A POWER struggle is threatening to wreak fresh chaos on Scotland's troubled college sector.
Minutes from a meeting of a body set up to help run Glasgow’s three colleges shows leading figures engaged in an unprecedented row over who has ultimate control over decision-making.
Paul Little, the principal of City of Glasgow College, has written to the over-arching Glasgow Colleges Regional Board (GCRB) accusing it of failing to act in a “fair, transparent and robust” way over funding decisions and questioning why it should be answerable to the umbrella body.
A response from Robin Ashton, the chair of the GCRB, accuses Mr Little of making a “very serious and completely unsubstantiated allegation” over the quality of its governance.
The row is the latest blow to the further education sector since the Scottish Government’s controversial merger programme which reduced the number of colleges to 20 in 13 regions across the country.
In an official report on the merger in 2016 Audit Scotland identified six colleges where severance arrangements for senior staff had been poorly handled.
Auditors also warned Edinburgh College that it was facing an uncertain financial future - racking up debts of more than £3 million after missing student recruitment targets and facing a cash claw back after falling foul of official rules governing funding.
Last year it emerged regional boards across Scotland were costing the taxpayer £500,000 a year despite not yet fulfilling their intended role.
In the case of the GCRB there was a complete breakdown in 2015 with infighting between board members leading to the resignation of Henry McLeish, the former First Minster, from his role as chair.
The start of the latest spat was a letter to Mr Ashton in early December in which principal of City of Glasgow College, Paul Little, expresses “continued concern” that his college board does not agree with the terms of the GCRB’s financial memorandum - which sets out its relationship with individual institutions.
He said the City of Glasgow College board “does not accept that a fair, transparent and robust process was completed to agree 2016/17 funding”.
In a response dated December 7, Mr Ashton said: “You will obviously be aware that the quality of governance in Scotland’s colleges has been under intense scrutiny over recent years, and that the Glasgow region has figured in this national focus.
“Therefore, whilst I could understand any of the assigned colleges stating that they were disappointed with a funding settlement, I find it totally unacceptable that this is extended to allege poor governance, particularly given that the body making the allegation was party to the decision-making process itself. I would therefore ask that your board reconsider its allegations.”
The situation has arisen because there are several colleges in Glasgow and it was decided to set up an overarching regional board to co-ordinate activity.
In areas where there is only one college its own board performs the same function.
Scottish Funding Council (SFC) guidance requires that GCRB puts in place a financial agreement known as a memorandum with each college to set out the formal relationship between them. Glasgow Clyde College and Glasgow Kelvin College have already agreed to the GCRB financial memorandum.
However, City of Glasgow College does not agree that having GCRB as the final arbiter “is appropriate to ensure robust governance and transparency”.
The college board is concerned GCRB should have “complete authority to set conditions of funding” and does not to be fully accountable to its executive officer.
It would prefer to be accountable to the Scottish Funding Council.
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 hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel