Scottish education secretary Angela Constance has warned in a private letter that she is considering removing the chair of a Glasgow college and other board members over their conduct, TES Scotland can reveal.
In a letter dated last week and seen by TES Scotland, Ms Constance tells George Chalmers, chair of Glasgow Clyde College’s board: “It seems to me that the board may have committed repeated breaches of terms and conditions of a grant made to it [by the Scottish Funding Council] and may have mismanaged its affairs.”
Ms Constance writes that she is “considering what action requires to be taken to address the issues. One possible outcome is Scottish ministers making an order...to remove you and other board members.”
Many of the government’s concerns relate to the board’s suspension of principal Susan Walsh earlier this year and the process that followed.
Ms Walsh was suspended in February with no official reason given, just weeks after her leadership of the college was praised in an Education Scotland inspection report. She was appointed OBE for her services to education last year. In April, it was reported that she would attend a disciplinary meeting, which TES Scotland understands is yet to take place.
Pressure builds for the Glasgow Clyde College board
The letter increases pressure on the college’s board, which has been criticised over Ms Walsh’s suspension.
According to the letter, there has now been “no principal in place for over six months”, as “it appears that the deputy principal has not assumed the powers of the principal”.
It states that Ms Walsh raised concerns about college governance “immediately prior” to her suspension and that these concerns have not been considered by the board.
The letter adds that Ms Walsh had intended to take advice from the college’s solicitors on “governance issues in relation to propriety, processes, procedure, conflicts of interest and behaviours”. It continues: “The board minutes record no board discussion of the concerns raised by the principal...In particular, there is no record of any discussion about seeking further details of the principal’s concerns.”
The letter also highlights potential “failings in relation to board decision-making processes”, including:
- Inadequate notice being given to members of what would be discussed at meetings.
- The board’s decision to make detailed changes to the college constitution and articles of governance without notice.
- Informing board members that the purpose of a meeting was to discuss issues with government, Scottish Funding Council and Glasgow Colleges’ regional board representatives, and instead using that meeting to make arrangements for setting up a disciplinary panel and an appeal committee.
- Issues around transparency: the letter says a number of meetings may have taken place without agendas, and minutes may not have been routinely approved at the next meeting.
There may also have been “improper delegation of functions to an individual board member” when one member was given the authority to decide whether there was sufficient evidence for the board to proceed to formal disciplinary action in relation to the suspension of the principal, “and that single member made this decision”.
‘Decisive action’ required, says NUS Scotland president
The letter also cites the breakdown of the relationship between the board and student members and the student association. It notes that this seems to have been prompted by the exclusion of the student members from a meeting on 23 February, “which in turn appears to have resulted from a misreading of a provision of the college’s constitutions document”.
NUS Scotland president Vonnie Sandlan said that student associations had worked hard to be enshrined in law. “Since the start of this year, however, we have seen that success consistently ignored at best, if not outright undermined, by the leadership of the college board.
“No one should accept turning back the clock and returning to the days when college students were denied a voice and strong representation, and no college student should be expected to accept a chair who wilfully allows that to happen,” she said.
“That requires decisive action. It’s positive that this letter would seem to indicate that the Scottish government is looking at the full range of options available to it, but it’s quite clear who the issues lie with and what needs to happen.”
The education secretary demands a quick response
In her letter, the education secretary sought a response from the board by last Monday, and it is understood that a meeting between her and representatives of the board has taken place.
A spokeswoman for the Scottish government confirmed that the education secretary had written to all board members at Glasgow Clyde about concerns relating to the college’s governance, “including those raised by a number of staff and students”.
She added that the board had been given “time to respond fully to the concerns outlined in the letter”.
The spokeswoman continued: “Good governance is key to meeting the needs of students, and ministers have a clear interest in ensuring that our colleges are well run.
Our priority is to ensure that the students and staff at Glasgow’s colleges are well-served and we will continue to work closely with Glasgow Clyde College to ensure this is the case.”
A Glasgow Clyde College board spokesman said this week’s meeting had been “the first time the board had met the [education secretary]”. He said the board had “robustly responded to the allegations set out in her letter” and, with the agreement of Ms Constance, would provide a written response by today.
“That response will include the GCC board’s plans for the future,” the spokesman added. “The board representatives told the [education secretary] that they believed they had acted properly and in the best interests of the college, its students and staff throughout the last few difficult months. The board wishes to make no further comment at this stage.”
