No 6813
Wednesday 4 February 2026
Vol clvi No 18
pp. 306–323
13 February, Friday. Lent Term divides.
17 February, Tuesday. Discussion by videoconference at 2 p.m. (see below).
22 February, Sunday. Preacher before the University at 11.30 a.m., Professor Robin Osborne, Fellow of King’s College, Emeritus Professor of Ancient History (Hulsean Preacher).
28 February, Saturday. Congregation of the Regent House at 10 a.m.
4 March, Wednesday. End of third quarter of Lent Term.
|
Discussions (Tuesdays at 2 p.m.) |
Congregations (at 10 a.m. unless otherwise stated) |
|
17 February 17 March |
28 February 16 March, 2.45 p.m. (ceremonial installation of the Chancellor) 28 March 11 April |
The Vice-Chancellor invites members of the Regent House, University and College employees, registered students and others qualified under the regulations for Discussions (Statutes and Ordinances, p. 111) to attend a Discussion by videoconference on Tuesday, 17 February 2026 at 2 p.m. The following item will be discussed:
1.Joint Report of the Council and the General Board, dated 3 February 2026, on corrections to Special Ordinances concerning Selection Committees (p. 313).
Those wishing to join the Discussion by videoconference should email Discussions@admin.cam.ac.uk (please note the new email address) providing their CRSid (if a member of the collegiate University), by 10 a.m. on the date of the Discussion to receive joining instructions. Alternatively contributors may email their remarks to Discussions@admin.cam.ac.uk, by no later than 10 a.m. on the day of the Discussion for reading out by the Proctors,1 or may ask someone else who is attending to read the remarks on their behalf.
In accordance with the regulations for Discussions, the Chair of the Board of Scrutiny or any ten members of the Regent House2 may request that the Council arrange for one or more of the items listed for discussion to be discussed in person (usually in the Senate-House). Requests should be made to the Registrary, on paper or by email to UniversityDraftsman@admin.cam.ac.uk from addresses within the cam.ac.uk domain, by no later than 9 a.m. on the day of the Discussion. Any changes to the Discussion schedule will be confirmed in the Reporter at the earliest opportunity.
For general information on Discussions see the Reporter website at https://www.reporter.admin.cam.ac.uk/discussions.
1Any comments sent by email should please begin with the name and title of the contributor as they wish it to be read out and include at the start a note of any College and/or Departmental affiliations held.
2https://www.scrutiny.cam.ac.uk/ and https://www.admin.cam.ac.uk/reporter/regent_house_roll/.
The Vice-Chancellor begs leave to refer to the Notice of 15 December 2025 (Reporter, 6808, 2025–26, p. 159), concerning the text of a Statute to amend the Statutes of Peterhouse. She hereby gives notice that in the opinion of the Council the proposed Statute makes no alteration of any Statute which affects the University, and does not require the consent of the University; that the interests of the University are not prejudiced by it, and that the Council has resolved to take no action upon it, provided that the Council will wish to reconsider the proposed Statute if it has not been submitted to the Privy Council by 29 January 2027.
The Vice-Chancellor begs leave to refer to the Notice of 15 December 2025 (Reporter, 6808, 2025–26, p. 160), concerning the text of a Statute to amend the Statutes of Robinson College. She hereby gives notice that in the opinion of the Council the proposed Statute makes no alteration of any Statute which affects the University, and does not require the consent of the University; that the interests of the University are not prejudiced by it, and that the Council has resolved to take no action upon it, provided that the Council will wish to reconsider the proposed Statute if it has not been submitted to the Privy Council by 29 January 2027.
The Vice-Chancellor wishes to remind members of the University of the days in 2026 appointed by regulation for the wearing of festal gowns by Doctors (which are also the days on which the academic dress of other universities may in general be worn). Under this regulation, the day of the Chancellor’s installation and of the Honorary Degree Congregation are designated as additional ‘Scarlet days’.
|
Date |
Occasion |
|
16 March |
Installation of the Chancellor |
|
5 April |
Easter Day |
|
14 May |
Ascension Day |
|
24 May |
Whitsunday |
|
31 May |
Trinity Sunday |
|
24 June |
Honorary Degree Congregation |
|
1, 2, 3 and 4 July |
General Admission to Degrees |
|
1 November |
All Saints’ Day and also Commemoration of Benefactors |
|
25 December |
Christmas Day |
The Council has received the remarks made at the Discussion on 4 November 2025 concerning the above Report (Reporter, 2025–26: 6798, p. 38; 6803, p. 109). It has consulted the General Board in preparing this response.
This Report proposes changes to Special Ordinance to remove an option to have standing Boards of Electors for the election of Professors because this option is no longer used. Ad hoc Boards are already the norm for practical reasons. There is a workload associated with keeping a standing Board fully constituted. There can be very long periods between vacancies, with the risk that when a vacancy does occur, new members need to be appointed.
