Skip to main contentCambridge University Reporter

No 6353

Wednesday 25 June 2014

Vol cxliv No 36

pp. 644–663



25 June, Wednesday. Congregation of the Regent House at 10 a.m. (General Admission). Scarlet Day. Easter Term ends.

26 June, Thursday. Congregation of the Regent House at 10 a.m. (General Admission). Scarlet Day.

27 June, Friday. Congregation of the Regent House at 10 a.m. (General Admission). Scarlet Day.

28 June, Saturday. Congregation of the Regent House at 10 a.m. (General Admission). Scarlet Day.

8 July, Tuesday. Discussion at 2 p.m. in the Senate-House (see below).

19 July, Saturday. Congregation of the Regent House at 10 a.m.

The ordinary issues of the Reporter for the remainder of the 2013–14 academical year will be published on: 2 July, 16 July, and 30 July 2014.

Notice of a Discussion on Tuesday, 8 July 2014

The Vice-Chancellor invites those qualified under the regulations for Discussions (Statutes and Ordinances, p. 103) to attend a Discussion in the Senate-House, on Tuesday, 8 July 2014, at 2 p.m. for the discussion of:

1. Report of the General Board, dated 4 June 2014, on Senior Academic Promotions (Reporter, 6351, 2013–14, p. 621).

2. Report of the General Board, dated 4 June 2014, on the establishment of two Professorships in the School of Clinical Medicine (Reporter, 6351, 2013–14, p. 625).

3. Report of the General Board, dated 4 June 2014, on the establishment of a Readership in Statistics in Biomedicine (Reporter, 6351, 2013–14, p. 625).

4. Report of the Council, dated 25 June 2014, on the demolition of certain buildings within the University estate (p. 650).

5. Report of the General Board, dated 23 June 2014, on the provisions for certain visiting Professorships (p. 650).

Notice of benefactions

23 June 2014

The Vice-Chancellor gives notice that he has accepted with gratitude the following benefactions, of which both the capital and the income may be used:

(i)a benefaction of £745,000 from the Arcadia Fund, payable over five years, to support a project in the Mongolia and Inner Asia Studies Unit (Department of Archaeology and Anthropology) to document the endangered cultural heritage of the Kalmyks;

(ii)a benefaction of £500,000 from the Turner-Kirk Charitable Trust, payable over five years, to support the work of the Isaac Newton Institute for Mathematical Sciences;

(iii)a benefaction of £200,000 from the Yusuf and Farida Hamied Foundation to extend for a further five years support for the Cambridge Hamied Visiting Lecture Scheme, established by the Foundation in 2009 to stimulate exchange of ideas and academic collaboration between India and the University;

(iv)a benefaction of £150,000 from the H. B. Allen Charitable Trust, payable over three years, to fund a Next Generation Fellowship for Professor Keith Martin, in the John van Geest Centre for Brain Repair within the Department of Clinical Neurosciences;

(v)a benefaction of £104,565 from Perennial – Gardeners’ Royal Benevolent Society, payable over five years, to fund one horticultural technician traineeship per year in the Botanic Garden over the same period;

(vi)a benefaction of £50,000 from the Freemasons’ Grand Charity, together with £50,000 from the Charity’s Masonic Samaritan Fund, to support the research of Dr Alasdair Coles in the Neurology Unit of Department of Clinical Neurosciences, bringing to a total of £200,000 the Charity’s support for Dr Coles’ research.

Report of the Council on the governance and management arrangements for sport within the University: Notice in response to remarks made in Discussion

The Council has received the remarks made at the Discussion on 29 April 2014 (Reporter, 6346, 2013–14, p. 516) concerning the above Report (Reporter, 6343, 2013–14, p. 452).

The focus of the review was on the governance of sport within the University, therefore the main recommendations of the Review Committee relate to the establishment of a body with responsibility for providing direction in the development of a strategy for sport, and to the position of the Sports Service within the University’s structure, with minimal changes to the existing infrastructure. There appears to be a consensus that such change is necessary, even if there is disagreement on some of the details. The Review Committee has acknowledged in its report that further work is necessary, once the revised governance framework is in place. If the Report’s proposals are approved, transitional arrangements will be agreed with the Syndicate and the Director.

