The Lamp Post Secures Release of the Haines Watts Report into the University of Wales Lampeter.
As a result of a successful complaint to the Information Commissioner HEFCW throws in the towel.
“Following the approval of the proposed merger of the University of Wales, Lampeter and Trinity University College, Carmarthen, we have reviewed the disclosability status of the HW (Haines Watts) Corporate Finance Report that was the subject of your information request of 28 April 2009.
Following this review, we have concluded that the Report can now be published in redacted form, and we attach a copy for your information.
A copy of the redacted Report has also been sent to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) in addition to the other information already provided to the ICO to assist his review of this case.
HEFCW” Higher Education Funding Council for Wales
The Failure of Corporate Governance?
We have not had time to fully digest and analyse the contents of the report but items 41 and 42 below give a disturbing insight into the failure of corporate governance by virtue of the fact that lay members of the Council were surprised and shocked. The function of non executive Lay Members of the University Council is to prevent this situation from happening, a task made impossible if they are not fully informed or told the truth.
The redaction of items 43 to 46 on pages 39 and 40 under the confidentiality exemption means we can only guess what was said, and that the redacted was probably a collection of deleted expletives!
“41. Similarly at the Council meeting on 13 March 20081 discussion of the negative indications arising primarily from falling recruitment the minute records included the note: “Concern raised by some of the lay members of the seriousness of this financial news which was a surprise and a shock”.
42. We have seen a document [1] prepared by the Vice-President to inform a meeting between herself, the President and the Vice Chancellor at a meeting in November 20072. We understand that it was subsequently circulated to some Lay members of Council.”
[1] We would also like to see a copy of this document.
Now that the police have handed a file to the Crown Prosecution Service on MP’s expenses can we now expect an inquiry into the funding of £14,500 in legal expenses for former Visitor Carl Cooper to defend his cover up of institutionalised abuse of students and academic fraud? UWL’s solicitors legal giant Eversheds have refused to comment on these matters, I wonder why?
Documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act confirm that lay members of the Council were lied to when they approved funding. If you tell lies to obtain money in any way its called fraud, and if you do it in collusion with somebody else its called conspiracy!
To download a copy of the Haines Watts report click here
————-
The Failure of the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales (HEFCW) to Provide Value for Money and Consult the Taxpaying Serfs
HEFCW has a ‘memorandum of understanding’ with the Welsh Assembly Government to provide value for our money and is required by law to consult the public on issues concerning the funding of Higher Education Institutions or HEI’s. So the question is why was nobody held to account for this fiasco and why were we not consulted on the need to impose conditions on Lampeter in return for receiving any more of our money?
Moreover, what is the Welsh Assembly and the Welsh Assembly Government going to do about it?
——————
A Not So Merry Christmas!
A Sad But Familiar Tale Concerning the ‘Lampeter Experience’
Christmas 2007 was a sad one for me as I felt the full impact of the loneliness of the part time distance student when there was insufficient support from a tutor.
I had started the research masters course with the Department of Theology and Religious Studies (DTRS) at Lampeter College with high hopes and, after sending a large tranche of research material to my tutor, he told me that it was his intention to push me on to achieve what was required for an academic degree study. Sadly that support was not forthcoming and, in November 2007, he did not even respond to an email from me requesting a discussion on theoretical frameworks.
When later I queried the DTRS about this the department not only never answered my complaint about the lack of response to that email, but stated it was not the function of a research supervisor to develop an interesting debate with his or her students. Given that statement I had no confidence in continuing my studies through the DTRS and asked for a full rebate of my fees.
When I studied the complaints procedure I realised how long winded and biased it was towards a university. Throughout the process I often wondered why I was doing it as I felt there was little likelihood of success. This was not helped by the delays in response from the department to some of my letters and emails. In my complaint I stated that the DTRS and Lampeter College were prepared to take the fees from distance students but not provide the necessary support that such students required given that they could not access the facilities at the college.
In January 2009 I received a letter from the Pro Vice-Chancellor informing me that the first stage of the investigation had been held and that she did not feel there was sufficient evidence to uphold my complaint - a decision which I did not accept. The Assistant Registrar was helpful in trying to arrange the Academic Complaint Re-examination which took place on April 20 at Lampeter College. I felt that those who represented the university at that hearing were fair and professional. I was assured I would receive a report within a few weeks.
Six months later I was still waiting. By then I had found The Lamp Post and been in contact with Trevor Mayes. I contacted the Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education and was informed that I should ask Lampeter College for a Completion of Procedures letter or ask the College to progress my complaint. Only if I had sent more than one reminder and had not received a response within a reasonable time should I contact the OIA again! I did write to Lampeter College on that basis and, after another two weeks of silence, had decided that I would prefer to contact the Quality Assurance Agency. But then I received a phone call from the quality assurance office at Lampeter College.
