, would undermine governance.

The forthcoming reforms also highlight the more hands-on approach of the SNP-majority government, whose other policies have included merging Scotland's police forces and stricter rules on land ownership in Scotland.

"You have a series of solutions with no clear problems," said Steve Chapman, departing principal of Edinburgh's Heriot-Watt university. "It will start to change the nature of universities: they will become less ambitious, more directed, less competitive and less efficient."

He added: "You can't imagine the US government telling Harvard what to do - the same should apply here."

Professor Ian Diamond, principal of the University of Aberdeen, said he was "frankly baffled" by what the legislation added to the organisation and leadership of Scottish universities. He added: "Why are we engaging in something that doesn't further the competitiveness of universities?"

Supporters of the bill said it would make it easier for staff to hold managers to account, with Ferdinand von Prondzynski, the principal of Aberdeen's Robert Gordon University who was appointed by the Scottish government to lead the initial review, saying "nothing we recommended compromises institutional autonomy".

But this was rejected by other principals. Charlie Jeffery, the University of Edinburgh's senior vice-principal, said any proposals for staff representatives to be replaced by union nominees could "disenfranchise most of the staff", since the majority of Scotland's university employees did not belong to unions.

<

The tabular content relating to this article is not available to view. Apologies in advance for the inconvenience caused.

There was also concern from the university leaders over how the legislation could undermine moves towards gender equality on the governing bodies. Petra Wend, principal of Queen Margaret University, said: "Decades of research show that when there are direct elections women are deterred from applying." While Frances Cairncross, the chair of court at Heriot-Watt, said: "If I had had to submit to an election campaign I'm afraid I'd have chosen not to stand."

"It is wrong to say we are going back to the 1970s", said Mary Senior, Scotland official for the University and College Union. She said there would be less opportunity for courts to "rubber stamp" above-inflation pay rises for principals and to close down academic departments. "The state gives universities billions every year - it's right that it should set their parameters."

The Scottish government said it wanted to "enable our universities to embrace more transparent and democratic governance principles". The government added that it was analysing the responses to a recent public consultation on the bill.

© The Financial Times Limited 2015. All rights reserved.
FT and Financial Times are trademarks of the Financial Times Ltd.
Not to be redistributed, copied or modified in any way.
Euro2day.gr is solely responsible for providing this translation and the Financial Times Limited does not accept any liability for the accuracy or quality of the translation