The Council is of the view that the development of sport in the University will be best served by a Sports Service that is embedded in the Unified Administrative Service. The Director would continue to provide leadership in this area of activity and, under the proposals, would be supported by a senior line manager and guided by a Committee, in arrangements that mirror those for others serving as Directors. High-level committees do not usually include the responsible officer in their membership and therefore the Director would, in common with the formal position of the Librarian, the Director of the North West Cambridge project, and the Chief Executive Officer of the University Press, to name a few, not be a member of the Sports Committee, although he or she would be closely involved in the development of strategy and policy. However, the Council agrees with Mr Lemons that the title of Director of Sport would be a more appropriate title for this role. It also agrees with the comments read out by Dr Lasenby that separate sub-committees of the Sports Committee should approve respectively the registration of sports clubs and the allocation of grants to those clubs. The proposed regulations for the University Sports Committee have therefore been revised, by amending the title of the Director in Regulation 3, by amending Regulation 4(d) to read ‘make provision for the registration of and allocation of funds to sports clubs;’ and by removing the words ‘and allocation of funds to’ from the responsibilities of the Clubs Sub-committee in Regulation 7.

The correspondence read out by Dr Lasenby also makes reference to the registration of sports clubs. At present, sports clubs register with both the Sports Syndicate and with the Junior Proctor. However, Regulation 7 of the regulations for the Sports Syndicate already gives the Syndicate authority to ‘approve the object, constitution, and rules of the University sports clubs’, to ‘maintain a list of approved University sports clubs’, and to add and remove clubs from that list (Statutes and Ordinances, p. 135). With the agreement of the Junior Proctor, an amendment to the regulations for Clubs and Societies (Statutes and Ordinances, p. 199) is now proposed to remove sports clubs from the ambit of those regulations (see Annex). The Review Committee’s report noted that the arrangements for all clubs should be reviewed, and more detailed consideration will be given to this matter once the new Sports Committee has been established.

The Council is submitting a Grace for the approval of the recommendations of the Report, as revised by this Notice (Grace 1, p. 652).

16 June 2014

L. K. Borysiewicz, Vice-Chancellor

F. P. Kelly

Rachael Padman

N. Bampos

Mark Lewisohn

Shirley Pearce

Jeremy Caddick

Rebecca Lingwood

John Shakeshaft

David Good

Mavis McDonald

Jean Thomas

Andy Hopper

Rosalyn Old

I. H. White

Richard Jones

Flick Osborn

A. D. Yates

Fiona Karet

Note of Dissent

All agree that change is needed, and all agree with the need for high-quality sporting facilities benefiting all members of the Collegiate University, as well as the local community. Members of the Regent House with commitment to, and knowledge of, all levels of sport, from elite to community, raised cogent objections to the proposals in the Discussion. A number of relatively minor, though useful, changes have been made in response to their concerns, but the central thrust of the Report, i.e. the replacement of the Sports Syndicate by a Sports Committee, and the absorption of the Department of Physical Education in to the Unified Administrative Service (UAS) as the Sports Service, is unmodified. We are not convinced that the interests of sport in the University are best served by centralization.

The Report on Sport argues that the Sports Committee should devise a vision and strategy for sport in the University, and then hold the Sports Service to account for delivering it. However, the Syndicate could equally well, or better, devise a vision and strategy, and the Syndicate might have a chance of delivery (given that the Director of Physical Education is under the general control of the Syndicate). The Sports Committee would have little hope of ensuring delivery, since the Director of Sport would have no responsibility to the Sports Committee and instead would report to the Registrary (who is not even listed as in attendance at the Sports Committee). At least when Sir Geoffrey Howe was sent to the crease he had a broken bat; the Sports Committee looks like having none. There is a disconnect between the aims, aspirations, and principal terms of reference of the Sports Committee, and the implements it would be provided with to fulfil those objectives.

If better financial, legal, or HR support for the Syndicate is needed, it can surely be provided by the UAS without alienating those who understand the diverse nature of sport in the University and the needs of its participants, which must be the prime requisite for a body charged with devising a vision and strategy for sport.

On a wider note, we believe that the systematic concentration of power in a single point of failure is unwise. Syndicates have an important role within the University, and the apparent programme for their demise is to be regretted.

Stephen J. Cowley

I. M. Le M. Du Quesnay


That the following new Regulation 8 be added after Regulation 7 of the regulations for Clubs and Societies (Statutes and Ordinances, p. 199), to come into effect on a date agreed between the Junior Proctor and the Chair of the University Sports Committee:

8. These regulations shall not apply to sports clubs.1

1 See the regulations for the University Sports Committee.

Report of the Council on the financial position and budget of the University, recommending allocations from the Chest for 2014–15: Notice in response to remarks made in Discussion

23 June 2014

The Council has received the remarks made at the Discussion on 27 May 2014 (Reporter, 6350, 2013–14, p. 616) concerning the above Report (Reporter, 6347, 2013–14, p. 539).

Dr Cowley draws attention to the process by which the transfer from accumulated reserves to the Capital Fund towards the cost of replacing the University’s biofacilities was approved, as noted in paragraph 9 of the Report. It is regretted that a response to the query Dr Cowley raised about the impact of the loss of income generated by those reserves was not provided at a Council meeting. Nevertheless, the Council is satisfied that the members of the approving committees were given sufficient opportunity to comment on the contents of the Report, and that the impact of making the transfer was carefully considered. The loss of investment income resulting from the transfer and its offset by efficiency savings and research-related income generated by the new facilities was recorded in the minutes of the 5 February 2014 meeting of the Finance Committee’s Business Committee, which were circulated to the Council on 14 February. The Finance Committee received a paper at its meeting on 5 March noting the opportunity cost of around £6m related to the transfer but deferred making a final decision until a pending possibility of external financial support had been resolved. As Dr Cowley notes, the Finance Committee finally approved the transfer by circulation on 30 April. The Report acknowledges, in paragraph 39, that the Capital Fund is fully committed for the next five years and that the University will need to further develop philanthropic and industrial partnerships to realize its full ambitions in capital planning. The Council, through the Planning and Resources Committee, will continue to monitor the Capital Plan closely.

Dr Cowley also refers to the approval of the project on the construction of an extension to the Wolfson Brain Imaging Centre for the Radiopharmaceutical Unit. This was a minor works project, the scope of which had increased to meet regulatory requirements, pushing the budget over the threshold of £2m for capital projects at a late stage. The increase in costs is being met by the School of Clinical Medicine from existing resources; the commitment from the Capital Fund remains the same.

The Council is submitting a Grace for the approval of the recommendations of this Report (Grace 2, p. 652).

Election of a member of the Board of Scrutiny in class (c)(i)

23 June 2014

Under the provisions of Statute A VII (New Statutes and Special Ordinances supplement, p. 7) an election of members of the Board of Scrutiny in class (c) is to be held in the Easter Term of each alternate year. Regulation 2 for the election of members of the Board of Scrutiny (Statutes and Ordinances, p. 113) provides that, if at an election insufficient nominations are received to fill all the places either in class (c)(i) or in class (c)(ii), the Council shall appoint as many members as may be necessary. No person having been nominated in the election for one member of the Board of Scrutiny in class (c)(i) in Easter Term 2014 (Reporter, 6347, 2013–14, p. 526), the Council was asked to make an appointment to that vacancy. At a meeting on 16 June 2014, the Council agreed instead to re-open nominations. The Council is therefore publishing a Grace to enable an election to be held, notwithstanding Regulation 2 (Grace 3, p. 652). If the Grace is approved, nominations will re-open and a ballot may be held in accordance with the timetable published below.

The Board of Scrutiny consists of:

(a)the Proctors;

(b)the two Pro-Proctors nominated by the Colleges;

(c)eight members of the Regent House elected by the Regent House.

Under the provisions of Statute A VII 4, no person may be a member of the Board of Scrutiny who is a member of the Council, the General Board, or the Finance Committee of the Council, or who holds any of the University offices of Chancellor, Vice-Chancellor, Pro-Vice-Chancellor, University Advocate, Deputy University Advocate, Registrary, Assistant Registrary, or Secretary of a School. The Statute further prohibits from membership holders of offices with primarily administrative duties designated by Ordinance: Directors and Deputy Directors in the Unified Administrative Service and Assistant Treasurers have been designated as such prohibited offices. A retiring member of the Board who has served for four or more consecutive years is not eligible to serve again as a member in class (c) until one year has elapsed after the end of her or his previous period of service.

