[Prev][Next][Index]
INKYTEXT 132
***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** *****
III N N K K Y Y TTTTTTT EEEEEEE X X TTTTTTT
I N N N K K Y Y T E X X T
I N N N KKK Y T EEEEE X T
I N N N K K Y T E X X T
I N NN K K Y T E X X T
III N N K K Y T EEEEEEE X X T
***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** *****
ISSUE No 132 ESTABLISHED 1993 Monday 11th March 1996
LANCASTER - LONDON - PARIS - VIENNA - NEW YORK - TORONTO - MELBOURNE - TOKYO
Vancouver Oxford Cambridge Bristol Nottingham Brighton Sheffield Leeds Berkeley
Keele Loughborough Port-Moresby Blackburn Marburg Casuarina Bangkok Olympia(Wa)
Guildford Bradford Boulder(Co) Ambleside Urbana Wellington(NZ) Preston Perpignan
Stoke Stamford(Ct) Milton Keynes Rastatt Liverpool Trieste Canberra High Wycombe
Northwich Wollongong Jersey Cowes (IOW) Ripon York Edinburgh Middlesbrough Derby
Northampton Portsmouth PaloAlto Derby Exeter Cambridge(Mass) Brasilia Wetherby
Drayton Valley Bangor Wilmslow Southampton Reading Glasgow Stanford Basingstoke
Farnborough Coventry Hong Kong Manchester Wolverhampton Stevenage Johannesburg
911 SUBSCRIBERS
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please address all correspondence to InkyText@lancaster.ac.uk
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
AGENDA
Amendments and Matters Arising
1. Meeting of the University Council, 8 March 1996
2. Readers' Letters: Bikes, Spelling, Law Libraries, Waste, Subscriptions.
AMENDMENTS AND MATTERS ARISING:
The Payroll Office staff STAYED at work on Snow Tuesday to ensure that
the weekly paid staff were paid on time.
1. MEETING OF THE UNIVERSITY COUNCIL, 8 MARCH 1996
--------------------------------------------------
FRIDAY'S GRIM MEETING OF THE UNIVERSITY COUNCIL stretched over 6
hours, descending into anger and farce towards the end, after members'
second trip to the urinals. It struggled through some of the main bits
of the agenda and broadly, if reluctantly, approved most current
salvage plans. Some lasting enmities may have been formed.
The meeting was held in the aptly-named 'Barn' at Charlotte Mason, a
dingy, elongated room with appalling acoustics adding to other
frustrations. Many found it difficult to hear all that was being said.
Others could not catch the chairman's eye and had to signal their wish
to speak to Mr Halstead, who relayed it, commenting later that he was
glad there was still something useful for the Principal of Charlotte
Mason to do.
Some members reached Ambleside at 11.30 for a tour of the site before
lunch, and got home only some 10 hours later.
THE VC's REPORT AND DRAFT LETTER took up the first two hours, a
leisurely, line-by-line discussion, RESTRICTED of course. You already
know the 'opportunistic' decisions in place; the remainder will become
apparent when they hit us, but the new openness may allow some more to
be revealed sooner. Sell-offs, cut-backs, staff losses and cancelled
building plans are the ones we know about.
The cost of ensuring the necessary early retirements, and the means of
raising the money needed for that are the two major unknowns.
When all details of the draft as amended had been agreed, the VC
circulated a letter received on Thursday evening from KPMG, confirming
that we are still a going concern in their opinion, BUT only provided
that we approve and implement all the measures detailed in the VC's
draft letter.
The KPMG letter had not been tabled at the start so as not to
prejudice subsequent discussion, but it certainly had an impact on what
then followed and is likely henceforward to be used as a stick to keep
rebels and unruly committees in line.
A CONSTRUCTIVE AIRING of the Charlotte Mason situation took up the
next hour and a quarter. The emotional steam had been removed from the
issue by a helpful meeting of the Lakeland Campus Advisory group on
Friday morning. There is a long way to go before details can be
finalized. The Charlotte Mason JCR President made one of the day's more
statesmanlike and dignified contributions.
St Martin's governing body meets on Tuesday and will have before it a
paper by the Principal described later as 'unhelpful'. It is thought
Professor Edynbury may be jumping the gun a bit in making some
unconfirmed assumptions with financial implications.
By now it was nearing 6.00 pm with the major controversial items still
untouched. Procedural wrangles: numerous members wished to leave for
evening engagments and wanted to reconvene at a later date. The
Academic Registrar emphasized that such hastily arranged meetings would
inevitably be unrepresentative. Older hands recognised that reconvening
at a later date is a bad habit that would lead to endless repetition.
(Merely encourages vacillation and prolixity.)
OTOH (=on the other hand), student unions and political campaigners
know that squeezing controversial items into the last 10 minutes of a
long agenda is the safest way for those in charge to keep control and
prevent radical change. There may have been some modest filibustering
by the top table on this occasion. Or perhaps it was just unwitting.
After a 10 minute recess for urinating and phone-calls to irate
spouses, the meeting re-assembled, though numbers were constantly
depleted thereafter, and irritation grew at the brief time left to
debate four major items.
THE AUDIT COMMITTEE'S RED-HOT AND RESTRICTED REPORT ON KPMG'S REVIEW
OF FINANCIAL FORECASTS was allotted 15 minutes. In the end an
aggressive, bad-tempered, scrappy and unconvincing wrangle went on for
nearly an hour. Frayed tempers all round, open fury in several
quarters, silent exasperation everywhere else.
No one seems sure whether all or any of the discussion was restricted,
like the original report and the 'management' (VC and Stephen
Lamley?)'s reply to it. Mrs Gill Gardner of Oglethorpe's didn't seem to
think there was anything much legal to worry about, especially since
financial forecasts didn't form any part of our debenture data.
Many lay members were furious that the full KPMG report remained
confidential to the VC and Audit Committee. They could not understand
how they could be expected to accept responsibility and exercise it if
they had to take other people's interpretation of it on trust.
Some reluctance to accept any future Finance Office projections until
they have been commented on by KPMG, and insistence that any future
such reports be revealed to Council members.
No clear or consistent account of the outcome can be obtained from
members present. The Audit Committee do not seem to have been granted
their wishes, rumoured to be hawkish to the point of requiring sackings
and redundancies, plus putting numerous services out to tender.
By this time members were leaving regularly and Professor Abercrombie
had to leave with Mr Lamley. Mention of a meeting with Dame Elaine
Kellett-Bowman MP to put her in the picture. High farce arrived when
the student common room next door opened and the angry silence
following one specially vituperative question was interrupted by the
opening bars of Coronation Street.
THE SOUTH WEST CAMPUS SELL-OFF DEAL turned out to be most
controversial item of all, since Professor Shennan's document had no
supporting papers and he was not in a position to clarify numerous
worries about the sums capable of being realised or controls we could
retain over rent levels, etc.
All members were extremely concerned that there was no definition of
the kind of 'success' that would trigger payment of 250K to BZW.
Suppose, for example, that they found us a 'buyer' but that no deal
could be concluded that would give us enough capital 'profit' (after
paying building costs) to make the thing worthwhile. No very clear
decision was reached. It's unlikely that anyone will know what they
'decided' before the Minutes appear.
THE STAFFING OF INTERNAL AUDIT proposals were now doomed and got short
shrift: vehement and scornful rejection from numerous quarters.
Plaintive reminders that we currently have no Head of Internal Audit
prompted *sotto voce* expressions of relief.
NUMEROUS OTHER ITEMS didn't receive the attention they deserved or
were simply passed without comment. The VC stopped attempts to raise
highly cogent matters relating to our future committee structure. He
seemed to declare that there could be no discussion on the papers
listed for discussion. Great discontent on all sides.
Much regret at this end that nothing was said about the SICKNESS
ABSENCE POLICY document signed 'Personnel Services Division'. As with
financial forecasts the authors of such documents really ought, in the
Audit Committee's words, to be held responsible for them.
One outcome of this meeting may have been to make various lay members
re-assess their involvement with us. In particular it may make Sir John
Kerr ponder on whether or not he wishes to be Pro-Chancellor - and it
may not have helped his chances of being appointed.
It all shows that finance and politics are too important to be left to
the military. Too important to be left to the financiers and politicans
as well of course.
2. READERS' LETTERS
-------------------
To the reader who wants to be delisted (or desubscribed) because of
the way Inkytext increases the contents of the mail box; small piece of
helpful (I hope) advice. Don't cut yourself off like this for this
reason. It is possible to delete old messages thus keeping one's mail
box to manageable proportions.
------------------------
ALL WE WANT IS A ROOM SOMEWHERE ... I feel I must reply to the reply
to my letter to InkyText about bike security on campus.
I've had no response AT ALL to my various letters to the Transport
Committee. I offered to attend their meeting and put the cyclists'
point of view. I offered to ask around among cycle-users to find out
what facilities were needed and where - no response.
One garage to rent somewhere near County is hardly a vast expenditure
on cycle security! A few points:
1. Some time ago the university decreed that first year students would
not be allowed to keep cars on campus. As many of the student rooms on
campus are occupied by first year students it's hardly surprising that
they now have a surplus of garages.
2. The rent asked for a (shared) garage was higher than the cost of an
inner zone parking permit for a car!
3. As I said at the time a garage at the far end of the campus from
the Sports Centre where the showers are is useful only for someone
living in County College who wants doesn't want to keep a bike chained
to their bed!
4. For someone (like me) who is not coming in every day it's even less
attractive - I'll leave the ONE garage available for bike parking to
others who can make better use of it.
5. Renting a joint garage is only as safe as the other tenants - while
I don't want to cast aspersions on fellow cyclists but it only needs
one person to leave the door unlocked and ....bye-bye bikes!
6. As cyclists we don't need loads room, we don't need fancy shelters
- all we need is a room somewhere - with a few rails to lock bikes to,
some sort of limited access - swipe cards or numbered locks as the PC
labs have in linguistics - and perhaps a member of the Sports Centre
staff who could look in occasionally to check no-one is quietly sawing
through a bike lock...
PS Note to Paul Mullineaux - I'm NOT a Research Associate. I was a
Research Assistant (subtle difference) and now work as PA to Prof Leech
- Clerical/Secretarial Grade 4 Assistant Staff.
However, I must stress that the university makes no distinction
between cyclists - first-year student, Head of Department, part time
temp. junior secretary, Vice Chancellor, washer-up - ALL cyclists
suffer the same lack of facilities. Liberte, Egalite, Velocipedite!
Just hope they never bring the Tour de France to Bailrigg!
Mary Hodges
-----------------------
Did you really mean 40 odd professors? What makes one professor odder
than the next? Why aren't I one? How can I get to be one?
[NOTE: Can you be sure you are not? (Ed.)]
----------------------
Re: the Serbo-Croat spelling saga. A friend sent me the following,
which should please both you and the shade of George Bernard Shaw.
Communications Simplification Act of 1996
Having chosen English as the preferred language in the EEC, the
European Parliament has commissioned a feasibility study in ways of
improving efficiency in communications between Government departments.
European officials have often pointed out that English spelling is
unnecessarily difficult - for example, cough, plough, rough, through
and thorough. What is clearly needed is a phased programme of changes
to iron out these anomalies. The programme would, of course, be
administered by a committee staff at top level by participating
nations.
In the first year, for example, the committee would suggest using 's'
instead of the soft 'c'. Sertainly, sivil servants in all sities would
reseive this news with joy. Then the hard 'c' could be replaced by 'k'
sinse both letters are pronounsed alike. Not only would this klear up
konfusion in the minds of klerikal workers, but typewriters kould be
made with one less letter.
There would be growing enthusiasm when in the sekond year, it was
announsed that the troublesome 'ph' would henseforth be written 'f'.
This would make words like 'fotograf' twenty per sent shorter in print.
In the third year, publik akseptanse of the new spelling kan be
expekted to reach the stage where more komplikated changes are
possible. Governments would enkourage the removal of double leters
which have always been a deterent to akurate speling.
We would al agre that the horible mes of silent 'e's in the languag is
disgrasful. Therefor we kould drop thes and kontinu to read and writ as
though nothing had hapend. By this tim it would be four years sins the
skem began and peopl would be reseptive to steps sutsh as replasing
'th' by 'z'. Perhaps zen ze funktion of 'w' kould be taken on by 'v',
vitsh is, after al, half a 'w'. Shortly after zis, ze unesesary 'o'
kould be dropd from words kontaining 'ou'. Similar arguments vud of
kors be aplid to ozer kombinations of leters.
Kontinuing zis proses yer after yer, ve vud eventuli hav a reli
sensibl riten styl. After tventi yers zer vud be no mor trubls,
difikultis and evrivun vud fin it ezi tu understand ech ozer. Ze drems
of ze Guvermnt vud finali hav kum tru.
--------------------------------
If I get the gist of Prof. Shennan's letter it seems to be saying that
since the ex-captain and his band of officers have run the ship aground
in the entrance to the harbour it now falls to the 'over 50s' in the
crew to walk the plank in order to lighten ship.
It all seems to echo the Government's response to the Scott report,
except for 'over 50s' read a few low ranking civil servants..
Very noble all round!
Yours cynically,
Disgusted of Arnside.
---------------------------
I am a new emloyee at Lancaster in the Department of Engineering. I
was told by Prof Dorey that Inky Text may make some interesting weekend
reading and was a good way to find out what going on.
Could you please add my name to the circulation list?
-------------------
'Spot the Waste Competition' I would like to propose a competition -
entry open to all readers of Inkytext, first prize a trip to a meeting
of the Premature Retirements Committee.
The object of the competition is to spot the most costly waste of
money in the University. Money must have been spent after August 1st
1995.
To get the ball rolling here is my first entry: spotted this morning a
brand new M reg. van in university livery - 'Lancaster University
Cleaning Services'. Approximate cost 6k?, I am guessing, maybe more
with the special paint job.
Colin Jex
Management Science Dept.
[NOTE: Except that the van in question, like its sister labelled
'Security', is not a waste at all. Both are essential for servicing the
Storey Institute, Cancellor's Wharf, etc. etc. Even for efficiently
transporting our bulk centrally purchased toilet rolls to outlying
parts of campus. Even the older maintenance minibuses are worked to
death transporting plumbers to the Wharf or Library books to the
Storey's store. (Ed.)]
-----------------------------
In view of Inkytext's earlier comments on the subtleness of use of the
first person plural in Prof. Shennan's letter to middle-aged staff,
could you clarify who might be the "Some of us" who "wonder whether it
is wise for an impoverished nation to try to maintain two major law
libraries 20 miles apart", referred to in Inkytext 129?
Those of us who have reflected on such matters know that there are
many fewer law libraries (even publicly-funded ones) within a 20-mile
radius of Lancaster than there are at the same distance from either
Charing Cross or the Birmingham Bull Ring or Manchester Piccadilly. I
cannot believe, in view of Inkytext's reputation for being forthright
and clear, that your remark had more sinister connotations.
sol picciotto
[NOTE: No. Just overheard some influential members of the nation,
really, though my pronoun was intended to imply that I possibly share
their thoughts. But then I tend to favour regional solutions in most
things anyhow.
The people I had in mind and have heard mention the subject are not so
far from Charing Cross themselves, a little to the south and west. They
might also agree that there are more law libraries than they care to
fund in London, Birmingham and Manchester. (Ed.)]
----------------------------
All these years I've survived without Inkytext, but have decided that
I can do so no longer. Please could you add me to the mailing list?
--------------------------