Notices

Calendar

22 April, Wednesday. First ordinary issue of the Reporter in Easter Term.

28 April, Tuesday. Full Term begins. Mere’s Commemoration Sermon in St Benedict’s Church at 11.45 a.m. Preacher, The Very Reverend Professor David Fergusson, OBE, FRSE, FBA, Fellow‑Commoner of Magdalene College, Regius Professor of Divinity, Dean of HM Chapel Royal in Scotland.

2 May, Saturday. Congregation of the Regent House at 10 a.m.

4 May, Monday. End of first quarter of Easter Term.

Discussion on 28 April 2026: Cancellation

The Vice-Chancellor gives notice that the Discussion announced for Tuesday, 28 April 2026 will not take place as there are no items for discussion. The next Discussion is currently scheduled for 12 May (see below).

Discussion on Tuesday, 12 May 2026

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, 2024, p. 111) to attend a Discussion by videoconference on Tuesday, 12 May 2026 at 2 p.m. The following item will be discussed:

1.Report of the General Board, dated 31 March 2026, on the establishment of a Faculty of Government (Rokos School of Government) (p. 417).

Those wishing to join the Discussion by videoconference should email Discussions@admin.cam.ac.uk 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 Director of Governance and Compliance, 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.

Election to the Board of Scrutiny

9 April 2026

The Vice-Chancellor announces that the following candidate has been nominated in accordance with Statute A VII 3 for election to the Board of Scrutiny, and that it has been certified to her that the candidate has consented to be nominated:

Class (c)(ii): a member of the Regent House

Dr Connor Purcell Wood, CL
nominated by: The Revd Dr M. S. Smith, CL, and Dr G. Johnson, W

As no other candidates have been nominated, Dr Wood is duly elected, to serve with immediate effect until 30 September 2027.

Grace 1 of 2 April 2026 (exchanges of Professorships): Notice of proposal for amendment

10 April 2026

The Vice-Chancellor gives notice that she has received a proposal for the amendment of Grace 1 of 2 April 2026 (Reporter, 6820, 2025–26, p. 404), signed by 42 members of the Regent House as noted in the Annex below.

The Grace currently reads as follows:

1. That the recommendation in paragraph 4 of the Report of the General Board, dated 19 November 2025, on exchanges of Professorships (Reporter, 6804, 2025–26, p. 118) be approved.

The Council will consider the proposed amendment at the earliest opportunity.

Formal text of the Grace with the proposed amendment:

1. That Special Ordinance C (vii) Part B be amended by inserting, after Section 1, a new Section 2 as set out below; by renumbering the remaining sections and updating any cross-references accordingly and by amending sub‑paragraph (a) of the renumbered Section 3 as set out below.

The new Section 2 shall read:

2. The election to a vacant Professorship may be made by Grace of the Regent House, in all cases after the issue of a Report to the University by the General Board recommending the election, provided that the person elected is the holder of another Professorship in the University, the election to take effect from the date of resignation from the other Professorship.

The renumbered Section 3(a) shall read:

[2] 3. (a) Except as otherwise prescribed in Section 1 and Section 2 above, the election to a Professorship shall be made by an ad hoc Board of Electors constituted in accordance with either Section 4 or Section 5 below.

Background information provided with the amendment:

The General Board has proposed changes to Special Ordinance C (vii) Part B that would allow it to transfer the holder of one Professorship to another, without the need to follow an appointment process approved by the Regent House.

Not all Professorships in the University are equivalent. Several of the prestigious Professorships have large endowments that support the research as well as the stipend of the holder.

At present, except in a handful of exceptional cases, appointments to vacant Professorships are made by Boards of Electors. When a Professorship is established for a particular individual, for example on the recommendation of a promotions Report, the Regent House must approve its creation (and therefore the appointment) by Grace. These procedures for professorial appointments protect academic standards and protect the University from the risk of patronage.

If this amendment is approved, an exchange of Professorships will become possible, but only when it is approved by Grace of the Regent House after the publication by the General Board of an explanatory Report. The requirements for a Report and a Grace will ensure that any exchange is justified. Since cases are rare (the need for an exchange is thought to arise only once or twice per decade), the requirements should not be administratively onerous.

Annex

The amendment has been signed by the following members of the Regent House:

Investments in and research funded by companies belonging to the defence industry

16 April 2026

In October 2025, the Council accepted the recommendations of a working group on investments in and research funded by companies belonging to the defence industry, which it had established to consider matters raised by students and by members of the Regent House (Reporter, 6800, 2025–26, p. 56).

The Working Group did not make a recommendation on investment in conventional weapons. Instead, it presented the Council with three options to consider:

1.no restrictions on investment in conventional weapons companies;

2.a 1% threshold for investment in conventional weapons companies; and

3.a prohibition on investment in conventional weapons companies.

There was consensus on the Working Group that any decision ‘should not jeopardise the fund of funds model of investment and should not result in financial detriment to those who invest in the CUEF’ (see paragraph 125 of the Working Group’s report).

