Court report

By Peter Evans

Human resources and estates matters topped the agenda at the December Court. The proceedings began, however, with a welcome to a new member, Dr Martyn Ward, who had been elected by Senate as one of its non-professorial representatives in succession to Michael Coughtrie. (The latter had been elected to Court from 1 August 2003, but was 'disqualified' from office after only one meeting following his promotion to a Personal Chair.)

In relation to national negotiations over the 2003 pay award, the Principal intimated that these were at a critical stage and if there were any significant developments about which the Court should be informed he would write to members without delay. Since the Court as a body had not been informed of the concerns of AUT on the proposed pay modernisation framework, which was the sticking point in the negotiations, it was agreed that relevant briefing papers from AUT and from UCEA (the employers' association), which were not confidential to the negotiating process, would be made available to Court members.

Another intractable issue aired at this meeting related to the Fixed-Term Employees (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations 2002. Although the University had introduced a policy on the use of fixed-term contracts in the light of these Regulations, which provided that the University would normally transfer fixed-term staff to permanent status after six years, the position taken by AUT was that the only acceptable method of dismissing or making redundant academic staff, whether permanent or fixed-term employees, was by use of the provisions of Statute 16. This would mean that, for the small proportion of fixed-term staff whose contracts the University did not wish to renew, it would be necessary either to set up a Redundancy Committee or to institute formal disciplinary proceedings - both involving cumbersome procedures. The Court was advised that other universities were experiencing similar difficulties and discussions were on-going in the sector. After an initial exchange of views it was agreed to await the deliberations of the Human Resources Committee in February before deciding on the way forward.

With several major capital projects under way or in the pipeline, the Court has become used to presentations on estates matters; at this meeting, as a Christmas bonus, it got two. The first reported progress on the development of a new University estates strategy, which was being taken forward through the Campus Services Committee. Rooted in the Page & Park campus development plan (approved by the Court in 2001), the main aims of the strategy would be effectiveness, attractiveness and sustainability, while a key objective was more intensive use of space. Draft strategies for both the main campus and Ninewells were expected for the Court's next meeting in February.

A presentation by the Dean of Medicine, Dentistry & Nursing followed, in support of a detailed proposal for the construction of a Clinical Research Centre at Ninewells. This development, a joint venture with NHS Tayside, was the central component of the Medical School's forward plan for research and was intended to support multi-professional teams of researchers from the University, local NHS Trusts and other agencies. Total estimated costs were £5.5m, with additional equipment costs of £3.5m. A contribution of £1.3m had already been allocated within the University's capital programme and the remaining funding would be provided from external sources, including SRIF 2 and NHS Tayside.

The Court responded warmly to the Dean's aspiration to achieve a quantum leap in research capability through the procurement of state-of-the-art imaging facilities, while also noting that inability to fund all the proposed equipment would not vitiate research programmes that were already being planned and executed. As sufficient funding had been secured to cover construction costs, the Court gave full authority for the project to proceed. Building is scheduled to commence at the end of 2004.

Attention then turned to another proposal for capital funding. A further investment of £300k was sought over the period 2003-04 to 2005-06, i.e. in addition to the £2.9m already approved, for the next stage of the network improvement programme (upgrading of the data network, the cabling infrastructure and telecommunications). Recognising the importance of this project, the Court approved the top-up required, noting that the Planning & Resources Committee and the Finance Committee would have a further opportunity to review the outcome of the tendering process before a final commitment was made.

The Court approved financial statements for the year ended 31 July 2003, which had been subject to external audit and scrutiny by both the Finance and Audit Committees. A surplus for the year of £1.02m was reported (N.B. 'surplus' denotes income which is set aside for capital investment after recurrent expenditure requirements have been met). The Court was apprised of the differences between the accounting standards SSAP24 and FRS17, under which pension liabilities were calculated: the explanation left members only slightly wiser, but it was noted that the size of the deficit for the University of Dundee Superannuation Scheme was not unusual for the sector and the University had already responded by increasing the employer's contribution rate. It was also noted that the main national scheme for academic staff, USS, was performing strongly and remained in surplus, against the trend.

Reference was made to two external reviews: the next stage of the Scottish Executive's Higher Education Review, due to be published in February, and the Lambert Review of business-university collaboration, carried out under the auspices of the Treasury. The latter included comments on the management and governance of universities and advocated that the sector should voluntarily develop its own code of governance - although it was not clear at this stage how that might be put into effect in Scotland.

The Court also received a progress report on achievement of the objectives set out in the 'Towards 2007' planning document; such reports will be submitted biannually from June 2004 onwards. Other matters of note dealt with at this meeting were: the fixing of a date (27 February) for the forthcoming election of a Rector; the confirmation of Professor Colin Reid, newly elected Dean of Law & Accountancy, as budget holder for that Faculty; and consideration of a consultation document from the Students' Association regarding proposed organisational changes, which would in due course lead to constitutional amendments.

Finally, the Court bade farewell to two senior officers of the University who were retiring on 31 December. Peter Copeland was stepping down after 25 years in Estates & Buildings, including the last eight as Director - although he would continue to make a contribution to the University as a professional consultant. The other significant departure was that of Robin Walker, who had held the post of Director of Finance for 17 years. The Chairman thanked him for his professionalism, his clarity of exposition and his patient and helpful approach; Court members applauded these remarks and, by now in festive mood, consumed mince pies in his honour.