UNIVERSITY OF ESSEX
COUNCIL
17 OCTOBER 2005
(2.15 pm – 4.00 pm )
MINUTES
UNRESERVED BUSINESS
Chair
Mr Melville-Ross
Present
Mr Barrett, Mr Blundell, Dr Burnett, Professor Busfield, Ms Colston, Professor Crewe,
Professor Downton, Dr Elston, Mrs Garbutt, Mr Gore, Professor Henson, Mr Hughes,
Ms Kinealy, Professor Lubbock, Dr Mackenzie, Professor Massara, Professor Masterson,
Professor Millard, Sir Robin Mountfield, Mr Pertwee, Professor Sherer,
Ms Stamp, Ms Stevens, Professor Sunkin, Professor Temple
Apologies
Ms Brennan, Ms Hodges, Mr Lewis, Lord Newton, Professor Pretty, Mr Rainbird
Secretary
Academic Registrar
In attendance
Registrar and Secretary, Director of Finance, Director of Information Systems, Planning
Officer, Publicity Information Officer, Deputy Director of External Relations, Director of
Estate Management, Director of Personnel Services
CORRESPONDENCE AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
Noted
The Chair welcomed Mrs Garbutt, Mr Gore and Ms Stamp as new lay members,
Dr Burnett, Professor Henson, Professor Mackenzie, Professor Masterson and
Professor Pretty as members elected by Senate and the new student members,
Ms Kinealy and Mr Barrett.
222/05
STARRING OF AGENDA ITEMS
Noted
The unstarred items of the agenda were deemed to have been received or noted
and approved by Council as appropriate.
223/05
DECLARATION OF INTERESTS
Noted
No-one present declared an interest in any item on the agenda.
224/05
The Minutes of the meeting held on 11 July 2005 were signed as a correct
record.
225/05
MINUTES
Approved
MATTERS ARISING FROM MINUTES (C/05/66)
None.
226/05
VICE-CHANCELLOR’S REPORT
Reported
The Vice-Chancellor gave an oral report which covered:
i)
Student Numbers
ii)
Anglia Ruskin University
iii)
Colchester Institute
The report is attached to the Minutes as Appendix A.
227/05
Noted
A revised budget taking account of the shortfall in student recruitment would be
presented to Council at the next meeting.
228/05
One aspect of the decline in recruitment was the reduced demand for student
accommodation, which meant that with hindsight the decision not to proceed
with building additional accommodation last year was justified.
229/05
The total number of students recruited to fill places funded by the Workforce
Development Confederation was below target, as new courses had been
developed late in the year, but it was expected that recruitment would be close
to target in future years.
230/05
UNIVERSITY OF ESSEX SOUTHEND BUSINESS PLAN UPDATE (C/05/67)
Noted
An update to the Southend business and academic plan approved by Council in
October 2004. It showed the venture had incurred higher start-up costs than
originally anticipated, along with slower than expected student number growth.
The mix of students had also switched from self-financing students to a greater
proportion of publicly funded students. This change had a detrimental impact on
finances. Significant operating deficits were expected in 2005/06 and 2006/07
before the campus approached financial sustainability, but by 2008/09 the level
of surplus expected represented 10% of turnover.
231/05
Reported
The financial position of UoES compared with the original business plan was a
matter of concern, particularly in the light of the University’s overall situation,
and it was essential that steps were taken to control costs more effectively and
to meet income targets. Finance and Strategy Committee would consider
measures to strengthen the financial management of UoES and would review
the overall management structure for UoES, using external advice and
assistance if thought appropriate.
232/05
Developments were quite fast-moving in Southend and the paper already
needed some updating. An example was that although the original plans for
student accommodation had fallen through, it seemed likely that alternative
purpose-built student accommodation could be provided by 2007, on better
terms than the original plan. The figures were not static and there was scope for
controlling costs. Despite the costs being greater than had been anticipated,
Southend was still believed to be the right strategic development in terms of
educational provision, particularly to meet local vocational training needs.
