51ÂÒÂ×»»ÆÞ

Court Minutes 18 June 2025

Unconfirmed minutes of a meeting of the University Court held at 3.00pm on 18 June 2025 in the Large Boardroom, Queen Margaret University.
Court Members Court Members
Pamela Woodburn (Chair) Steven Hendry
Janet Archer Ann Hill
Patrick Bartlett Dr Kavi Jagadamma
Professor Richard Butt Sofia Khan
Silvia Cardinale Zoë MacCallum
Julie Churchill Jacqueline Morrison
Dr Maria Giatsi-Clausen Carol Sinclair
Sir Paul Grice Bill Stronach
Professor John Harper Andrew Watson

 

Staff members in attendance  Role

Irene Hynd

Vice Principal and University Secretary (Secretary)

Becky Hope-Palmer

GIVE Scheme Participant

Gordon Mackenzie

Head of Strategic Planning and Policy Development 

Dawn Martin

Assistant Secretary, Governance and Quality Enhancement (Minute Secretary) 
Jonathan Matthews

Head of Financial Reporting and Analysis
Chris Reilly

Interim Director of Finance
Steve Scott

Chief Operations Officer
Angela Smith

Head of HR

 

The Chair welcomed members to the meeting. Particular welcome was extended to Zoë MacCallum, recently elected Student President - Academic Life, who had taken up the role on 10 June 2025. 

Apologies were noted for Ellenore Hobkirk, Dr Arturo Langa, James Miller and Guy Smith.

The Chair advised members that this was the final meeting of the University Court for two lay members, Dr Arturo Langa and Carol Sinclair. Unfortunately,  Arturo was unable to attend the meeting, but in his absence, the Chair expressed the appreciation of the Court for Arturo’s contribution to and support for the Court over his 6 years of tenure. 

The Chair advised that she would formally Court’s sincere thanks to Carol for her commitment and contribution to its work later in the meeting (minute 18 refers). 

Members were advised that Julie Churchill (appointed Senate representative) and Dr Maria Giatsi-Clausen (appointed trade union academic staff representative) were both stepping down from the Court, having served the full term of six years available to members. The Chair thanked Maria and Julie for their invaluable contributions to Court discussion over the last 6 years.

Finally, the Chair extended best wishes to Chris Reilly on behalf of the Court on his departure to take up a new interim Director of Finance role. The Chair congratulated  Jonathan Matthews on his appointment as Director of Finance. 

There were no conflicts of interest declared.

There were no other items of Other Competent Business.

4.1 Minutes of the meeting held on 16 April 2025
The Unconfirmed minutes of the meeting of the University Court held on 16 April 2025 (paper Court (25) MINS 02) were APPROVED as an accurate record. 
4.2 Matters arising
 There were no matters arising.

The Chair reported that she continued to meet regularly with the Principal and with the University Secretary to advance the business of the Court. Important matters of discussion in recent meetings included the University’s financial position and the Innovation Hub governance, both of which items would be discussed later in the Court meeting agenda. 

The Chair had participated in a recent risk management workshop facilitated by the University’s Internal Auditors Henderson-Loggie, the outcomes from which would be progressed through the Audit and Risk Committee. She had also engaged in discussions around the skills matrix for lay members under the auspices of the Nominations Committee, and which had informed the role specification for lay member vacancies being advertised.  

The Chair extended her thanks to Andrew Watson, Chair of the Finance and Estates Committee, for his involvement in the recruitment process for the Director of Finance. 

The Chair advised that she had met with the departing Interim Director of Finance, along with the Convener of the FEC and the Principal, to seek his reflection on areas for future consideration. Members were advised that reflections included the following on securing future sustainability:

•    Continued focus on managing the cost base, with challenge around TNE and other income forecasts. 
•    Continued recognition of the estate as an enabler for business and of the importance of commensurate capital expenditure. 
•    A reassessment of the scope and delivery of the EVOLVE project.
•    A top-down approach to the budget development process, taking account of contributions from across the University. 

The Chair reported also on recent external engagement. This included attendance at a meeting of the UK Committee of University Chairs (CUC), which, amongst other matters, had discussed communication in times of financial challenge, areas of learning from the University of Dundee, and broader sector challenges. She also continued to attend meetings of the Committee of Scottish Chairs (CSC). These continued to be useful, although the Chair considered that more discussion around a long-term solution for the financial sustainability of the sector could be advantageous. Two sessions were planned with Professor Pamela Gillies, Chair of the Investigation into financial oversight and decision making at the University of Dundee, and these would likely serve as a catalyst for broader discussion. 

The Chair concluded her report with an acknowledgement of QMU’s outstanding achievement in winning Higher Education Institute of the Year award at the prestigious Herald Higher Education Awards 2025, held in Glasgow on 29 May 2025. QMU had also secured wins for Outstanding Contribution from a Staff Member, honouring podiatry lecturer Evelyn Weir for her decades-long service to Scotland’s homeless community - and Outstanding Contribution to the Local Community for its pioneering Wooden Spoon Frame Running Equipment Hub, the first of its kind in Scotland. The Chair had attended the ceremony with the Principal and staff and students and had very much enjoyed the opportunity to celebrate the achievements of the University.

