22 February 2005
Board ofScrutiny
Noon, Tuesday 22 February 2005
Chadwick Room,
Present:Stephen Cowley, Nick Downer, Margaret Glendenning,Nicholas Holmes, JohnLittle, Timothy Milner,Saskia Murk-Jansen,David Phillipson, Nick Pyper,Jennifer Rigby, John Spencer (Chairman),
Inattendance: Tessa Payne
1.Apologies
HelenThompson
2.Minutesof previous meeting
Thesewere agreed.
3.Mattersarising
Therewere no matters arising, other than those already on the agenda.
Itwas agreed that both a short and long response to the comments of CharlesLarkum should be prepared.The shortversion would be sent to the Council for official publication, and the longerversion to be sent to Charles Larkum.Council would be advised that the Board had written directly to MrLarkum in greater detail.John Spencerwould review the existing draft response and circulate for comment,
TheBoard discussed the issue of potential conflicts of interest of members whoserved on other University or College committees.It was agreed that the formal restrictionsthat already exist in the Statutes and Ordinances were satisfactory, but thatthe Board would need to continue to be sensitive to potential conflicts ofinterest that might arise.
Itwas noted that a response had been received from Graham Allen regarding the consultationon leadership, governance & management.
4.Reporton meeting with Board of Graduate Studies
Atthe meeting with representatives from the Board of Graduate Studies (BGS) on 8February, the issues of workload, resourcing levels and the modernisation ofprocesses had been discussed.Temporarystaff were employed to help process applications within two weeks.Both CAMSIS and CAMGRAD were provinguseful.The relationships with CambridgeTrusts were becoming increasingly integrated, assisted by changing deadlinesfor applications.The Board agreed thatBGS was doing a good job, despite the limited resources.
Itwas noted that the Transferable Skills money was managed by BGS to support graduateand postdoctoral students.BGS would liketo develop what they can offer to this group of students, but they have noresources at present.
5.Reporton Discussion held on 1 February – annual Reports of the Council and GeneralBoard, and Financial Statements for the year ended 31 July 2004.
TheBoard noted that John Spencer had given his speech and that there was nothingelse to report.
6.Studentbursaries
TheBoard discussed the various sources of student funding available, and agreed thatthere was not sufficient easily accessible information circulated within theUniversity about these issues to enable staff to inform themselves.It was also felt that CU should do more togenerate positive publicity, particularly in view of its laudable efforts toavoid the creation of a poverty trap for average income families.
7.Discussionon counter-terrorism paper
TheBoard discussed the implications of counter-terrorism legislation on thereporting requirements of the University.It was noted that it generates huge amount of paperwork, due in part tothe legislation being put together by non-practitioners.The burden was increased within CU due to thefragmentation of the University structure, and it was suggested thatconsideration should be given to the employment of a University ComplianceOfficer.
8.Dateof next meeting
Thenext meeting will be held at noon on Tuesday 8 March in the Chadwick Room at
9.Anyother business
Concern was voiced as to whether the issues raised in the Audit minuteson a possible future 'deficit' of the USS pension scheme were being acted on sufficientlyquickly to enable them to be built into the University planning process.
Itwas agreed that the next agenda should include discussion of a shortlist oftopics for annual report.