233/05
Continuing Professional Development course provision was developing slowly,
but courses being developed by Learning Partnerships at Colchester were then
being marketed in Southend. The programme was expanding, especially short
courses in field of health, but there were teaching space constraints in Princess
Caroline House. It was intended to develop a portfolio of courses which could
be offered when accommodation was available in the new building and at the
Palace Hotel. The developing provision was designed to be capable of flexible
delivery which would reduce costs.
234/05
Noted
2
The extent to which international students would be attracted to study in
Southend was questioned but the intention was to develop degree schemes there
which would be attractive in their own right, rather than to have competing
offerings in Colchester and Southend. It was agreed that marketing was a
critical factor, and it was confirmed that significant resources had been devoted
to both local and international marketing. It was important that there was a
constant emphasis on product development across the whole University, but that
that there was a diversified product to reflect different emphasis in the separate
locations.
235/05
Members were aware that the developments in Southend arose from the
availability of capital funding which provided a short window of opportunity. It
was a capital-led project but it was being kept under close scrutiny to ensure
that action could be taken promptly if difficulties arose. It was easy to
underestimate capital risks so it was important to receive regular reports on
capital development. Council would maintain a watching brief over the project
through regular reports from Finance and Strategy Committee.
236/05
PROGRESS OF THE COSTS REDUCTION PROGRAMME (C/05/68)
Noted
The paper provided an update on the planned reduction of staffing costs across
the University to be achieved by 2006/07.
237/05
REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES
Finance and Strategy Committee (C/05/69)
Noted
Report of the meeting held on 5 September 2005.
238/05
UNIVERSITY FINANCIAL STRATEGY – PROGRESS (C/05/70)
Noted
The paper outlined progress towards the objective of producing a new financial
strategy for the University which would be presented to Council later in the
financial year.
239/05
CAPITAL BUILDING PROJECTS: PROGRESS REPORT (C/05/71)
(a)
Networks Centre
Reported
Negotiations had continued since the last report to Council to reach a settlement
with Wates on the final account figure following completion of the building.
While the final figure was higher than originally contracted, the outcome was
thought to be satisfactory in the circumstances.
240/05
Resolved
that the final account figure of £5.25 million for the construction contract as
negotiated with Wates Construction be approved, increasing the total cost of the
project to £7.38m
241/05
(b)
Noted
Social Science Research Centre
The Chair of Council had approved on behalf of Council an increase the budget
for the Social Science Research Centre by £650k, noting that the increase would
be accommodated within existing resources.
3
242/05
There was a small risk that the HEFCE requirement to complete the project
within two years might cause a problem with funding, but steps were being
taken to mitigate the risk.
243/05
Some concern was expressed about the risks of overspend on capital projects.
There were alternative procurement methods and there was a tension between
using a two-stage procurement method, which was a quicker process overall and
using a fixed price design and build approach. The latter had been adopted for
the Social Science Research Centre, which meant there was reduced risk of
overspend but that it would take longer.
244/05
It was likely that there would be significant increases in building costs in
general because there were several major building projects in the Colchester
area, as well as the substantial demand expected to arise from the 2012
Olympics.
245/05
HEFCE 2005/31: ACCOUNTABILITY FOR HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTES –
UNIVERSITY’S RESPONSE (C/05/72)
Noted
HEFCE was consulting the sector on proposed new process of accountability
and regulation. The specific proposals indicated that ‘low risk’ institutions
would have greater freedoms, and it was confirmed that Essex was currently
classified as ‘low risk’.
246/05
KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
(a)
Research Income (C/05/73)
Noted
The paper provided data on the University’s research grant applications and
successes with information about the University’s overall performance,
benchmarked where possible against comparative universities.
247/05
Reported
A policy statement on the way full economic costing of research would operate
was in preparation for the guidance of staff. Two Funding Development
Officers had been appointed, and they were already successful in terms of
generating additional grant applications. If the approach was successful in terms
of additional grant income then the activity could be expanded.
248/05
(b)
Noted
(c)
Business Development – 2004/05 (C/05/74)
The paper reported on business development activity during 2004/05.
Annual Report from Albert Sloman Library 2004/05 (C/05/75)
Noted
(d)
Noted
249/05
250/05
Sunday Times Good University Guide (C/05/76)
Comparison of the University’s position in the Sunday Times university league
tables over the past four years.
