Meeting of the Parliament 08 March 2016
The bill, which I hope will receive full scrutiny after some years of enactment, has as its base democratic accountability. The purpose of amendments 27 and 31 is simple: it is to underpin that and to make the important role and function of the rector equivalent to the role and function of the proposed senior lay member.
I fully accept and acknowledge the historic relevance of our ancient universities. I was lucky enough to attend one—the University of St Andrews—and was later privileged to be appointed a lay member of its court. I also accept and acknowledge the major contribution and significance of the ancients, which are globally recognised, and the role played by many if not all rectors, past and present. However, we cannot set about rightly demanding the overall democratic accountability that we seek—which requires the consistent application of a recruitment process and so on across a sector that faces an increasingly globally competitive future—but agree to disregard a perception of elitism in the sector.
Part of that perception would be curtailed by my amendments 27 and 31, together with other amendments. The amendments are designed to ensure that rectors and senior lay members, or whatever they are called, play a consistent, active and immediate, rather than remote, role in the post to which they have been elected. The franchises for rectors would be broadened to include all staff as well as the student franchise, to which I will return with future amendments.
I move amendment 27.