ONE of the most prestigious academic bodies in Scotland has attacked controversial new legislation that gives more power to ministers over the way universities are run.
The Royal Society of Edinburgh (RSE), Scotland's national academy of science and letters, said the proposed Post-16 Education (Scotland) Bill ignored the "fundamental right" of universities to be autonomous. It is the latest criticism of the Bill, unveiled by Michael Russell, the Education Secretary, last year.
Last week, Alan Simpson, who leads the body that represents the chairs of university courts, said the legislation would pave the way for the greatest political influence over higher education for more than a century.
And this week the principals of four universities warned the Bill risks undermining the ability of the sector to compete on the global stage.
The legislation is controversial because it lets ministers set priorities for universities in return for public funding – including ensuring institutions comply with new rules on gover-nance and widening access.
It also gives the Scottish Funding Council (SFC), which administers public money on behalf of the Government, powers to review the provision of courses.
A written submission from the RSE to the Scottish Parliament's education committee – which is scrutinising the legislation – said the Bill went too far.
The submission said there was an absence of an "overarching strategy" and called the proposed changes "ad hoc".
It stated: "The Bill provides Scottish ministers with significant powers to determine principles of governance or management in relation to universities.
"Oversight of management effectiveness is one of the principal functions of each institution's governing body and we see no justification for its inclusion in the present Bill.
"The fundamental right and need for universities to enjoy autonomy in their strategies and operations is not being sufficiently recognised."
The RSE was equally scathing about the potential implications of proposals for the SFC to review course provision.
It said: "It is the institutions themselves that are best placed to determine such matters, depending upon their individual circumstances."
While the RSE said it strongly supported measures to widen access, it "remained to be convinced" a ministerial requirement on the issue would improve the situation.
The submission concluded: "Fundamental questions remain as to why a review of higher education governance was initiated and what public concern was it designed to address.
"There has been no explanation of how the proposed changes will improve the existing arrangements for governance and we are concerned that the proposals are in danger of putting at risk the significant gains which have been made."
Universities Scotland, which represents university principals, also attacked the proposals in its written submission on the Bill.
It said: "We do not see a need for the higher education provisions in the Bill, which create new, and quite extensive and unspecific powers over higher education institutions.
"While universities are keen to continue to work with the SFC to widen access - the Bill gives the impression there is a problem which needs to be addressed through legislation, which in our view is not necessary."
A Scottish Government spokesman said: "The Government is listening to all points of view during this process of pre-legislative scrutiny."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article