251/05
AMENDMENTS TO UNIVERSITY CHARTER, STATUTES AND ORDINANCES
(C/05/77)
Noted
At the July 2005 meetings Council approved the recommendations of the
Working Party on the Effectiveness of Council that Privy Council approval
should be sought to amend the University Charter and Statutes.
4
252/05
In accordance with the paragraph 31 of the Charter, a Special Resolution is
required in order to recommend to the Privy Council that changes be made to
Charter and Statutes. Accordingly Council affirmed approval of those
recommendations.
253/05
(a) Membership of Council
Resolved
that it be recommended to the Privy Council that the Statute XVII be amended
as follows (deleted text struck through and new wording underlined):
254/05
Section XVII The Council (extract)
The Council shall consist of the following persons, namely:
A. Ex officio Members:
The Chancellor, tThe Pro-Chancellors, the Vice-Chancellor, the
Treasurer and the Pro-Vice Chancellors Deputy Vice-Chancellor
B. Appointed Members:
Three persons appointed by the Court, not being members of the
Academic Staff.
B. Appointed Members
Two Deans of the Schools appointed by Council on the
recommendation of Nominations Committee
C. Elected Members:
Ten Six Academic Staff members of the Senate elected by the Senate
subject to and in accordance with the Ordinances.
One non-academic staff member elected by the non-academic staff
subject to and in accordance with the Ordinances.
D. Co-opted Members:
Such other persons, not being members of University Staff and not
exceeding ten nine in all, as may be co-opted by the Council.
E. Student Members:
Two One Students of the University to be elected subject to and in
accordance with the Ordinances.
(b) Term of Office of Council Members
Resolved
that the current arrangements whereby a member of Council may serve for a
maximum of six years (two terms of three years) should be increased to allow a
maximum of nine years (three terms of three years), although the norm would
be two terms, and that it be recommended to the Privy Council that the Statute
XVII be amended as follows (deleted text struck through and new wording
underlined):.
Section XVII The Council (extract)
2.
(a)
Ex officio Members of the Council shall remain members only
so long as they hold the offices by virtue of which they became
members.
(b)
Members of the Council appointed by the Court shall hold
office until the end of the third year following their appointment, or
until such earlier date as may in each case be determined by the Court.
(b)(c) Elected Members of the Council shall remain members only so
long as they are members of the Senate. They shall hold office until the
end of the second third year following their appointment or such earlier
5
255/05
date as may in each case be determined by the Senate to effect rotation.
(c)(d) Co-opted Members of the Council shall hold office until the
end of the third year following their co-option or until such earlier date
as may in each case be determined by the Council. Co-opted Members
shall be eligible for further co-option, normally for a further period of
three years and a maximum total of nine years.
3.
(a)
A member of the Council appointed by the Court shall, upon
completion of his or her term of membership or upon resignation, not
be eligible to be a member of the Council by re-appointment by the
Court until one year has elapsed from the date of the completion of his
or her term of membership or his or her resignation (as the case may
be).
(b)
In the event of there being a casual vacancy among the
membership of the Council appointed by the Court, the Council shall
have the power to co-opt a person, not being a member of the Academic
Staff, to membership of the Council to hold office until the next
meeting of the Court, when he or she shall be eligible for appointment
to the Council.
3
An Elected member of the Council shall upon completion of his
or her term of membership under paragraph 2(c) (b) of this Section of
these Statutes be eligible for re-election for a further term not exceeding
two three years, and shall upon completion of any such further term of
membership or upon resignation, not be eligible to be a Member of the
Council by re-election by the Senate until one year has elapsed from the
date of the completion of his or her term of membership or his or her
resignation (as the case may be).
4
Co-opted Members shall be eligible for further co-option.
Powers of Council
Resolved
that it be recommended to the Privy Council that the Statutes relating to the
membership and powers of the Court be amended so that
(a)
the power to appoint the Senior Officers (Chancellor, ProChancellors, and Treasurer) and to appoint lay members of
Council be transferred to Council;
(b)
the power to receive the annual audited Statement of Accounts
of the University be removed, it being noted that the Council
approves the annual Accounts;
(c)
the membership of Court be changed in accordance with a new
schedule to be devised after appropriate internal and external
consultation, to reduce ex officio and representative
membership and to increase individual members appointed by
Council.
Accordingly it is recommended to the Privy Council that the Statutes XVIII and
XVI be amended as follows (deleted text struck through and new wording
underlined):
Section XVIII Powers of the Council (extract)
Subject to the Charter and these Statutes, the Council shall, in addition
to all other powers vested in it, have the following powers:
6
256/05
1.
To appoint from among its members a Chairman who shall hold
office for three years and shall be eligible for re-appointment for one or
more further periods of three years.
2.
To appoint from among its members a Vice-Chairman who
shall hold office for three years and shall be eligible for re-appointment
for one or more further periods of three years.
3.
To appoint the Chancellor on the recommendation of a joint
committee of Council and the Senate. Jointly with the Senate to
nominate to the Court a person for appointment as Chancellor.
4.
To appoint the Pro-Chancellors and Treasurer on the
recommendation of Nominations Committee. To nominate to the Court
persons for appointment as Pro-Chancellor and Treasurer.
5.
To appoint members of the Court as provided for under Section
XIV of these Statutes.
6.
To co-opt members of the Council as provided for under
Section XVII of these Statutes.
Section XVI Powers of the Court
The powers of the Court shall be:
1.
To appoint the Chancellor, Pro-Chancellors, and Treasurer.
2.
To receive from the Vice-Chancellor and to comment upon an
Annual Report on the working of the University and to receive the
annual audited Statement of Accounts of the University.
3.
To appoint members of the Council as provided for under
Section XVII of these Statutes.
APPOINTMENT OF STUDENT UNION RETURNING OFFICER
Resolved
that Richard Walker, NUS Regional Officer, be appointed as Returning Officer
for the Students’ Union elections for 2005/06.
257/05
REPORT OF CHAIR’S ACTION (C/05/78)
Approved
Actions taken by the Chair on behalf of Council since the last meeting on 11
July 2005.
258/05
Resolved
that Julie Garbutt and Richard Nicol should be co-opted as members of Council
from 1 October 2005 – 31 July 2008.
259/05
LAY MEMBERS’ LINK SCHEME (C/05/79)
Noted
The list of academic departments and centres to which lay members of Council
were linked for 2005/06.
260/05
Date of Next Meeting
Noted
Monday 19 December 2005 at 2.15pm
261/05
7
RESERVED BUSINESS
There was no reserved business.
Moira Collett
Academic Registrar
14 November 2005
…………………………………..
Tim Melville-Ross
(Chair of Council)
19 December 2005
8
Appendix A
VICE-CHANCELLOR’S REPORT TO COUNCIL
Student numbers
I am sorry to have to report to Council that after five successive years of strong growth in student numbers,
the student recruitment figures are very disappointing this year. In view of the strategic and financial
implications of this year’s results I hope Council will allow me to go into a little more detail than normal.
Our recruitment of UK and EU undergraduates – who constitute about 60% of our student body – has been
on target and does not cause us concern. Indeed the target for 1st year intake was set about 100 higher than
last year and was met. However, recruitment of almost all other categories of student have fallen below
target, in some cases quite markedly and unexpectedly. The shortfall in overseas fee-paying students is
particularly serious.
To give you a flavour of the shortfall:
Oct 04
O/S UG
O/S PGTaught
O/S PGResearch
Oct 05
351
508
70
259
646
87
Difference
- 92 (-26%)
-138 (- 21%)
-17 (-20%)
We did anticipate that our overseas student intake would fall this year, because applications were
significantly lower than last year – by 35% in the case of undergraduates and about 15% in the case of
postgraduates. As a result we adjusted our expectations and thus financial forecasts sharply downwards for
this year. In the case of overseas UGs, the adjustment was about right, if anything too pessimistic; but in the
case of overseas postgraduates it was too optimistic by some margin.
