Adam Campbell

2,000 people turned out to lobby the University of Glasgow Court against planned cuts to student courses, as part of university plans to save £20 million.

The protest, backed by the Students’ Representative Council (SRC) and the Free Hetherington, took place on Wednesday February 16. The protesters were marching against proposed course closures, such as Nursing, the Department of Adult and Continued Learning (DACE) and modern languages such as German, Slavonic and Spanish.

The campaign against course closures has been backed by playwright Tom Stoppard and Baroness Onora O’Neill, who have both signed an open letter along with 150 academics against the course closures, which has been sent to the Scottish Education Secretary Mike Russell.

The protest began at 12 noon on University Gardens and proceed down University Avenue before going up Gibson Street. The march then continued into the university grounds, with a rally being held in the West Quadrangle.

Speakers at the rally included members of staff from Slavonic studies and nursing, as well as SNP MSP Sandra White and Green MSP Patrick Harvie, who had previously put forward a motion to the Scottish Parliament raising concern at the cuts at Glasgow University.

Speaking at the rally Sandra White called Anton Muscatelli, the Principal of Glasgow University, ‘disgrace’ while Patrick Harvie called for any politician who votes for cuts or fees to be sacked.

There were some divisions between protesters as the large majority started the march outside the Free Hetherington, while a small minority joined the march from outside the Queen Margaret Union (QMU). This march was organized by students who wished to distance themselves from the members of the Free Hetherington who participated in the kettling of NUS President Aaron Porter.

In an email sent round to all students before Wednesday’s march, President of the SRC, Tommy Gore, warned against any use of violent protest.

He said: “Come along to the march and have fun. If you agree with chants, chant them- if you feel alienated by other chants it’s likely most other people around you will feel the same way. Any minority, lacking popular support will be quickly drowned out by the sensible majority of students that we’re looking forward to marching alongside. University security will be on hand, not to limit our right to protest – which they respect and are often sympathetic to – but to make sure if idiots do turn up and idiots do try and be idiots, they won’t be able to detract from what we’re sure will be a mass meeting of like-minded, sensible and (thankfully) educated people who want to show that they feel strongly about this very important issue in a calm and dignified way.”

Despite these fears and a large police presence, the march was entirely peaceful, although there was anger at Gore’s comments, with one University member, Andrew Rubens, expressing his reasons to Gore for boycotting the march in a letter.

He said: “You are anti-democratic, anti-pluralist, authoritarian and frankly a snob (please explain to me why people who currently do not have access to a university education should not march in solidarity with students and against the further restriction of opportunity embodied in these proposed cuts to courses and staff? Or indeed ‘uneducated’ (shudder) non-academic staff at the university who will also be affected?). Freedom of speech is already under threat from government, and the SRC, with its usual mandate of less than 10% of the student body, has less right to tamper with it than they do.” He later withdrew comments regarding snobbery.

The march was timed to coincide with the meeting of the University Court, which approved a consultation on the proposed cuts. The consultation will run until May, when the university is expected to announce its decision on the cuts.

The university announced last year that is was facing a £35 million shortfall over the next three years. It hoped to attract an extra £15 million in income from overseas students, which leaves a £20 million deficit to be made up by reducing expenditure.

The cuts proposed at the moment are expected to save £3 million in 2010 and 2011, with a further £17 million in savings needing to be made over the next three years.

A university spokesperson explained the reasoning behind the proposed cuts.

He said: “The higher education sector currently faces unprecedented financial pressures, and this University is responding in a planned and strategic way to the cuts in public funding.

“Our approach is two-fold: to generate more income, and to pursue cost-savings.”

Aaron Porter

Nick Sikora

Aaron Porter, President of the National Union of Students (NUS), was surrounded and heckled by Glasgow University students on a recent visit to a Labour Party conference.

Porter, who is a Labour Party member, was approached by a number of students critical of his refusal to condemn police kettling tactics when he temporarily left the main conference venue. He was then encircled and prevented from moving by a ring of people holding hands around him.

Porter eventually fled the scene before later returning to the conference to give a speech to other Labor Party members. He was not physically touched during the incident.

