Dundee University ‘fell well short', says interim boss in response to report
Former Glasgow Caledonian University principal Professor Pamela Gillies was asked to look into the culture, leadership and financial management at Dundee earlier this year after a £35 million black hole was discovered, leading the institution to consider cutting hundreds of jobs.
The report found former principal Professor Iain Gillespie, who has since resigned, ex-interim principal Professor Shane O'Neill, and previous chief operating officer Jim McGeorge had acted as a 'triumvirate', making decisions amongst themselves, and it also questioned the quality of information about the university's finances given to other senior officials.
In publishing the university's response to the report on Wednesday, interim principal Professor Nigel Seaton said: 'It was evident from the Gillies report that there had been clear failings in financial monitoring, leadership, and governance at the university.
'The entire UK higher education sector has been forced to deal with significant external factors in recent years but our university's response to these, and its management of finances, fell well short of the standards that everyone should have expected.'
Dr Ian Mair, the acting chairman of the university court, said: 'The actions we propose to take in the short, medium and long term are designed to ensure the university has a sustainable future built upon strong governance, financial competence, transparency, and accountability.
'Our response provides detailed assurances to our stakeholders that the immediate, robust, and impactful action required to implement significant operational and cultural change is under way.'
The response looked at the financial dealings of the university, its culture and governance, laying out short, medium and long-term actions to ensure its improvement.
The appointment of a permanent principal, chief financial officer and chief operating officer could take up to 18 months, according to the response, which puts the hiring of the three roles in the 'longer term (12-18 months)' category.
The replacement principal, the response said, must have 'experience of transformation and change and with a people-focused leadership style'.
Prof Gillespie was criticised in the Gillies report for not consulting with staff, as well accusing him of 'hubris' in his leadership and being unable to take criticism.
In the next six months, it is hoped a new chairman of the university court can be found, along with regular members of the body, including those with 'financial skills and experience'.
The university said it will cancel or defer all 'non-essential capital projects' and use financial modelling to devise rolling five-year budget forecasts for key areas to get back on its feet financially.
The response also pledged to listen more to staff and students, with a number of events already being planned to do so.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
24 minutes ago
- The Guardian
The Guardian view on inheritance tax rises: to win the argument, ministers must build the case on fairness
Britain's tax debate has changed. Previously the argument was whether there would be rises in an autumn budget. Now the only question is which levies the Treasury will raise. The shift has been a two-stage process. First, economic data made it look highly improbable that Rachel Reeves could fulfil existing spending pledges, while also sticking within her self-imposed fiscal rules, on current revenue projections. She needs money. Second, the chancellor and the prime minister stopped denying that this was the case. They have not confirmed that taxes are going up, but they no longer pretend that isn't a reasonable expectation. One option under consideration, as revealed by the Guardian this week, is to change the inheritance tax (IHT) regime. The range of reliefs that currently limit tax on gifts made in the years prior to death could be replaced by a lifetime cap. This would bring more high-value assets into the scope of IHT. Only a wealthy minority would be affected. The most recent HMRC data shows that fewer than 5% of deaths lead to any required payment of inheritance tax. While the headline rate is 40%, various reliefs and exemptions bring that down to an effective rate of 13%. A common argument against most taxes is the disincentive impact they might have on investment and aspiration. That hardly applies to a levy on unearned, hereditary windfalls. In utilitarian terms, this is just the sort of pot that an enterprise‑oriented exchequer should target. But the public does not see it that way. IHT is unpopular despite its negligible impact on most household finances. Partly that is a function of wishful thinking. Surveys show voters vastly overestimating the likelihood that they will one day inherit or bequeath an estate that is taxed. But distaste for IHT also has a deeper emotional resonance. It is deemed unfair, as a 'double' taxation because estates might consist of savings accrued from earnings that were taxed earlier in a working life. This is not an exceptional case. Many items and activities fall under overlapping tax purviews, but people feel there is something particularly mean about the Treasury dipping into the finances of grieving families. Failure to address similar reservations led the government into a storm of protest last year when very generous IHT reliefs on farmland were made slightly less generous. The damage from that furore was out of all proportion to the financial gains. The government is right to look at raising more money from IHT, but the lessons of past battles must be learned. Myths need robust debunking, while other issues around inheritance – the instinct of parents to help children – need handling sensitively. There is a powerful argument for intergenerational fairness in a society where inheritance, especially of property, dictates life chances, dividing ever younger cohorts into landowner and tenant classes. Taxing inheritance is a modest but necessary levelling mechanism. That case needs making well ahead of the budget. The tone of the conversation around tax may have changed, but the mechanism involved a prime minister and chancellor reluctantly conceding a reality only once it had already been widely acknowledged elsewhere. If they want their plans to gain public favour, they must rise out of that reactive, defensive crouch and make bigger arguments for a fairer tax system. Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.