Court RECEIVED a detailed written report from the Principal and Vice-Chancellor (paper COURT (25) 16). 
As a precursor to his report, the Principal extended his thanks to the Chair of Court, to the Conveners of the Finance and Estates and Audit and Risk Committees, and to the wider Court membership for their contributions to an effective and inclusive culture, within which challenge was welcome and supported. He noted also the continuing positive relationship between the Court and the Senior Leadership Team and the importance of this for good governance and financial oversight. 
Speaking to his report, the Principal covered matters as noted below:
 
6.1 External context 
The Principal provided an overview of the following external factors, noting the resulting impact on QMU and the sector as a whole.
6.1.1 Funding
The Scottish Funding Council (SFC) had published its final funding allocations for 2025-26 on 29 May 2025. QMU’s total funding for teaching, research and innovation would rise by 1.2% in cash terms in 2025-26. Whilst at the better end of outcomes over recent years, this equated to a 1.4% real terms cut, compounded by other economic factors, including continuing inflationary pressures. 
Within this context, there had been further debate about the future resourcing of universities in Scotland. As Interim Convener of Universities Scotland, the Principal had taken the opportunity to discuss future resourcing with the First Minister, Ministers and opposition leaders, including at a special session of the Education, Children and Young People Committee held on 4 June 2025 to discuss the financial sustainability of universities. He anticipated that the sector would take the opportunity over the coming months to explore funding options that might be taken up by a new Parliament in 2026. In doing so, decisions would be guided by questions of equity, demography and economic need, alongside institutional sustainability. 
6.1.2 UK Immigration policy
The UK Government’s Immigration White Paper had been published in May 2025, setting out proposals for change which, if implemented, would be likely to have a negative impact on international recruitment. These included a strengthening of thresholds for criteria within the Basic Compliance Assessment of sponsors, a reduction in the ability for graduates to remain in the UK after their studies, and exploration of the introduction of a levy on higher education provider income from international students. 
In discussion it was suggested that the impact of the proposals, if accepted, was likely to be more acute for smaller institutions. The implications for the Scottish sector were also less clear than for the rest of the UK. The Principal advised that clarity had been sought with UK Ministers as to whether the proposal for a levy would apply to Scotland. Whilst there had not yet been a formal statement, UK Ministers had confirmed that it was a devolved matter and there had been no suggestion at this stage that Scottish Ministers would want to adopt this approach.
6.1.3 Tertiary Education and Training Bill
As Interim Convener of Universities Scotland, and acting on behalf of the sector, the Principal had provided evidence concerning the Tertiary Education and Training Bill to the Education, Children and Young People Committee on 14 May 2025. Whilst conveying the broad support of the sector for the intentions of the Bill to enhance the system for funding post-school education and training, he had also reported the concern that organisational change might impact SFC’s capacity to deliver on key elements of its current responsibilities, particularly at a time of significant challenge for the sector.  
6.2 Financial position
The University’s financial position was discussed more fully under agenda items 7 and 8 (minutes 7 and 8 refer). The Principal’s report set out proposed actions in the context of a projected operating deficit of £2.9m within the draft budget for the financial year 2025-26. These measures had been discussed and agreed in principle at the Finance and Estates Committee on 10 June 2025. 
In the short term, the following was proposed:
• An emphasis on cost reduction in finalising the 2025-26 budget, including exercising stronger control over staffing decisions.
• A review of 2025-26 operational plans and budgets to identify cost savings of £2.5m. While the University’s cash position was not of immediate concern, capital spend would also be reviewed and monitored to preserve this position.
• The EVOLVE change programme to be refreshed and accelerated to achieve shorter term and higher impact outcomes in terms of efficiencies. Its overall scope would also be extended beyond professional services to include consideration of academic delivery. 
• A Voluntary Exit scheme would be launched, subject to consideration of focus and timing. 
An additional meeting of the Finance and Estates Committee was scheduled for w/c 11 August, at which point a progress update would be provided against the short-term measures, as well as consideration of a range of medium-term actions identified as follows:
• The Academic Planning Board would continue to consider the financial viability of programmes as part of its annual review. Further, consideration would be given to options to structurally reduce academic costs, as well as Research and Knowledge Exchange Centre rationalisation driven by the recent review of the Centres. 
• A strategic review of procurement would be undertaken, looking for further savings opportunities over the next five years.
• The establishment of shared services, where these had potential to offer efficiencies, would be considered. In this context, there was ongoing productive discussion with colleagues from Edinburgh Napier University, and this could be expanded to include other universities in due course. A bid for SFC funding to support the development of shared Research and Knowledge Exchange support across the post 92 and small and specialised institutions was in development.
• There would be continued focus on seeking new transnational collaborative partnerships and identifying opportunities to grow QMU Online. 
The Principal had met recently with Trade Union officers representing UCU and Unison to set out the financial position, and the SLT would engage in further dialogue with the recognised Trade Unions through established routes, including the Joint Negotiation and Consultation Committee. 
A communication would be issued to all staff in the week commencing 23 June 2025, informed by the Court discussion around the budget (minute 8 refers). The Principal expressed his commitment to providing transparent communications, recognising the importance of staff being able to contribute to discussions around actions in support of financial savings. 
In terms of the wider context in Scotland, the Principal advised that the SFC commissioned report Investigation into financial oversight and decision making at the University of Dundee was due to be published on 19 June 2025. It was expected that the report would set out lessons beneficial to the wider sector in Scotland concerning governance, financial oversight and culture. An update would come to a future meeting of the Court. 
6.3 Student numbers
At this stage in the recruitment cycle, there was a modest increase of 0.6% in undergraduate applications compared to last year, with Scottish applications up by 2.3%. Despite this improvement and an increase of around 11% in offers made, the overall level of firm ‘acceptances’ was down by 15%, whilst insurance choices were up by around 13%. Postgraduate applications remained open for September entry with applications up by 20.7% overall. This was due largely to an increase in international applications, but as noted earlier (minute 6.1.2 refers), the Immigration White Paper had the potential to negatively affect international recruitment.
Members were advised that the recruitment pattern was reflective of sector trends in an increasingly competitive market. Many undergraduate programmes remained open for late applications with preparations well underway for Clearing, which would launch on 5 July 2025. It was hoped that these efforts, coupled with strong retention and progression, would ensure that SFC funded numbers did not fall too far short of targets. 
6.4 Land Development
A detailed update on the land development project was provided in paper Court (25) 19 (minute 9 refers). In summary, the Edinburgh Innovation Hub was scheduled to become operational from 13 October 2025 and to be completed within the approved budget of £36m. Alongside the completion of construction, a Mobilisation Plan was being pursued. 
The Innovation Hub Strategic Engagement Board, (IHSEB), chaired by the Principal, had been established to direct QMU’s engagement with Hub. Membership of the Board included Marian McNeil, recently appointed Director of the Edinburgh Innovation Hub, as well as academic and professional services staff of the University. 
 
