Thursday, 18 March 2010

More delay....and a short tour of Statute A

This post is just to update on the further delay...a delay that is wholly uneccessary. It will also explain the statutory technicalities.

Members of the Regent House will recall that just before Christmas some 79 members of the Regent House petition the Council under Statute A. Since then Council has been trying to decide what to do. It is divided but with a majority in favour of pressing on with the lift and delaying as long as possible the neccessity of facing the Regent House on this issue. This strategy has meant that the lift will be complete before the Regent House has a chance to vote. It is still unclear when we will have a chance to vote...but that day must come. It cannot be avoided.

Now for the technicalities.

Statute A,VIII,7 provides:
"Any fifty members of the Regent House may initiate a Grace for submission to the Regent House...." and in accordance with that provision 79 members of the Regent House initiated the following Grace.

That all construction works for a lift into the Regent House Combination Room be removed and the building returned to its former state, and that the Council report, as soon as convenient, to the Regent House with proposals to secure reasonable access to the Combination Room and associated rooms for those unable to use the stairs.

Now what happens next? Statute A, VIII, 9 (omitting irrelevant words reads as follows):

"(a).... the Council shall consider any Grace or amendment initiated under section 7, and either (i) shall authorize the submission of the Grace or amendment to the Regent House or (ii) shall publish a Report giving reasons for its decision to withhold authorization and recommending the Regent House to approve that decision. If such approval is not given, the Council shall, not later than the end of the term next following, submit the Grace or amendment to the Regent House.
(b) If a Grace or amendment initiated under section 7 involves expenditure from University funds additional to that already authorized, the Council shall refer the Grace or amendment to the Finance Committee, and to the General Board or another body as appropriate, for their advice; in submitting such Grace or amendment to the Regent House, the Council shall at the same time publish a statement indicating how it is intended to make financial provision for the proposed expenditure."

As far as we know (and we can't be certain because nothing has been said officially) Council has declined simply to submit the Grace for ballot (with a flysheet explaining what a bad idea demolishing the lift is and how expensive it will be). Instead the Council is going to publish a Report explaining what a bad idea demolishing the lift is and how expensive it will be! Council will have to recommend that the Regent House approve the Report; and, of course, the only way in which the Regent House will be able to do that is by Grace! (Statute A, VIII, 5 provides:"Any proposal to be placed before the Regent House or the Senate for approval shall be in the form of a Grace...").

So by choosing to Report to the Regent House the Council has chosen the slowest route to a Grace. But a Grace there will be: the Regent House will be voting about whether it should be allowed to vote on the original Grace. But this will be after a torrid Discussion...what larks...except that to the aesthetic abomination of the lift has been added this unedifying pitcure of a Council seeking to avoid facing the Governing Body of the University....Fortunately, the Regent House cannot be avoided...much later than it should have the Regent House will be able to speak!

1 comment:

  1. I think they've bitten the bullet: there will be a "torrid Discussion" (27 April) and subsequently, and Grace...