That was followed by a letter which stated that the Chair of the Complaints Committee, had reported: “The University of Wales, Lampeter accepts that it cannot demonstrate that the student was given adequate guidance on what to expect from her main supervisor or that the student received adequate supervision. Therefore the fees paid by the student should be reimbursed….”
A good ending? Not really because it has been a long, often traumatic process and I never did receive from Lampeter College that which I had really wanted and thought was on offer: an interesting and informative discussion of the material I had researched leading to a thesis that would have academic merit. The question now is: will the College learn from such experiences and offer better supervision and support for those who come to them hoping to obtain a degree? I do hope so.
Pip Land
December 2009
———————–
Some Advice for Our American and Canadian Cousins.
We have seen a significant increase in traffic from the USA and Canada concerning complaints about the University of Wales. Sorry to have to inform you but,
The University of Wales Does Not Have Any Complaints Procedures!
Be warned that if you do make a complaint you will probably be threatened with legal action and required to sign an undertaking never to tell the truth again.
Our advice is stay away until they do, meanwhile, you may find this information helpful.
This situation is allowed to exist by the Welsh Assembly Government despite the fact that students are allowed to complain under the Higher Education Act 2004. The financial regulator the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales has failed to act despite their guidelines stating that they should have procedures in place. The Visitor to the University is none other than our Head of State, Her Majesty the Queen, she has written to the First Minister of the National Assembly for Wales on this issue but the letter was placed on file and ignored as it said nothing new! It is also a requirement of the academic regulator the Quality Assurance Agency (QAA) but they have ignored this too until now.
———————————
QAA Causes for Concern (CFC) Procedure - For Students and Staff
The University of Wales, the University of Wales Lampeter and Trinity University College have all been referred to the QAA as a Cause for Concern. More details on CFC’s are available here
http://www.qaa.ac.uk/causesforconcern/default.asp
We will publish the details of our CFC’s in due course, meanwhile if you have an issue that a complaints procedure failed to address, the procedures were ignored or they do not exist, we suggest you make a CFC using the form downloaded from the QAA website. You may not be able to remedy your own complaint but you may prevent some other victim going through the same thing.
According to QAA guidelines, you should be advised that if you are not happy with any complaint then you can pursue the CFC procedure with the QAA, if you are not then that is justification for making a CFC in itself.
—————————–
Petitions Committee Asks for Comments
Further to the Petitions Committee’s consideration of your petition at its meeting on 8 December, please find attached an electronic copy of a letter from Val Lloyd AM, Chair of the Committee regarding your petition, along with a copy of a letter from the Minister for Children, Education, Lifelong Learning and Skills.
PETITION: PUBLIC ACCOUNTABILITY IN HIGHER EDUCATION
The Petitions Committee considered correspondence from the Minister for Children, Education, Lifelong Learning and Skills regarding the above petition at its meeting on 8 December. A copy of this correspondence is enclosed. At the meeting the Committee agreed to write to you asking for your views on the Minister’s response in order to inform its future decisions on the issue. In particular, the Committee ask that you identify any areas which you feel may require further consideration.
We have sent in a reply, more details soon
——————————
Innovation, Universities, Science & Skills Select Committee - Report on Students and Universities
Protection for Whistleblowers should be addressed - current arrangements are inadequate
Clearly complaints procedures at Lampeter are flouted and invented according to whatever is necessary to make them go away, while the University of Wales does not have any procedures at all despite being a requirement by HEFCW and Administrative Law under the Second Nolan Committee. The question is what does HEFCW intend to do about it? Read more…
Our campaign for better treatment of Mature Students vindicated.
Phil Willis MP the Chairman of the Committee said:
Much more needs to be done to help part-time and mature students. There needs to be equal treatment for all students and a system that has the flexibility to take account of the needs of, for example, a mature student who has family commitments. Read more…
———————————————————-
The Lamp Post was Right!
HEFCW Fails the Public Interest Test under the Freedom of Information Act 2000
Higher Education Funding Council for Wales (HEFCW) have been informed that their refusal to hand over the Haines Watts report into Lampeter’s finances fails the exemptions under the Public Interest Test
The term “public interest” is not defined in the FOI Act. In general, the “public interest” refers to the interests of the general community or a section of it, as opposed to a purely private interest. It does not mean “what the public is interested in” or curious about. Depending on the circumstances, the public interest in disclosure may involve helping to ensure that:
- there is informed public debate about significant decisions.
- the public are able to participate effectively in decisions affecting them.
- there is adequate scrutiny of the decision-making process.
- authorities are accountable for the spending of public money.
- authorities do their job properly.
Given the failure of the UK government to withhold MP’s expenses the chances of HEFCW withholding this report are zero. Its only a matter of time before we the taxpaying public will know the true extent of the corruption. Read more…
———————————-
The Plagiarism Game!
The good news is that Universities are now studying how students are being deliberately stitched up with the use of anti plagiarism software, Universities UK are likely to come up with a policy on this issue. There are growing numbers of north American students seeking advice on false accusations of plagiarism. Read more…
