The 2020 Governance Report on The University of the West Indies (UWI) by the Dennis Byron-led commission remains a document in need of analysis and debate. While the report has been tabled in the Jamaican Parliament, it is worthy of debate among staff at The UWI. I propose this article as part of my ongoing contribution to that debate.

There are three areas of the report which have occupied my attention. These are:

1) establishment of executive committee of council

2) strategic planning

3) financing

Establishing executive committee

The report proposes the abolition of the Finance and General Purposes Committee (F&GPC) and the establishment of an executive committee of council and the delegation of some powers of council to it. For clarity, council is the highest governing body on the university and is chaired by the chancellor). The executive committee of council would perform the functions currently performed by the F&GPC, but would be different in at least four critical respects, namely:

(i) The executive committee of council would comprise 13 members, while council comprises 45 members;

(ii) The executive committee of council would be chaired by an external person, whereas the campus F&GPCs are chaired by the principals and The UWI (regional) by the vice-chancellor;

(iii) The executive committee of council would have the power to make and recommend policy for consideration by council;

(iv) The chancellor and vice-chancellor would be ex-officio members of the executive committee of council.

These proposals are problematic, in my view, in several respects, including that:

(a) By reducing the decision-making body to less than a third of its current size the proposal seeks to concentrate power in the hands of a few. This cannot be good for governance and democracy.

Interestingly, the report stated that, “The commission does not think that the delegation would undermine the…regional character of the university.” (p 48)

It is my view, however, that the creation of an executive committee of council with the power to, among other things, “set policy” (p 49), is likely to undermine the “regional character of the university”.

(b) With the chancellor being an ex-officio member of the executive committee of council, there will be a real of perceived conflict of interest arising from the fact that the chancellor, who chairs council, would be able to influence, or be perceived as influencing, deliberations and recommendations over which he/she would later preside when decisions are being made.

(c) The proposed structure would then remove the element of objective analysis of issues presented to council and would likely to be perceived as a marginalisation of some stakeholders in the university. This move could have the effect of undermining trust at a time when mutual trust is perhaps our most important asset.

Strategic planning

The report expresses concern about the fact that strategic plans are “…approved without allocation of financial resources” (p 44). At the same time, the report proposes the abolition of the University Strategy and Planning Committee and argues that the strategic plans would be reviewed by the executive committee of council. However, the report does not state what entity would prepare strategic plans. This is an area of major oversight at a time when planning ought to be central to the operations of the university.

Financing

The report takes the position that students’ contribution should increased by 100 per cent from 20 per cent of the economic cost to 40 per cent, and the governments’ contribution reduced by 25 per cent from 80 per cent of the economic cost to 60 per cent.

The reality is that governments’ contributions have long fallen. In some years some governments have contributed as little as 37 per cent, but on average governments’ contributions hover around 45 per cent, which means that governments are contributing nearly 50 per cent less than what is expected. The gap has been closed through projects and commercial operations of the university. And, where the earnings from these areas fall short, what we have are the deficits that now exist.

I share three proposals on how the finances of The UWI may be addressed in the short, medium, and long term:

For the immediate term, I suggest that governments use a portion of the funds in dormant bank accounts to provide emergency funding to The UWI. Several countries of the region, including Antigua and Barbuda, The Bahamas, British Virgin Isalnds, the Cayman Islands, Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago, have substantial sums in dormant bank accounts. I propose that, as an emergency measure, a portion of these funds be used to provide liquidity support to The UWI over the next one to three years.

On the question of the current financial health of The UWI, it must be noted that when Sir Hilary Beckles assumed office in 2015 the UWI’s financial arrears was a massive US$120 million. Over the last five years, approximately, he has led a reduction of that debt by two-thirds down to US$40 million, despite crumbling financial support from regional governments and high fee receivables.

For the medium term, I recommend that The UWI pursues alternative use of some of its buildings for commercial activities. During the next three to five years, the university should expand its commercial operation to increase its earnings from same. This should involve retrofitting some of its buildings for commercial use. This will, of necessity, involve renegotiating agreements with entities which are partners in the construction and use of those buildings.

For the long term, I propose that regional governments establish a Child Opportunity Trust Fund. This initiative would involve governments opening an account in the name of each child one year after birth and seeding each account with the equivalent of US$100. This account would then be financed by the parents — and, in the case of wards of the State, by the State — to the tune of US$1 per day or $30 per month for 18 years. This initiative would be supported by the banking sector, which would be expected not to charge a fee for operating these accounts, and the governments would not charge taxes on the earnings. At maturity, each child would have access to those funds to be used to purchase their education wherever they wish, or for setting up businesses.

Timing of the report

The report was unfortunately viewed as an assessment of the stewardship of the vice chancellor, Sir Hilary Beckles, whose contract was, at the time of the report, up for renewal. The delay in confirming whether the vice chancellor’s contract would be renewed was not only contrary to The UWI’s ordinances, but gave rise to concerns in the minds of many that there was at intent now to renew. The vice chancellor’s contract has now been renewed with Jamaica and Trinidad & Tobago not voting in favour. But the placing on the governance report in the public domain while there were discussions on, and delay in renewing, the contract created not only an unfair situation for the holder of the office — an employee of the university who, like all employees is entitled to fair treatment — but also damaged the image of the university.

Although, the vice chancellor’s contract has been renewed, there needs to be discussion within the university on how it handled the process, with a view to ensuring that the provisions of the university’s human resources policies are upheld, and principles of fairness maintained. Crises are too precious to waste.

Dr Canute Thompson is an advisor to president of the People’s National Party and Leader of the Opposition Mark Golding as well as a senior lecturer in educational policy, planning, and leadership at The University of the West Indies, Mona, where is also serves as head of the Caribbean Centre for Educational Planning (CCEP). Send comments to the Jamaica Observer or canutethompson1@gmail.com.