The Working Group’s report provides information on investment in the Cambridge University Endowment Fund (CUEF) as managed by the University of Cambridge Investment Management Ltd (UCIM) (see paragraphs 71 and 72). The fund of funds model is an investment model based on the careful selection of third-party fund managers rather than direct investment. The University is one of 23 unitholders (i.e. investors) in the CUEF; other unitholders include Colleges and charitable trusts associated with the University. Cambridge University Endowment Trustee Body (CUETB) has been set up to ensure that UCIM can manage the CUEF in accordance with strict legal and regulatory requirements. CUETB guides UCIM’s decision-making by setting the investment and distribution policies governing the CUEF on behalf of all unitholders, avoiding the conflict of interest that the Council directly managing the CUEF would present.1 This Notice therefore sets out the Council’s position as the body responsible for making decisions about investment in the CUEF on behalf of the University.2

The Council discussed the Working Group’s options on investment in conventional weapons over the course of several meetings. An initial discussion in November 2025 demonstrated a range of views about investment in conventional weapons and a desire on the part of some Council members to understand more about the conventional weapons sector, how a screen in this sector might work, and whether it would, in fact, jeopardise the fund of funds model or result in financial detriment to investors in CUEF. At the following meeting in February 2026, the Chair of CUETB provided information on these matters, including an explanation of the investment model used by CUEF (the fund of funds model), CUETB’s approach to responsible investment, and how the conventional weapons sector differs from the fossil fuel sector and others.

The Chair of the CUETB reported to the Council that the initial assessment of the three options suggested that it would not be possible to implement options 2 and 3 without compromising the fund of funds model and future returns of the CUEF. The CUETB therefore proposed a new monitoring regime (Transparency Reporting regime) as an alternative option. The new regime responds to requests from unitholders for the CUETB to monitor on their behalf the level of exposure of the CUEF to certain sensitive investment categories, including conventional weapons. In this new monitoring regime, monitoring of investments in conventional weapons is part of a broader annual transparency reporting framework and is based on a materiality threshold. If the CUEF’s exposure to companies which primarily manufacture conventional weapons were to exceed a certain threshold as a proportion of its assets, the CUETB would receive a transparency report including details of all relevant companies. Discussions would then be initiated with UCIM as to how to manage a reduction in exposure of the CUEF in this category in due course.

The Council is supportive of the Transparency Reporting regime. It will keep the new regime under review to see if it is an effective mechanism.

The Council wishes to see greater interaction with the CUETB. It endorses the Working Group’s suggestion that UCIM and CUETB should consider whether more transparent communication about investments is possible. Whilst it recognises that not all information can be shared, it encourages CUETB to hold UCIM to account and to be as open as possible with CUEF unitholders. The Council is therefore asking CUETB to provide greater clarity on the information that it can share with unitholders without compromising the confidentiality undertakings in non-disclosure agreements between UCIM and third-party fund managers. Greater engagement, including through the provision of more detailed reports on investments, will provide the Council with the assurance that its concerns are being taken into consideration by the CUETB.

Office of Director of Finance

16 April 2026

By Grace 1 of 15 January 2025, proposals for the merger of the offices of Chief Financial Officer (CFO) and Director of Finance were approved, to take effect from a date agreed by the Council. Since then, the Council has revisited its plans for restructuring the senior administrative offices, taking the opportunity afforded by a vacancy in the office of Registrary and the CFO’s planned departure. In December 2025, it noted in its Annual Report that the merger had been postponed and that the CFO and the Interim Director of Finance would continue in their existing roles. The Council is expecting to publish a Report about its proposals in the Easter Term. Mr Odgers has agreed to remain in office as CFO until those plans have been considered by the Regent House.

The Council wishes to start recruitment for a permanent, new senior finance officer in the University as soon as possible, whilst the CFO remains in office. The person recruited would take over the responsibilities from the Interim Director of Finance, plus additional responsibilities in relation to oversight of Enhanced Financial Transparency implementation and the 10-year model. The Council is therefore submitting a Grace (Grace 2, p. 419) to re-establish the office of Director of Finance and to rescind the office of CFO in Ordinances with effect from the resignation of the current CFO. If the Grace is approved, on the resignation of the current CFO, references to the office of CFO will be replaced with references to the Director of Finance in General Board Regulations, the Financial Regulations and the Sites and Buildings Regulations (or removed if duplicated).

Delivery of the future development of the North West Cambridge site

16 April 2026

The Council is publishing this Notice to provide an update on the plans for North West Cambridge, focusing on the expected delivery model for housing on the site in the next phases of development.

In 2013, the local planning authority granted outline planning permission for the development of the North West Cambridge (NWC) site, following the approval of Grace 2 of 15 June 2011.1 Planning permission has been submitted for the next phases of the development following the approval of Grace 1 of 18 June 2025.2 In anticipation of planning permission being granted this year, the Estates Division is actively conducting partnership discussions with property developers and investors to deliver and fund, alongside the University, the next phases of residential development.

The future development of the site will retain the principal aim of the first phase – to create a vibrant, long-lasting and sustainable place. The planning application also proposes changes to the capacity of the site. The new proposal for outline planning permission seeks to enable additional development to provide up to 3,800 further dwellings bringing the total up to c. 5,650, whilst maintaining up to 2,000 student beds and 100,000m² of employment and academic floorspace and ancillary amenity, sports and open green space.3

With the support of the Property Board, in 2024 the Estates Division conducted an options appraisal of delivery models for the next phases. It identified that having a development partner to work with the University to deliver the remaining phases of Eddington was the most beneficial route.

This Notice outlines the broad framework for the proposed development partnership and the procurement strategy that is underway to identify a partner to deliver the future phases of North West Cambridge with the University. The model assumes a joint venture between the University and a private development partner (the partner), with both parties contributing equally to the funding of infrastructure and land servicing following a land equalisation payment to the University from the partner. It is envisaged that the partnership will dispose of serviced land parcels to third-party developers but retain the option for the University, the private sector partner or both (through the joint venture) to deliver directly some of the end-use development plots.

The selection of a partner is being guided by the strategic objectives of the University. The principal objective remains the delivery of 50% of the total number of residential units at North West Cambridge as affordable housing for eligible University staff, without subsidy from the charitable funds of the University. The output of the partnership will be accommodation for staff, students and for sale on the open market on land identified for non-operational development. The Joint Venture will not include any operational land and the development of this will remain solely with the University and be subject to the usual governance routes for new operational space.

In seeking a partner, the Estates Division will aim to demonstrate that any procurement undertaken delivers value for money and satisfies the requirements of the Charities Act. The Division is therefore following a rigorous procurement process to select the private sector partner. There has been close engagement with the Property Board throughout and the final appointment of the preferred partner will be subject to Finance Committee approval in mid-2026.

It is anticipated that a corporate joint venture entity will be established (e.g. a limited liability partnership or a private limited company), owned by both partners on equal terms. The Joint Venture is expected to be a 50/50 arrangement with both partners providing equal investment, and having joint decision-making responsibilities and share in the risk and reward of the joint venture’s activities. The University will commit the unserviced land to the partnership vehicle and the partnership will service land parcels ready for future development. The Joint Venture will have an obligation to deliver the enabling site-wide infrastructure and servicing of individual land parcels. Given the scale of the site and mixed-use nature, it is not intended that the Joint Venture will develop all the land parcels. Rather, it is expected that the Joint Venture may have the option to deliver some of the end-use development itself and to dispose of remaining service land parcels on the open market.

Prior to entering a full contract, the University and the private sector partner will work together on a long-term business plan and an initial phase business plan. A commitment to fund the development activity will be based on these business plans and sourced from the bond repayment portfolio. Such commitments will be considered by the Council on the advice of the Finance Committee and the Property Board.

Topic of concern to the University (support for the veterinary course): Notice in response to Discussion remarks

16 April 2026

The Council has received the remarks made at the Discussion on 13 January 2026 concerning the above Topic of concern, which was prompted by the recommendation made by the Council of the School of the Biological Sciences in December 2025 to close the veterinary course to new admissions from October 2027 (Reporter, 2025–26: 6808, p. 162; 6812, p. 277). The General Board has been consulted in the preparation of this response.

The General Board received the remarks, together with correspondence on the same subject, in the papers for its meeting on 23 February 2026. At that meeting, the Board considered the School Council’s recommendation alongside a response to that recommendation from the Department of Veterinary Medicine. The General Board has since announced its decision, amongst other things, to continue to admit students onto the veterinary course and to give the Department the opportunity to implement its plans to achieve full accreditation and financial sustainability, reporting regularly on its progress to the General Board (Reporter, 6816, 2025–26, p. 355).

The public discourse following the School Council’s recommendation was characterised by significant strength of feeling in the community around Cambridge continuing to offer veterinary education. At the time of the Discussion, there was limited information about the rationale for the School’s recommendation available in the public domain. This led to speculation and misunderstandings which might have been avoided. The Council and the General Board regret that it was not possible to communicate more fully earlier on in the process and consider this a lesson learned. The General Board expects to publish the analysis conducted by the School and the Department later in the Easter Term, which will serve as the response to these remarks, in lieu of more detail in this Notice.

The General Board acknowledges that it should have been better prepared for the discussion of course closure. So that there is greater clarity on the steps leading to such a decision in future, it has asked its Education Committee to develop a procedure for course closure that will draw on good practice examples and sector guidance.

Report of the Council on changes to Statutes J 4 and C XV: Notice in response to Discussion remarks

16 April 2026

The Council has received the remarks made at the Discussion on 17 March 2026 about the above Report (Reporter, 2025–26: 6815, p. 349; 6820, p. 406).

Professor Evans draws attention to two reviews which the Council agreed that it would carry out, one on the use of Special Ordinances following their introduction and the other on the governance arrangements for oversight of Cambridge University Press & Assessment. Neither has taken place because other matters have taken priority. The Council will aim to carry out these reviews when there is capacity to do so.

Professor Evans also notes that the 2025 edition of the University’s Statutes and Ordinances has not yet been published. This is because of unanticipated staffing issues. The expectation is that this edition will be published later this term.

The Council is submitting a Grace (Grace 3, p. 419) for the approval of its recommendations.