Dr Astle and Professor Evans both raise concerns about constituting a Board of Electors only when a vacancy occurs. Dr Astle quotes remarks made in 1971 when ad hoc Boards were originally proposed, which suggest that ad hoc Boards might bias the search in favour of particular candidates or particular areas within the field of the Professorship. He also has a concern about ‘the extent to which ad hoc Boards are able to make elections purely on academic grounds, without being influenced by financial, political or ‘strategic’ considerations’. The Council notes that the selection criteria for Professorships are determined by individual Boards of Electors, in line with the procedures to which Dr Astle refers. Those Boards must have the flexibility to determine the specific criteria to be met before starting the recruitment process. Of course, academic credentials are very important, but they are not the only criteria. The Council also observes that such bias or influence is a possibility, whether a Board of Electors is ad hoc or standing. Members of Boards of Electors are actively encouraged to identify possible candidates, because Boards are search committees as well as electors. Dr Astle also draws attention to the recent delegation of the appointment of Boards of Electors to the Councils of the Schools and the active encouragement for the Head of School or a designated representative to serve on Boards of Electors for Professorships in their School. He questions whether the processes for making academic appointments should be insulated from the influence of those with responsibility for managing the financial consequences of them, referring to the Heads of the Schools’ responsibilities under Statute A V 10.
The Council sees great value in the Heads of the Schools serving on Boards of Electors. Their knowledge of the wider School context, but one step removed from the Department or Faculty to which the Professor would be assigned, complements the specialist knowledge of the experts in the field of the Professorship who make up the majority of the members on the Board. Further, the Council does not consider that committing to standing Boards is the best way of mitigating the risks Dr Astle and Professor Evans identify. It is the long-standing policy of the University to appoint the most outstanding candidate based only on personal merit and the application of criteria related to the duties and conditions of the particular position and the needs of the institution concerned.1 It is also a requirement for any conflict, whether actual or perceived, to be declared.2 These policies are drawn to the attention of Boards of Electors in the relevant procedures. The requirement to publish the membership of Boards in the Reporter has also been retained in Special Ordinance, providing transparency on the appointments made.
Professor Evans states that the Report proposes the deletion of the provision that confirms a Report is to be published when a personal Professorship is established under a University promotions scheme. This is incorrect. This Report proposes only changes to Part B of Special Ordinance C (vii) and the provision Professor Evans refers to is in Section 3 of Part A. Professor Evans also asks whether the period of appointment of a Professorship is at the discretion of the ad hoc Board of Electors making the election to that office. The Council can confirm that this is not the case; all elections to Professorships are to the retiring age unless otherwise stated in the Grace of the Regent House establishing the Professorship, in accordance with Special Ordinance C (vii) A 6.
The Council is submitting a Grace (Grace 1, p. 314) for the approval of the recommendations of this Report.
1See the Equal Opportunities Policy. The Recruitment Policy also supports the aim of attracting, recruiting and retaining the most talented staff across all areas of academic and professional activity to maintain and enhance the University’s world-leading reputation.
2See the Conflict of Interest Policy.
The Council has received the remarks made about the above Report at the Discussion on 9 December 2025 (Reporter, 2025–26: 6804, p. 119; 6808, p. 193).
Mr Allen states that no clear rationale is given for finally closing the University Centre’s catering and social facilities. Those facilities have been entirely closed since 2020. As Dr Rutter notes, the facilities were generally loss-making, and while it may be desirable to have them – for the reasons outlined by Mr Allen and Dr Rutter – the current aim to reduce operating expenditure across the University does not support the reintroduction of these costs at this time.
The condition of the University Centre building is sufficient to support the interim uses outlined in the Report, and it will provide a good location for those activities following their relocation from the Mill Lane North site. Notwithstanding the size of the University estate, it has not been straightforward to identify appropriate alternative space to enable the disposal of that site.
However, the extent of the maintenance and asset replacement that would be required to sustain the building’s long‑term operational use would require a multi-million-pound project equivalent to the refurbishment of the David Attenborough Building or the Stirling Building. The Council and the General Board have approved an estates capital plan which provisionally allocates the capital funding that is expected to be available to the University over the next twenty years. That plan is informed by discussions with Schools and institutions during 2024 and 2025 and seeks to implement – within a constrained financial envelope – the University’s academic priorities and its ambitions for an estate that is smaller, more fit-for-purpose and more environmentally and financially sustainable.
The capital plan currently anticipates that funding for a comprehensive refurbishment of the University Centre will be available no earlier than 2035. This indicative timetable is only likely to be accelerated in the event of a material improvement in the University’s overall financial position (which would permit the Finance Committee to release more of the University’s own funds for capital expenditure) or if the University secures external capital funding substantially beyond what is already assumed in the capital plan.
The Wolfson Foundation has been consulted about the Report’s proposals and has no objections.
The Council is submitting a Grace (Grace 2, p. 314) for the approval of the recommendations of this Report, which would remove the Ordinance for the University Centre and the related membership.