The pattern of applications, acceptances and actual arrivals has been quite different from previous years, and
this has made forecasting less accurate. The most significant change is the very much larger proportion of
‘no shows’, i.e. of applicants who have firmly accepted our offer of a place but not turned up. The reason for
this, we believe, is a much higher rejection of or delay in responding to visa applications than in previous
years, which in turn reflects more stringent Government policy towards potential illegal immigrants and
security risks. Some apparently emerging student markets have turned out to be hollow e.g. 75% of visa
applications have been turned down in Nigeria because the entry clearance officers doubt the academic bona
fides of the applications. I know from conversations with fellow vice chancellors that many other universities
– including UEA, Sussex, Liverpool, Sheffield and Hertfordshire - have experienced the same phenomenon.
This explains our forecasting problems but begs the question of why applications have fallen in the first
place. The main reason is that the University is heavily dependent on China for its overseas student
recruitment – in recent years it has accounted for about 40% of all overseas undergraduates and 30% of
overseas postgraduates – and the Chinese market is evidently in decline. This is for a variety of reasons:
China is rapidly increasing its own capacity, establishing new large universities at a fast rate; at the same
time Far Eastern currencies including China’s have depreciated against sterling, so that UK overseas fees
have cost 25% more to Chinese students over the last three years. The UK share of the Chinese market is
slipping in favour of Australia, Malaysia and, most significantly, the United States which is now reversing its
tight visa policy ushered in immediately after 9/11. And it has to be said that Essex is probably losing what
has been a remarkably high market share as other UK universities enter the market.
Whatever the reasons, the shortfall against target in overseas students has serious financial repercussions for
the University. Our first estimate is that it knocks about £1.5m off the bottom line this year to which must be
added the impact of smaller shortfalls in other categories e.g. UK/EU postgraduate numbers the number of
students returning for their 2nd and 3rd year. The impact is not confined to this year, of course, because
undergraduates and research students stay for 3 years and because we must plan on the assumption that the
Chinese market is in permanent decline, even if we strive to improve our market share in future years.
9
Anticipating a decline in overseas student numbers, I asked Professor Christine Temple to conduct an urgent
review over the summer of our overseas student recruitment strategy and operations ands she has now
reported. The review recommends changes in five areas:





The management structure for overseas recruitment and retention, with a focus on a better
integration of activities that are currently dispersed, into a single International Office, and a
strengthening of the Office’s staff and senior management;
Marketing, in particular, the replacement and renewal of our portfolio of courses and programmes,
better marketing information and, most important, the diversification of markets, including overseas
students studying in UK schools;
The establishment of more collaborative arrangements with high quality institutions abroad;
A significantly enhanced role for the English Language Teaching Centre, working in partnership
with Insearch;
A more streamlined admissions process.
We shall implement these changes with dispatch but their impact will not be felt for at least a year. They will
not save the University from having to take significant and sometimes painful measures to deal with the
financial consequences of our disappointing student numbers. The projected deficits for this and the
following two years are, quite simply, unsustainable, and urgent measures are needed to reduce our cost base
in the short-term and generate new income streams in the longer-term. We shall extend our staff cost
reduction programme which, as one of the papers for Council makes clear, has been a success, and we shall
have to prune operating budgets. On the income side we shall continue to explore the option of capitalising
our student rental income streams. These and other measures will be looked at in more detail by Finance &
Strategy Committee at its two meetings before the next Council, when I shall report back.
Anglia Polytechnic University
APU, our neighbouring university, has changed its name to Anglia Ruskin University - ARU. It had intended
to change its name to Anglia University, but UEA lodged objections, which we supported. We are pleased
that APU’s new name is distinctive and unlikely to be confused with that of any other university in the
region.
Colchester Institute
Those attending the July Council meeting may recall the University’s proposal that Colchester Institute,
should adopt this University in place of APU as its validation partner. This proposal is supported by HEFCE
which wishes to see a larger realignment of FECs and universities in the Eastern region. There are many
obvious advantages to the Institute becoming a partner of its local University rather than one 30 miles away.
It was expected that there would be a public announcement but this has been delayed pending HEFCE’s
resolution of some final details with APU (now ARU). In the meantime, the implementation of the changes
affecting CI and the University is proceeding amicably and on schedule.
IMC
17 July 2005
10