Times
an hour ago
- Times
Whatever happens to inflation, it's food prices that really bite
I've been guilty of an annoying habit over the summer, one that produces eye-rolling from others. I peer into a punnet of strawberries, count them, do the mental sum and then expostulate with something like '25p per berry!' Or, with added old-man grumpiness: 'Five shillings for a strawberry!' You might think this focus on the price of fruit as evidence for the rising cost of living is a bit weird, but you'd be wrong. We're all prone to it. Research by economists at the Bank of England found that of all spending categories, it is food items that are most likely to catch our eye and determine our view of the inflation rate more generally. Not only that, the research, published in May, found that rises in food prices in particular tend to exaggerate our view of future living costs: a 1 per cent rise in food costs increases our expectations of overall inflation in a year's time by 1.8 per cent, almost twice as much. Or in Bank-speak: 'Our results imply that the risk of household expectations contributing to persistent inflationary dynamics is greatest following large and inflationary shocks to, specifically, food prices.' Even energy bills and fuel prices aren't as potent, they found, in spite of accounting for a greater chunk of household spending. Those of us who thought the petrol price displayed at filling stations was the single most influential number in shaping the public mood about living costs are wrong. The phenomenon holds across all age groups, regions, income levels, job types and both genders, the researchers found. The only product or service category even more psychologically powerful than food was alcohol, especially for higher income and older households. Imbibers tended to be 'excessively sensitive to price changes': a 1 per cent increase in the price of their tipple produced a 4 per cent increase in their perception of the overall inflation rate. The researchers didn't say whether this was before or after consumption. Food, which only accounts for 11 per cent of average household spending, may be distorting our view of inflation more generally. So, for example, the very welcome £60 or 10 per cent fall in the average motor insurance premium to £562, announced on Wednesday by the Association of British Insurers, may carry less weight with us than the 10p increase in the cost of the chocolate bar we buy every day. This matters for two reasons. First, because present-day inflation expectations can exacerbate future price pressures in a self-feeding spiral. Firms raise prices when they expect their own input prices to rise. Employees push for pay rises which lead to firms putting up prices again. Second, because food prices in particular are surging right now. Annual food price inflation in June was 4.5 per cent. That compares to 3.6 per cent for the wider consumer prices index (CPI). Poor harvests have pushed up prices of coffee and cocoa beans while dry conditions at home have lifted beef and dairy prices. The problem is more pronounced in the UK than elsewhere. Food price inflation is 1.5 percentage points higher here than in the euro area. Different British tastes and therefore different weightings in the CPI basket may explain some of it, but two factors confined to the UK may have added to the effect. One is the rise in the minimum wage and in national insurance, which disproportionately affects the food industry, a low-wage sector. The other is the imminent new regime for packaging, which loads the cost of disposing of or recycling plastic, cardboard and glass on to the industry that produces it. The first EPR (extended producer responsibility) invoices will be sent out to food firms in October and some are already raising their prices in anticipation. UK food price inflation is therefore heading beyond 5 per cent in the next few months and rising to as high as 5.5 per cent by the year-end, according to Bank projections. This is not just an awkward statistic for monetary policy makers. The government will need very fancy footwork this autumn as it finds itself (probably) forced to raise taxes at a time when the price of that most essential of essentials is escalating and wages growth is slowing. (Note to all MPs: mug up on the price of a litre of milk or loaf of