The conference, titled the ‘National Labour Youth and Student Conference 2011’, was hosted by the Glasgow University Labour Club for members of Scottish Young Labour, and attended by a number of Labour politicians including Ray Collins, General Secretary of the Labour Party, and Jim Murphy MP, Shadow Secretary of State for Defence.

Onlookers claimed that upon returning to the event he looked ‘visibly shaken’, although managed to deliver his speech as planned.

Joseph McFadden, chair of the Glasgow University Labour Club, was critical of those who came to the event to heckle.

He said: “The treatment of Aaron Porter was reprehensible, only amplified by the hypocrisy of the perpetrators. Their pathetic justifications showed they have no respect for fellow human beings, as they treated Aaron in a way that I hope most people would never consider acting towards another person.

“Initially, to those at the Conference, it had appeared that people were simply protesting which we accepted was their democratic right as much as everyone at the conference had a democratic right to attend it without interference. When Aaron went out of the Theatre we were using for the main Conference events, we all thought that he was going to discuss the issues with the protesters in a proper manner; it was not until some time after the events that we found out they had actually acted as they did.”

He went on to state his belief that the NUS President handled the harassment well, and that the actions did not disturb the event.

He said: “All credit to Aaron he never looked for sympathy after his ordeal and defied the harassment in the best way possible by returning to the Conference and not being scared off by what happened. It was in a large part due to his actions that the rest of the Conference was able to proceed as well as it did and was not derailed by the thuggish behaviour of a few senseless individuals.”

Tommy Gore, Students’ Representative Council President, was not supportive of the demonstration.

He said: “Whilst the SRC are no supporters of Aaron Porter (how can he truly represent British students when more people voted for me than voted for him?), we don’t believe that physical intimidation of an individual is any way to show that opposition.

“Furthermore, the effect it had in polarising opinions on campus I thought was unhelpful in the run up to events on Wednesday, although it was obviously to everybody’s great credit who took part in the protest to show that they don’t need to resort to violence in order to get their message across to the University the opposition to the cuts.”

It was recently announced that Porter, who has faced increasingly personal attacks from students, will not be seeking re-election.

Philine Apenburg

The nominations for Glasgow University’s Students’ Representative Council (GUSRC) spring elections have been taken in and confirmed.

In the election the positions on the Council for academic officers, welfare officers, and sabbatical officers will be open for election.

The structure of the SRC Council has been changed in order to reflect the new structure of the University. The positions of faculty convenors have been replaced with college and school convenors

There have been other changes in the structure of the SRC Council. The position of Charities officer has been merged into one position with the Clubs and Societies Officer, now called Charities, Clubs and Societies Officer, with Sairah Tariq, Julia Tracey, Jamie Henfrey and James Orr contesting the position. The office of Environmental Officer has been added to the SRC Council and Ellen Docherty and Gintare Masiulyte are running for this post. While the Woman’s Interest Officer, has been replaced by Gender Equality Officer.

Many of the school representative positions remain vacant, with only four out of the eighteen positions being contested, while other positions such as Medicine, Veterinary and Life Science Convenor attracting only one candidate.

All four sabbatical positions are up for elections; these are the SRC officers who work full time, for an annual salary of £15, 292.

The sabbatical positions are the SRC President and three Vice-Presidents, VP Student Support, VP Learning and Development and VP Media and Communications.

James Foley, Stuart Ritchie and Desmond McKenna are running for SRC President.

Razvan Balaban, James Harrison, Kenneth Law, Marc Smith, Neal Robb and Cormac Beagan have been nominated for the office of VP (Learning and Development).

Oliver Milne, Dij Davies, Amy Johnson and Jamshed Ashmedov are contesting for the position of VP (Student Support).

For the position of VP (Media and Communications) Ross Mathers, John Donaldson, Fida Muhammad, Sean Anderson and Iain Smith have been nominated.

The elections are preceded by a hustings meeting, where the candidates are asked questions about the role. As a result of last year’s high turnout for the heckling meeting, two hustings are being held this year, one on February 28 for the non-sabbatical positions and one for the sabbatical positions taking place on Tuesday March 1.

Voting for the SRC elections takes place over two days, March 2 and March 3.

The contenders in the run for Glasgow University’s Rectorial position took part in a hustings event held in the Glasgow University Union Debates Chamber on February 16.

