skip to content
 

Board of Scrutiny

Timothy
Normal
Stephen John Cowley
2
77
2003-11-06T21:38:00Z
2003-11-06T21:38:00Z
2
567
3235
University of Cambridge
26
6
3972
9.2720

Board of Scrutiny

Minutes of the Meeting Held
at Noon on

Thursday 19 June 2003 at Selwyn College

 

Present: John
Spencer (Chairman), Christopher Forsyth, Robin Lachmann, Elisabeth
Leedham-Green, Timothy Milner, Oliver Rackham and Jennifer Rigby.

 

Apologies:  Stephen Cowley, David Howarth, Susan
Lintott, Jack McDonald and Helen Thompson.

 

1)         
Minutes
of the meeting held on 5 June 2003.
These were approved.

 

2)         
Matters
arising
.

 

a)         
Elections
to the Board
.  The Chairman noted with satisfaction the
high turnout in the recent election, which with 1,280 votes cast was almost
exactly comparable to the last Council election.  Those elected to serve for four years from 1 October 2003 were
Professor David Phillipson, Dr Nicholas Holmes and Mr Roger Salmon.  Dr Mantas Adomenas had been elected
unopposed as the under 35 candidate.

 

b)         
Finance
Working Party: Special Studies
.  The Chairman reported that he
had been to a meeting with the Vice-Chancellor that morning.  The V-C had informed him that the Board
would now be given access to the Special Studies, so that no further
representations on this matter were necessary. 
The V-C had then delivered a trenchant attack on the Board and its work,
accusing it of having done great damage to the University.  The Board stood accused of encouraging
damaging publicity about the University and especially of promoting the
suggestion that the University was facing bankruptcy.  The Chairman strongly denied these charges and pointed to cases
in which the Board had clearly exercised discretion when in possession of
sensitive information.  The Chairman
also denied that the Board perceived itself as an alternative “government” of
the University and emphasized that the role of the Board was reactive and
investigatory, not executive.  The
criticism seemed to be an attempt to “shoot the messenger” because the Board
had identified things that were going wrong and had brought them to wider
attention in its reports to the University.

 

3)         
Allocations
Report
.  The Board noted that this had just been
published in the Reporter and it was noted that one member of Council, Ross
Anderson, had not signed it.  Although
not all those present had yet read the Report, the following comments were
made.

a)         
The Board
should write to the Registrary, asking for a copy of the Approved Development
Plan for the UAS, a draft of which had gone to Council in February 2002.

 

b)         
It was noted
that a number of extra Finance Officers were being recruited to serve in the
Schools and that funds were being made available to recruit extra staff for
English and Criminology.  The allocation
for building maintenance had also increased.

 

c)          
The Board
observed that the projected deficit for the year ahead was to fall from £8.2 to
£5.0 million, while endowment and investment income was projected to rise by
22.2%. 

 

d)         
Only
£200,000 had been allowed for severance payments and under-funded pensions.

 

e)         
It was
agreed that the Finance Sub-Committee would examine the Report in more detail.

 

4)         
The East
Forum
.  The Board noted the publication of a Report
on this proposed development.  Various
questions were raised about details and in particular the funding arrangements
and the ownership of IPR.  The Chairman
resolved to speak to a colleague about the IPR question.

 

5)         
The
Eighth Report
.  The Chairman commented on the urgent need to
get this into draft form.  Members were
reminded that the final draft had to be ready by 14 July for comment by the
principal officers, so that it could then go to Council on 21 July.  It was suggested that the section on
governance should comment on the OPM Report and the problem of the
accountability of committees and officers.

 

6)         
Any Other
Business and Date of Next Meeting
.   In view of the low attendance
and the need to concentrate on writing the Board’s Eighth Report, no other
business was discussed.  The next
meeting would be on Thursday 3 July. 
The meeting closed at 1.25 p.m.