bread to avoid embarrassing interview ambushes this autumn.) The potency of food prices in influencing consumer thinking is a potential trap for the Bank. It is already losing the confidence of households. Inflation has been above its 2 per cent target in 46 of the past 60 months. In the latest 'Inflation Attitudes' survey, the average prediction of members of the public for inflation in five years is now 3.63 per cent, the highest since May 2019 and higher even than in 2022 when the actual inflation rate hit double digits. Bank of England credibility has been eroded and the UK is now 'an outlier' compared to Europe, according to Pantheon Economics. 'Something has changed — for the worse — in the way consumers make inflation forecasts,' warns Robert Wood, Pantheon's chief UK economist. Public faith in the Bank's determination to bring inflation back down to target is already wobbling. The coming pick-up in food price increases could sour that confidence further. Even if the wider CPI rate does start to come down, households may not feel it or believe it. Last week's cut in the base rate to 4 per cent could soon look premature. This may not be a Marie ('Let them eat cake') Antoinette moment. But the accelerating price of food is certain to rise up the agenda this autumn, in Westminster and the City.
Times
an hour ago
- Times
Rolls-Royce aims to become UK's biggest company by market value
Rolls-Royce, Britain's engineering champion, is chasing a target of becoming the country's largest company by market value. The company's chief executive Tufan Erginbilgic said that that could be achieved by a take-off in demand for small modular nuclear reactors for local power stations being commissioned to build to secure the nation's energy sovereignty. The ambition of Erginbilgic, who took over at the Derby-based group in 2023, would need to see Rolls-Royce nearly double its market capitalisation to overtake AstraZeneca, the pharmaceuticals group worth just shy of £172 billion. Rolls-Royce's market capitalisation is £92 billion. If it is to claim the scalp, Rolls-Royce would need to pass several other colossi of the UK corporate scene on the way: HSBC, Europe's biggest bank, is valued on the stock market at £163 billion, oil and gas major Shell has a value of £155 billion and Unilever, the consumer goods group, is at £110 billion. British American Tobacco currently remains marginally ahead of Rolls-Royce at £93 billion. Erginbilgic said Rolls-Royce has the 'potential' to become top dog because of its pivot into civil nuclear, using its technology developed for Britain's nuclear submarine fleet to build out local power stations with small modular reactors (SMRs). It has already signed deals with the UK and Czech governments. 'There is no private company in the world with the nuclear capability we have,' Erginbilgic told the BBC. 'If we are not market leader globally, we did something wrong.' He said Rolls-Royce is chasing a $1 trillion-plus market in SMRs which he reckons will see 400 of them installed worldwide by 2050 at a current cost of £2.2 billion apiece. The Rolls-Royce boss said the need for SMR installations is becoming particularly acute because of the need to power the data centres that will facilitate mass adoption of artificial intelligence. Rolls-Royce shares have already risen tenfold since Erginbilgic took over in January 2023 with the stock rising from 93p to the current £10.82. The chief executive famously called the company a 'burning platform' when he arrived and set about turbocharging the reforms of the company begun under his predecessor Warren East, who had weathered the Covid-19 crisis. Other storms have swept the business, including record fines for bribery and corruption across five continents; and billions of pounds to repair design and durability issues with the Trent 1000 engines for the Boeing 787 Dreamliner. Erginbilgic swept out much of the previous management and set about creating a regime in which the company would refuse to accept second best on pricing power for its engines for Boeing, Airbus and business jets, or on manufacturing efficiency. Since he took over Erginbilgic has seen Rolls-Royce overtake in market capitalisation terms the likes of his old oil and gas employer BP, fellow defence company BAE Systems, Barclays bank and Rio Tinto the miner.