Subject to the approval of the Grace, the Vice-Chancellor gives notice of an election of one member of the Board in class (c)(i) (a person who has been a member of the Regent House for not more than ten years on 1 October 2015), to serve for four years from 1 October 2014.

If no nominations are received in accordance with the timetable below, Regulation 2 for the election of members of the Board of Scrutiny (Statutes and Ordinances, p. 113) shall apply and the Council shall appoint a member to the vacant place.

Further information about the Board of Scrutiny can be found in the Statutes and Ordinances as noted above, on the Board’s website (, and obtained from Dr Ruth Charles (email, Chair of the Board until 1 October 2014.

The nomination and ballot timetable for the election is governed by Regulations 1–7 and 15 of the regulations for the Election of Members of the Council (Statutes and Ordinances, p. 110).

In order to be eligible a candidate for election must be nominated on a paper sent to the Vice-Chancellor at the Old Schools so as to reach him not later than noon on Friday, 7 November 2014. The paper must contain (a) a statement signed by two members of the Regent House, nominating the candidate for election to the Board or Nominating Committee, as appropriate, and (b) a statement signed by the candidate certifying that he or she consents to be so nominated. The candidate should also provide a curriculum vitae by the same date (see below).

The Vice-Chancellor would be obliged if nominations could be delivered to the Registrary in the Old Schools during office hours. Envelopes should be clearly marked as Nomination papers. Nomination papers may also be faxed to 01223 332332 or scanned (showing signatures) and sent by email to Nominations will be published on the Senate-House noticeboard as they are received; the complete list of nominations will be published in the Reporter on Wednesday, 12 November 2014.

In accordance with the regulations governing the election, each person nominated for election is required to send to the Registrary, not later than noon on Friday, 7 November 2014, a statement of her or his curriculum vitae, details of which shall be published for the information of members of the Regent House. It is suggested that such a statement should be of not more than 500 words in length, and that it should cover the following points:

The candidate’s present position in the University.

Previous posts held, whether in Cambridge or in other universities or outside the university system, with dates.

A note of the candidate’s particular interests within the field of University business and experience that he or she might bring to the Board.

If there is more than one candidate, an election will be conducted by ballot, under the Single Transferable Vote regulations, and voting papers will be distributed, together with the statements provided by candidates, not later than Monday, 17 November 2014. The last date for the return of voting papers will be 5 p.m. on Thursday, 27 November 2014.

General Regulations for Admission as a Graduate Student

23 June 2014

The Council has accepted a recommendation made by the General Board, with the concurrence of the Board of Graduate Studies, that the General Regulations for Admission as a Graduate Student (Statutes and Ordinances, p. 439) be amended following review of the General Board’s Code of Practice for Research Students. The amendments being proposed by Grace (Grace 4, p. 652) (i) rest authority with the Degree Committee for determining whether appropriate facilities are available for an applicant’s proposed course of study or research; (ii) require that each student be appointed an Advisor in addition to their Supervisor; and (iii) require the form of the progress examination to be approved by the Board of Graduate Studies.

Naming of neighbourhoods on the North West Cambridge site

23 June 2014

In accordance with the principles for the naming of roads, neighbourhoods, and buildings on the West and North West Cambridge sites (Reporter, 6350, 2013–14, p. 610), the Council, on the recommendation of the West and North West Cambridge Estates Syndicate, has approved the following names for neighbourhoods on the North West Cambridge site, for allocation by the Syndicate:

Ridgeway Village

Gravel Hill

Storey’s Field

Brook Leys


Further information is available at:

New website on University governance

A new online resource on the governance of the University is now available to University members at (access via Raven). With detailed information on the University’s governance structure, decision-making bodies, processes, and instruments of governance, the site is designed to help University members understand and engage with the governance processes of the University.

The site contains dedicated areas for the University Council, the Business Committee, the Audit Committee, and the General Board, where papers, core documents, and membership information can be found. Further University committees will be added in due course to the site.

Comments and queries about the site should be sent to the Reporter Team via the governance email address: