UNIVERSITIES OF DURHAM AND NEWCASTLE UPON TYNE BILL (Hansard, 14 May 1963)

THE CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES (LORD MERTHYR)
My Lords, I beg to move that this Bill be now read a third time.

§ LORD CHORLEY
My Lords, I had intended on the Second Reading of this Bill to say a few words in welcome to the Bill and to make a point which I think is of some importance. Unfortunately, the Question was put rather more rapidly than I had anticipated, and some of your Lordships may recollect that my attempt to speak was, quite naturally, called to order. I should, therefore, like to say a few words now, and I shall not take up too much of your Lordships' time.
On behalf of those who are interested, and particularly the universities, I welcome this Bill. These two institutions 1190 have each played a great part in university education in recent times, and I am sure that each will go on its way as a full university with distinction and will add to the lustre they have already won. But a point of general interest arises from the fact that more and more these Bills which are being brought up in confirmation of Royal Charters establishing universities are going into detail and setting out the Statutes of the universities. We are having more and more new universities set up, which is very right and proper, and it seems to me that the time has come when some attempt should be made to secure rather more uniformity in regard to these matters.
The point is of particular importance in connection with the dismissal of university teachers, which in the universities in recent years has been attracting a good deal of attention as a result of one or two unfortunate incidents which have taken place. If I may just refer to Clause 38 in the Durham Bill, which I think is in much the same terms as the Newcastle Bill, it establishes a right, which is quite reasonable and proper, that on the recommendation of a dismissal an internal tribunal should be set up to investigate the case, to which the man who is under dismissal may make representations. That is, as I say, quite proper; but it is not as liberal as the practice which exists in some other universities, because this applies only to a person holding an appointment until the age of retirement. Anybody who is familiar with what happens in the universities knows very well that the large majority of university teachers are not appointed until the age of retirement, but are appointed for much shorter periods. It is not really fair that it should be only senior professors and readers and men holding appointments of that kind who are entitled to have their position considered by an internal tribunal of this kind. In some of the other universities this is general practice.
We now have a position in which men are moving about a great deal from one university to another. They might have been appointed in a university where a general right of this kind was established by the Statutes, and go on to another university where the clause is restricted in this way, or even more restricted than the one which exists in this Bill. You cannot expect people, 1191 when they are given a chance to take up a better post in another university, to go through the Statute with a magnifying glass to discover exactly what the differences are. I suggest that the time has now come when the Lord President's Department, which I understand is responsible for looking after these things, to make an effort to establish some uniform system in regard to matters of this kind; to select the most liberal of the Statutes which govern this sort of situation, and to see that this is made general over the country. I am sure your Lordships will agree that it is important, at a time when so much in this country is depending on the right thing being done in these universities, and with many of our best young men being attracted into this profession, that points of this kind should be looked at. I do not want to take the matter further, because it is important that this Bill should go through without delay. However, I should like the Lord President and his officials to take up the matter, because if it comes before us again in this way I may feel it necessary to put down an Instruction.

VISCOUNT RIDLEY
My Lords, may I, with a good deal of knowledge of the proposed University at Newcastle, make some comment on what the noble Lord opposite has said? There are two sets of Statutes with provisions of the kind to which he has alluded: the continuation of Durham University, in Schedule 1, and others for the new University of Newcastle, in Schedule 3. The noble Lord will find, on examination, that both sots of procedures are far more careful of the rights of academic staff than are the present conditions in the combined universities in Newcastle and Durham, in the name of Durham University. This matter has been looked into carefully by those at the University concerned, and these provisions, to my knowledge, at any rate, in the case of Newcastle, are those put forward by the present members of the academic staff, carefully considered and 1192 approved by the Council of the division of Newcastle and the University of Durham and approved by the Court of Durham University. I do not think we could have gone further in making provision for what the noble Lord has in mind. Personally, from what knowledge I have of university administration, I believe that it would be a disaster if a standard set of provisions were enacted for all universities in this country, whether new or existing, and I very much hope that universities will continue to have the freedom proposed in Bills of this sort in Statutes which they think will be most suitable to them.

§ LORD CHORLEY
My Lords, may I explain to the noble Lord that I am not proposing that there should be uniform conditions throughout. These matters of deciding that a member has been properly dismissed are of great importance to university teachers, and I will sand to the noble Lord the Statute of another university which is much more liberal than the one to which he has just referred.