Editorial
—————————————————-

According to Egon Zehnder, the expensive consultancy outfit brought in to hire the replacement of former City vice-chancellor Malcolm Gillies, “recent experience has demonstrated the substantial costs” of hiring the “wrong” person.

We see it differently. Recent information “shows the indefensible costs” of getting rid of the “right” person. The £500,000 spent by the university on Prof Gillies’ severance package and on the recruitment of his successor is an incredibly expensive error at a time when the university cannot afford to mess up.

Cuts in excess of £700m are set to devastate higher education budgets nationwide, and our university will not be spared. Acting vice-chancellor Julius Weinberg has confirmed to staff that there will be cuts of up to seven per cent on future City spending. The cuts are unlikely to be made to the fees of consultancy firms – they will be made by laying-off staff.

Perhaps those pulling the university’s purse strings will attempt to recoup some of the misspent £500,000 through what they refer to as the “increasingly commercial profile of the university’s income”.

Such a business-led approach to education is, without a doubt, one of the “differing views” that contributed to Gillies’ departure. He was a highly admired vice-chancellor, amongst both colleagues and students, for his focus on frontline teaching and the academic experience of students over business-orientated governance.

At the time of his departure, senior colleagues said that he was one of the best things to have happened to the university, and even six months later such sentiments are still echoed by countless people at City.

This liberal approach did not prove popular with the university council, which is heavily weighted towards the interests of corporations and business. He is believed to have clashed on several occasions with the powerful business representatives on the university council, many of whom work in the City of London.

As new details emerge, it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that Gillies did not jump ship, but was forced to walk the plank for refusing to allow City to be turned from a respected academic institution into a mere tool for business. With two recruitment companies, hired to prioritise the commercial interests of the council, it looks terribly unlikely that we will see another education driven vice-chancellor fill the position. Gillies paid for his principles – and the students will financially for his dismissal. We can only hope that quality of our education will not be the next casualty.