THE head of one of Scotland's most prestigious universities has attacked new laws on the way institutions are run as "inconsistent" and "incoherent".

Professor Sir Timothy O'Shea, the principal of Edinburgh University, even suggested the SNP Government's approach could damage the institution.

The attack came as the Higher Education Governance (Scotland) Bill passes through the Scottish Parliament.

Last month, ministers backtracked over some of the new laws amidst fears they would lead to greater ministerial interference in the sector.

However, there is still confusion over plans to introduce new elected chairs of universities' powerful ruling Courts because Scotland's ancient universities - including Edinburgh - already have elected rectors who chair Court.

Angela Constance, the Education Secretary, said it would be up to institutions to decide how the roles would work together, but Sir Timothy called for the move to be shelved until it could be consulted on more widely.

In a letter to MSPs he said: "We are particularly alarmed at the new proposals the Scottish Government has made for an elected chair.

"These amendments propose an incoherent and inconsistent system of governance for the university which would significantly impede our ability, as the largest university in Scotland, to contribute to the economic and social good of the country and to deliver as one of the world’s leading universities."

Sir Timothy said the legislation would provide for two elected positions playing a chairing role in the university - both elected by the same constituency of staff and students.

This, he said, would change the long-established and well-understood role of rector "without any prior consultation or discussion".

He added: "The amendments are inconsistent, incoherent and potentially very damaging for one of Scotland’s major universities.

"There has been no consultation or discussion with us, or the wider sector on the implications, which require careful consultation and scrutiny otherwise there is a real risk of perverse and possibly unintended consequences."

The attack comes after a student leader from Glasgow University said the measures were "profoundly botched".

Liam King, president of the Students' Representative Council of Glasgow University, said: "From inadvertent clauses that risked turning Scotland's universities into public bodies to utter ignorance of the relationship between the role of rector and the role of chair of Court. This Bill has been an unmitigated disaster."

A Scottish Government spokeswoman said: "The aim of this Bill is to strengthen governance in Scottish higher education institutions by ensuring membership of governing bodies and other structures is balanced, fair and inclusive.

"We simply want to enable every voice on campus to be heard and contribute more transparent and inclusive governance in these institutions.

“The Scottish Government has no intention of removing or diminishing the rights or role of rectors in our ancient universities. The way in which rectors will interact with new elected senior lay members on governing bodies will be, as now, a matter for each autonomous institution."

The origins of the Bill date back to 2011 when a number of universities, including Glasgow and Strathclyde, brought forward course cuts.

Unions felt consultations with staff and students were rudimentary and decisions were motivated by economic considerations rather than academic ones.

There have also been long-running concerns over the spiralling salaries of principals and the increasing autonomy of their management teams.