The event allowed candidates Alison Louise Kennedy and current rector Charles Kennedy a chance to address the student body before the rectorial elections. Both nominees gave short speeches before the floor was opened up to questions.

Even though the event attracted a turnout of approximately 100, Tommy Gore, President of the Students Representative Council (SRC), commented that it was not as busy as he expected, before going on to highlight the importance of the rector’s role in maintaining student and university relations.

He said: “It’s good to see a reasonable number of you here, it’s not quite as many as I had perhaps hoped.

“I believe that an active, working rector is something that is very important for us students.”

The event began with A. L. Kennedy stating she was, “under no illusions of winning.” Instead she hopes to use the Rectorial election as a chance to discuss the issues surrounding education.

She also commented, “My education quite literally saved my life” and stressed the importance of a university degree. Charles Kennedy stated that in his previous years as rector he had and hoped to continue a ‘hands on’ approach at the job.

Both candidates agreed they were aiming to provide students at Glasgow University with the best academic experience possible in light of the proposed spending cuts, an issue that students had protested about earlier that day.

Charles Kennedy commented, “Access to higher education should be based on an ability to learn, not on an ability to pay.” A view that was echoed by A. L. Kennedy.

During the hustings, students posed questions to both contenders. Questions revolved around the issue of funding cuts, with candidates being quizzed on the importance of the University’s Department of Adult and Continuing Education (DACE) and attempts by the university to outsource international student recruitment.

One student asked how the candidates planned to make up the University’s £35million debt without academic cuts. A. L. Kennedy responded that she would start with, “cutting Anton Muscatelli’s salary”. This answer received the biggest applause of the night. She went on to suggest increasing external funding but did not support the business cash-raising model, stating that it had “previously failed in the NHS and in public transport.” Charles Kennedy replied that a funding structure similar to the American alumni donation system should be created.

Questions were then raised by students concerning the future of the modern languages and nursing departments, which are facing huge cuts in funding. Both candidates responded by agreeing on the importance of financial support for these departments. Charles Kennedy commented that by slashing resources in modern languages the University was, “trying to run the vehicle without part of the engine.”

A L. Kennedy echoed his statement in relation to the nursing department.

When a question about funding of the student unions arose, Charles Kennedy was quick to offer an explanation into the previous economic management of the, recently reopened, Hetherington Research Club. He stated that the closure of the club was disappointing, and that he did contribute to a business plan for reopening the club. The plan was, however, denied by university management.

photo by Sean Anderson

The Rector elections were held on over two days February 22 and 23, with Charles Kennedy being elected Rector with 82% of the vote, with 2601 votes while A. L. Kennedy received 565.

The Hetherington Research Club (HRC) occupation has claimed a ‘drunken rampage of vandalism and intimidation’ by members of the Glasgow University Union (GUU) Board of Management, culminating in destruction of property and the activation of the building’s fire alarm, following a recent intrusion into the building.

At approximately 03.30am, Monday 7, a group of eight members of the GUU gained access to the HRC building by reportedly pretending to be members of the Green Party travelling to Glasgow for a conference. Three of the men, said to be intoxicated at the time, were naked, using ‘Vote James Foley’ and ‘Vote Oliver Milne’ placards which were left over from the recent SRC elections to retain their modesty. One also sported a bright orange feathered mask in order to obscure his identity, eyewitnesses claim.

The reported damage to the Free Hetherington included destroyed signs taken from the front of the building, deliberately blocked toilets and a missing fire extinguisher, whilst two fire engines were dispatched to the Free Hetherington in response to the activated fire alarm. Strathclyde Police were also called to the scene.

It is believed that both present and former members of the GUU Board of Management were involved in the incident.

Chris Sibbald, incoming GUU President following the institution’s recent elections, visited the occupation following the incident in attempt to reconcile relations between the two organisations. The GUU subsequently issued a formal apology condemning the damage done.

It said: “Last night, various members of Glasgow University Union took it upon themselves to streak up University Avenue and enter the occupied Hetherington Research Building. Those members of the Board of Management not implicated in the event condemn the incident fully and would like to issue a formal and public apology to all those who were offended.

“This is an action that does not represent Glasgow University Union; it was an action committed by individuals. However, those individuals are aware that they hold a position of representation and responsibility at Glasgow University Union and they must, therefore, openly apologise.”

He went on to explain that those involved will face a disciplinary hearing.

He said: “Furthermore, and more seriously, a fire alarm was set-off in the middle of the night. This is completely unacceptable and the members responsible will be taken to a full discipline hearing.

“We have asked those who represent the occupation at the Hetherington Research Club to supply Glasgow University Union with as much information as possible with regards to the cause of the fire alarm, so that we can make as strong a case as possible.

“Glasgow University Union assures its members that it is taking this matter very seriously.”

On the same evening, a banner baring the words ‘Welcome to the Free Hetherington’, which was stolen from the front of the occupied building last week, was also displayed from the top of the GUU. Attempts to retrieve it were alleged to have been met by members of the current GUU Board of Management, who, it is claimed, threw drinks at occupiers on the steps below.

Speaking to Subcity Radio, Chris Sibbald denied that any drinks had been thrown, instead asserting that a glass had fallen from the balcony accidentally.

The GUU has been involved in a string of recent controversies centring on the destruction of ‘Vote James Foley’ placards on University Avenue, as well as allegations by Foley supporters that the GUU abused their position as a polling station during the SRC elections by supporting Stuart Ritchie as a candidate, although this was strenuously denied by GUU management.

SRC Vice President for Student Support, Fraser Sutherland, criticised those involved in the latest controversy.

He said: “We are disappointed that once again the actions of a few individuals acting in an irresponsible way has undermined what should be the main focus of students at the university – that being the threat to learning and support for students through cuts levied by the university SMG.

“Setting off a fire alarm in any premises is at least juvenile and at worst highly dangerous.  It is disappointing to see people who are elsewhere in positions of responsibility act in a stupid and inappropriate way to those to those taking part in the HRC occupation.”

An eyewitness who was in the Hetherington at the time of the attack listed the accusations levied at participating GUU members.

They said: “Theft, vandalism, waste of police and fire service time, stress, sleep loss, intimidation, indecency, verbal abuse, lives potentially put at risk; I won’t call it a climate of fear, but personally I have hopes for better weather.”

This article was edited on 12th July 2011 to remove an inaccuracy. Please contact editors@glasgowguardian.co.uk if you have any queries.

(First published: 09.02.11)

Nick Sikora

Details of management funding plans, understood by the Guardian in advance of their anticipated February 11 publication, reveal dramatic reductions to outgoings while university income grows.

The upcoming ‘Cost Reduction Plan’, which will aim to slash university expenditure, is expected to highlight increasing staff costs cuts and see a number of University courses axed.

The information, which is not due to be released to the public until later this month, suggests that Senior Management will maintain its intention to make total annual savings of £20million while increasing revenue by £15million elsewhere, a plan that was initially drawn up to save the University from insolvency in the face of predicted cuts by the Scottish Government.

It is hoped that these measures will now also give the institution an operating surplus, as the 6.7% reduction to university subsidies from the Scottish Government have not yet risen to the 20-25% many industry leaders had feared.

Several cost-cutting measures are already being rolled out across the university, with staff being invited to take part in a new Volunteer Severance/Early Retirement (VSER) scheme in the hope of encouraging those staff reaching the end of their career into early redundancy. Staff costs currently account for 55% of all University spend, a figure that the Cost Reduction Plan seeks to address.

An email mistakenly sent out by Senior Management to members of the University Senate in May 2010 outlined draft proposals collectively termed the ‘Strategic Investment Plan’, which mentions closure of a number of under-performing courses. The document listed several categories of course, preliminarily termed ‘platinum’, ‘gold’, ‘silver’ and ‘bronze’, which would outline the importance of their continued funding to the university.

‘Bronze’ courses, which were speculated to include subjects such as nursing and a number of modern languages, were to face the axe.

It was subsequently announced following the accidental circulation that the Strategic Investment Plan had been rejected by Senior Management, but many of the strategies it had discussed are expected to resurface in the upcoming Cost Reduction Plan.

Publication of the announcement comes as the university also prepares to reveal a current annual operating surplus that builds on the previous year’s figures. In the financial year ending 2010, the University had a surplus in excess of £7.3million, and costcutting measures already in place are to allow the university to improve on this for the year ending 2011.

Student’s Representative Council (SRC) President, Tommy Gore, was keen to stress the SRC’s intention to minimize any impact on students the cutbacks may have.

He said: “The SRC are obviously extremely concerned with some of the rumours that are currently flying about; however, it would be inappropriate to comment in more detail before we know what is laid out in the Cost Reduction Plan.

“Students can be assured that we will be fighting hard to ensure that the impact of the Cost Reduction Plan is minimised as far as possible.”

Other formative plans to reduce University expenditure include boosting site utilisation, which a recent report placed at just 20%, in an effort to increase efficiency and reduce wasted expenditure on energy and heating.

The future of Glasgow University’s balance sheets have been the subject of much speculation following Principal Anton Muscatelli’s controversial email to staff last September, in which he claimed that the university faced bankruptcy within three years unless ‘corrective action’ was taken.

Increased investment in facilities is an ongoing aim at the University, and is expected to continue despite cost-cutting aims. Recent years have seen long-term plans to replace ageing and inefficient buildings, such as Social Science’s Adam Smith Building and the Engineering Department’s Rankine Building, whilst a £10million purchase was put in place to obtain and develop the neighbouring Western Infirmary site when it closes in 2013.

The University Library is also planned to undergo future renovation, following on from the successful conversion of library’s Level 3. A £3million project has been put in place to deal with corrosion of the building’s façade.

Further details of the University’s costcutting measures will be available when the plan is released in full later this month.

The contest to become the University of Glasgow’s 121st Rector has begun with two candidates vying for the position – current rector Charles Kennedy and contender Alison Louise Kennedy.

The contest will be decided on February 21 and 22 when students at Glasgow University will vote online. The Rector’s chief role is to represent students, and acts as the ordinary president of the university court, which is the governing body of the university.

The University of Glasgow is one of five universities in Scotland that elect a rector and the office is held for three years.

Tommy Gore, President of the Students’ Representative Council (SRC), which the Rector works closely with, encouraged students to use their vote in the contest,

He said: “Whilst the SRC is impartial in the Rector election, we’re pleased to have two strong candidates running in what we hope will be a hotly contested election. I look forward to the election, and I’d urge all Glasgow students to take an interest, find out about the candidates and why they think they’d be the best person to be Rector. I hope the election will help to raise awareness of

the position of Rector, as Glasgow students are in a lucky position in that they are able to elect the person who chairs the University Court, the senior governing body in our institution.”

The race for Rector will be historic if either candidate wins. If A. L. Kennedy wins, she will be the second woman to hold the post after Winnie Mandela held it from 1987-1990. If Charles Kennedy wins, he will be the second rector to serve two consecutive terms as Rector, as Benjamin Disraeli held the post from 1871-1877.

Charles Kennedy, graduate of Glasgow University, is the former Leader of the Liberal Democrats whom he led from 1999-2006, and is the current MP for Ross, Skye and Lochaber. He is critical of the Liberal Democrat coalition government with the Conservative party and was one of 21 Liberal Democrat MPs to vote against the Browne Review proposals in December. In his role as Rector he stands as an independent.

Charles Kennedy won the last rector election in 2008 with 46% of the vote, being backed by the three main student bodies, The Glasgow University Union (GUU), which he was once President of, the Queen Margaret Union (QMU) and Glasgow University Sports Association (GUSA), all of whom are continuing to back him in his present campaign.

Colin Woods, current President of the GUU explained the reasons behind the union’s decision to back Charles Kennedy,

He said: “We feel that his experience as both a Glasgow Uni student, and as a continuing rector, will allow him to hit the ground running in tackling important issues both locally on campus and nationally.

“We feel that he is in the best position to represent Glasgow students at a national level, through his position at Westminster and as he has already shown he is not afraid to stand up for what he believes is best for us.

“Charles has also already built up strong relationships with members of the University court, student presidents and with the wider student population; meeting regularly with all concerned.”

QMU President Iain Smith, echoed Woods’ comments,

He said: “The QM Board of Management took the decision to support Charles Kennedy’s campaign for re-election as we felt that it was important that someone was elected to the role who would be able to represent members of the QM, as well as the wider student populous, in the most effective way possible.

Charles Kennedy is the QM’s preferred candidate due to his track record of working for students through his surgeries and meetings with elected student representatives, as whilst the latter is an innovation which came late in his first term as Rector, the meetings he has held with myself and the President’s of the SRC, GUSA and the GUU have been productive and enhanced the working relationship of the four student bodies.

“Furthermore, Charles’ experience with dealing with the University Senior Management Group during his first term as Rector could prove invaluable as the University begins to re-evaluate spending on teaching and student services, and if re-elected he will be able to begin acting on behalf of students without any transitional period.

“Finally, Charles has shown he is not afraid to stand against majority opinion in representing students by in voting against the Coalition Government in last year’s Tuition Fees referendum, and his role in Westminster offers Glasgow University students a level of national representation which many other Universities would envy.”

Alison Louise Kennedy is an award winning Scottish writer, teacher and stand-up comedienne. She was awarded an honorary Doctorate of Letters degree from Glasgow University in 2007.

A.L Kennedy spoke to the Glasgow University Guardian about her reasons for running as a Rector candidate.

She sawid: “The main issue I want to focus on is there’s this wrong-headed determination to use utterly discredited business models in education.

“It’s come quite late to Glasgow, which makes it slightly more bewildering because it clearly doesn’t work, even in business.

“It’s an opportunity to talk about that and to talk about getting back to looking at what education genuinely can be about, which works better commercially, it works better for people so that they actually have successful lives in a rounded way and it will work better for an institution that has a high academic reputation rather than just churning out highly discredited business models that destroyed the NHS, destroyed the BBC and have been generally undermining the institutions that we have been speaking about.”

Adam Campbell

The Scottish Government has published its Green Paper on the future of Higher Education in Scotland.

The publication of the paper sees the beginning of a period of consultation with various different bodies in order to find a Scottish Solution to higher education funding that is supported by the majority.

Concerns have been raised that Scotland is under pressure after Westminster voted in favour of a moderted form of the Browne Review Proposals in December.

However Education Secretary, Mike Russell, is keen to distance the Scottish Parliament from proposals that will be put in place South of the border.

He said: “Our tradition in Scotland is based on access determined by ability to learn, notability to pay. We reject the socially divisive view that students and graduates should be forced to take charge of their own education through tuition fees. I believe this approach would discriminate against the poorest, place barriers in the way of learning and would over time massively diminish the potential of Scottish society.

“I therefore believe the position taken by the Westminster Coalition is wrong for Scotland in three respects: It is wrong because it abdicates the state’s responsibility as the primary funder of higher education. It is wrong because it is based on a mistaken belief that the only beneficiary of higher education is the individual. And it is wrong, because when considered alongside other moves being made on levels of financial support available for students – such as abolishing the EMA in England – it will reduce the opportunities for those from the least well off backgrounds to improve their life chances by continuing to study once they leave school.”

Tommy Gore, President of the Students’’ Representative Council (SRC), welcomed the consultation process as an opportunity for Glasgow student concerns to be raised.

He explained: “The Scottish Government is currently consulting widely on the Green Paper – the SRC is taking an active part in the consultation sessions that are being held across the country, to make sure the interests of Glasgow students are best represented. Furthermore, we’re just beginning an extensive consultation process with students, to help inform the writing of our formal submission to the Green Paper.”

Documents obtained by the Guardian have revealed unpublicised plans by the University to  reduce academic influence within the University Court.

The Court, which is comprised of 25 sitting members, oversees the allocation of resources within the University as well as creating and administering strategic plans for the institution.

The new plans will see lay members of Court, who are usually sought for their expertise in areas such as law and business, more than double in number from five to eleven.

Lay members are recruited externally from the University, and are appointed by University Principal Anton Muscatelli.

The number of academic members of Court will drop from seven seats to four to accommodate the increase, while General Council representation, which includes all previous graduates and academic staff, will drop from five members to two.

The proposal, termed Draft Ordinance 206, will allow senior management to command a greater proportion of the Court’s 25 seats in coordination with their appointees, resulting in a shift in the balance of power from the academic body to the University executive.

This has lead to fears that the historic authority will devolve into a rubber stamp for senior management plans.

Draft Ordinance 206 will not be placed before the student body before being accepted as part of the University constitution. Only select SRC members, in their capacity as part of the University Court, have been given access to the plans in advance of them being approved.

The draft proposals are currently being reviewed by the Senate, the University’s academic body, as part of the consultation process that normally takes place before changes to the University’s constitution.

Documents leaked to the Guardian highlight strong levels of anger from within the Senate, with several academics stating their belief that the University is attempting to sideline academia in the pursuit of business goals.

One Professor, who was not the source of the leak, stated his concerns to fellow members of the Senate.

He said: “A lay majority in court opens up the likelihood of the court being ‘captured’ by the university management, who have better access to information and understanding of ‘how things work’.

“That possibility is increased by the role of Court in the appointment of lay members and the absence of mechanisms that promote accountability to stakeholders.

“The proposals to restructure court do not correspond with the (supposedly) central role of academics as drivers of the university’s mission. Thus, we are to provide the vision and application that produces results, but we are to be sidelined when it comes to the important decisions.

“We risk losing the ethos of an institution that is primarily driven by academic excellence, as understood by those best placed to interpret its meaning, and for that reason I oppose the proposed amendment.”

The sense of an increasingly authoritarian management was frequently mentioned in the leaked correspondence, with one senior Professor citing ‘an oppressive managerial culture’, and another accusing executive management of being ‘divisive and alienating’.

One academic wrote: “I have gone in the last year from feeling like a valued colleague and member of the University of Glasgow to feeling like an ill-treated employee, and I know I’m not alone.

“Glasgow is in my bones, but the new managerialism is sticking in my throat.”

Many accused senior managers of having an ‘ideological’ approach to university leadership.

A member of the Senate, who claimed to be speaking for many of his colleagues, stated that: “From conversations I’ve had, many among the professoriat are unhappy with the manageriat. This is not a personal animosity, but has to do with the new managerialism itself, since everything follows from this ideologically driven approach to higher education.”

At present, students have two sitting members on the Court, both of whom are members of the Students’ Representative Council.

Tommy Gore, SRC President and one of the Members of Court able to view the changes in advance, explained the fears the SRC has regarding a reduction in academic representation at the higher levels of University management.

Speaking to the Guardian, he said: “The SRC understands the need to carry out reviews such as this into the governing body of the University to ensure that it is fit for purpose, particularly if we are not following current guidance on good practice.

“However, we are obviously concerned at the reduction in the number of Senate Assessors on Court and the potential for this to have a detrimental impact on the academic input to the University Court.

“That said, we believe what is far more important is that the Senate Assessors, as well as the co-opted members, are of high quality, who contribute to the debate, and are not simply yes-men or women for the University Senior Management Group. We’re lucky that we currently have that in our Senate Assessors who sit on Court, and its important to ensure that continues, because we believe quality is far more important than quantity.”

If the proposals go through, Glasgow University Court will have the highest ratio of layperson to university staff of any rival ancient Scottish university.

The new ratio of 1.78 laypersons to every 1 staff member on the Court compares with 1.75 in Edinburgh, 1.56 at St. Andrews, and 1.45 at Aberdeen University.

A University spokesperson explained that the draft measure is an attempt to bring the University framework into line with other ancient Scottish universities.

He said: “The University Court has developed proposals to modernise the composition of the Court by bringing in more external expertise in line with other universities in Scotland.”

The Senate, who are presently reviewing the proposed constitutional change, will vote on the Draft Ordinance on December 9.

Nick Sikora

Three protesters have been arrested following an attempted break-in at the Glasgow University Union (GUU).

The attempt, which occurred on Friday 26 November, was part of a wider protest against cuts to higher education.

Demonstrators attempted to gain access to the GUU when it was learned that the building was scheduled to host the annual Glasgow University Conservative Association (GUCA) St. Andrews Dinner.

Approximately 50 demonstrators had assembled for the event, many in the mistaken belief that Scottish Conservatives president, Annabel Goldie, would be in attendance.

Police were called to the scene when several tried to storm the GUU, hoping to chain themselves to the union’s Reading Room where the dinner was taking place.

Eight police vans and two squad cars were dispatched to the scene in an effort to prevent attacks to the union’s guests and property.

Three demonstrators, two men aged 25 and one aged 20, were arrested when they attempted to force their way through the police blockade, leading officers to arrest them over a breach of the peace.

The demonstrators were not backed by the Students’ Representative Council (SRC) or the Glasgow University Anti-Cuts Actions Network (GUACAN), who have been responsible for similar demonstrations and protests in previous weeks.

The GUU, who have traditionally hosted the GUCA evening, were initially happy to tolerate the protesters in the spirit of freedom of speech.
GUU President, Colin Woods, explained: “On the evening in question, guests for the GUCA dinner began to arrive around 6.30pm at which time no protesters had gathered. By around 6.45pm around 30 protesters had gathered outside, who were accompanied by three police officers. This in my opinion is a perfectly legitimate protest against an issue which affects every student in the UK.”

However the decision was made to phone the police when it became clear that many of the protesters were making threats of violence against members of the public and guests to the Union, a number of whom were not involved with the GUCA dinner.

Woods continued: “As guests of the GUCA dinner arrived, including elderly women, they were greeted by the protesters with a tirade of insults, swearing and abuse; this was both intimidating and served no purpose in terms of a ‘protest’.

“This continued and became increasingly aggressive as supposed members of the Conservative Party were chased along University Avenue with the threat ‘Tory scum here we come’, these threats were effectively made to any member of the public wearing a suit, a shirt and tie or as was the case on the evening, even a military uniform.”

The violent nature of the protesters, particularly toward the elderly and the vulnerable, was also noted by GUCA President Ross McFarlane, who chaired the event.

He said: “We did have a lot of elderly people who attended the event in their late 70s. I mean, one woman was on her own, turned up in a taxi, in her late 70s, she’s frail, and she’s having profanities and abuse screamed in her face by these animals.

“I don’t think that’s a particularly acceptable way to behave whether you disagree with someone’s politics or not.”

Protesters ultimately failed to gain entry to the GUU, and numbers dwindled shortly after the GUCA dinner began.

Protesting representatives from the universities of Glasgow and Strathclyde closed the demonstration by making speeches to the remaining crowd, in which they poured scorn on the actions of the GUU in preventing them from attacking the GUCA meal. Verbal attacks were also made on GUU President in person.

Despite the protesters’ comments, the GUU confirmed its commitment to hosting peaceful events for people from across the political spectrum, with President Colin Woods lauding the union’s history of debate.

He said: “I support the students rights to protest for whatever it is they believe is right, this is true on both sides of the anti cuts debate; however, I do not believe the protests which took place on Friday were constructive in any way. The GUU is an a-political organisation which is famed for being a theatre for political debate, and indeed for debate in general. As such, it is the prerogative of GUU to affiliate as many political clubs, associations and groups on campus as possible.

“This could just of easily have been a dinner held by the Labour Party, the Lib Dems, the Green party, or any other political movement represented on campus.”

The demonstrations come as students take part in ongoing protests against planned cuts to higher education, with many rallies and occupations planned before the Parliamentary vote on December 9, which will confirm whether tuition fees will rise across the rest of the UK.
Large-scale protests have taken place in both Glasgow and Edinburgh in the wake of the announcement of the cuts, including sit-ins at Edinburgh and Strathclyde universities.

The GUU arrests are thought to be the first to take place in Scotland relating to action against the cuts, although hundreds have already been arrested in England and Wales.

SRC President, Tommy Gore, urged caution to students participating in political events, such as took place outside the GUU.

Speaking to the Guardian, he said: “We believe that the Glasgow University Conservative Association has the right to hold events without fear of intimidation; we also believe that the protesters have the right to freedom of speech, and the right to demonstrate in a peaceful manner.

“However, both sides have to realise that with events like this they risk alienating other members of the student body who would otherwise be in full support of them.”

GUCA President Ross McFarlane was keen to highlight the success of the event in spite of actions from protesters, claiming that further attempts to hijack Conservative Association gatherings would be similarly unsuccessful.

He said: “It was a wonderful evening. Being serenaded into the events by a choir of crypto-communists was certainly the icing on the cake.

“If they think that this association will be intimated or put off its activities on campus then they are sadly mistaken, particularly if they think we’ll be intimated to see any attempt to have the rule of law replaced with the rule of mob, then we’re determined to see that utterly crushed.”