HL Deb 10 November 1982 vol 436 cc233-5

2.49 p.m.

Lord Annan

My Lords, I beg leave to ask the first Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government how many universities have applied to the Privy Council to amend their statutes, or have altered their ordinances or regulations, so as (a) to vary the age of retirement or (b) to lengthen the period of probation before a member of staff acquires tenure until the retiring age.

Lord Elton

My Lords, the answer to the first part of the noble Lord's question is, none. As to the second, provisions relating to the probation of academic staff are, of course, entirely the responsibility of the university concerned and the department would not be informed about such changes.

Lord Annan

My Lords, in thanking the Minister for that Answer, may I ask whether, in view of the extremely favourable settlement which the universities have received, announced in The Times this morning, in part settlement of the very large claims that they have made on the Government for provision for retirements within the university, it is not now the time for the University Grants Committee to press universities to change their present system of tenure? Would not the noble Lord agree that it is a scandal that someone aged 25 can, within two and a half years, obtain a contract which cannot be broken without great damages being paid to him and which entitles him to a job until the retiring age of 65? Does the noble Lord not think that it would be much better if universities in general followed the example of the University of Cambridge in which there is a period of eight years before anyone has such an unbreakable contract?

Lord Elton

My Lords, I am grateful for the noble Lord's acknowledgment of the generosity of the agreement reached yesterday and announced by my right honourable friend in another place. As regards contracts, new contracts can of course be worded to provide for dismissal for reasons of, for instance, redundancy. Existing contracts which do not allow for this can be expensive, and that was reflected in yesterday's settlement. In such cases, a university is faced with negotiating amendments to the contracts or, in suitable cases—as is implied in the noble Lord's substantive Question—changing the provisions in their statute. So far two universities have made tentative inquiries about such amendments to their statutes.

Lord Vaizey

My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that this practice grew up in the 1950s; that it is a contractual arrangement which has very little to do with academic freedom; and that, while many would agree with him that it is proper for the Government to adopt an arms-length, hands-off relationship to the universities, the present position whereby young men and women find it almost impossible to find a university post because of the blockage at the top, is really not conductive to the health of our universities? It would be helpful if the Government could engage in constructive discussions with the universities on this matter.

Lord Elton

My Lords, I am certain that my right honourable friend would engage in any discussions if he was approached on the subject. I understand that he has been approached by two universities. I am well aware of the ossification that threatens some university departments and the noble Lord will know that we have an initiative to introduce new blood into universities.

Lord Glenamara

My Lords, in spite of what the two noble Lords have said, will the Minister give the House an assurance that, where universities apply for an amendment to their charters on matters unrelated to tenure, the Government will not make their agreement conditional upon changes being made to the clauses regarding tenure? There is a widespread view in the universities that the Government intend to use, or rather abuse, the procedure of the Privy Council in this way.

Lord Elton

My Lords, I am obliged to the noble Lord for drawing that fear to my attention and I will see that it is related to my right honourable friend.

Lord Kaldor

My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that some universities offer terms for early retirement that are so generous that it is very difficult to see how the university saves any money by taking that course as compared with the alternative of those people continuing to function until the time of their retirement? If so, what advantage is there to the nation to induce people to retire years before their mental powers have deteriorated if it does not even save any money from the point of view of the Government?

Lord Elton

My Lords, these are matters for negotiation between the individual and the institution concerned, but basically they are concluded when it is in the interest of each to do so.

Lord Annan

My Lords, would the noble Lord agree that the only way in which universities are likely to move on this matter is if the University Grants Committee is advised that some financial repercussions will occur unless there is movement on these matters? Unless such a statement is made, universities—as can be shown ever since 1969 when Mrs. Williams put 13 points to them—are unlikely to move.

Lord Elton

My Lords, the package to which we have referred several times in these exchanges contained £40 million to help with unforeseen and unavoidable increases in the cost of superannuation, as well as rates and some other smaller items. In fact I think that this will result in movement.