6.5 Research and Knowledge Exchange (RKE) and Innovation
The External Review Panel for QMU’s new five-year Knowledge Exchange and Innovation Fund (KEIF) Strategy 2025-2030 had provided excellent feedback, including commendations on strong links to Scottish Government priorities and to the UN sustainable development goals. Other RKE and Innovation updates included completion of the commercial opportunity stage for Palm-Alt under the SE High Growth Spin Out Programme, new strategic alliances and external research funding awards as set out in the report.
6.6 Appointment of the Chancellor
The Principal was delighted to note formally that Patrick Grant, the designer, entrepreneur, writer, and advocate for sustainability and sustaining communities, would be installed as the new Chancellor at the first of the 2025 graduations, on 7 July 2025 at the Usher Hall, Edinburgh.  Thanks were extended to the Vice-Principal and University Secretary for her role in securing the appointment.
6.7 Higher Herald Education Awards
The Principal echoed the Chair’s congratulations to staff and students involved in the Higher Education Award categories (minute 5 refers), noting that such awards were rightly a source of celebration and pride in terms of positive impact.
6.8 Complete University Guide rankings
 
Disappointingly, QMU’s position in the overall Complete University Guide (CUG) rankings had fallen from 97th to 113th place, despite some good outcomes at discipline-level. Initial analysis of the overall ranking data suggested that the graduate outcomes element of the Guide’s methodology was the major driver for the fall in position. Members were advised that in general the formulae contributing to rankings differed across the league tables, with metrics such as REF performance, number of research-active staff, and student satisfaction survey scores having varying degrees of relative influence on league table position. 
It was explained that graduate outcomes data was partly based on role profiles as well as salary, immediately placing QMU at a potential disadvantage due to the subject mix and diversity of graduate destinations. Other factors impacting the graduate outcomes data included that it relied on graduates’ willingness to complete the survey and that it was administered externally, which might negatively influence participation. Further, it was explained that the graduate outcomes data used in the 2025 CUG guide was drawn from graduates exiting the University in 2021-22. Whilst useful, it was therefore not necessarily reflective of the current employment profile. For example, no Paramedic or ITE graduates were included.
6.9 Concluding comments
The Principal concluded his report by putting on record his thanks to colleagues for their continuing dedication and hard work, to students and student representatives for their commitment and leadership, and to Court members for all their support and encouragement. 

 

Court RECEIVED a paper on the financial outturn forecast for the financial year 2024-25 (paper COURT (25) 17). The forecast and draft budget for the financial year 2025-26 (minute 8, paper COURT (26) 17 refers) were considered in conjunction with a briefing to the Audit and Risk Committee on the Scottish Funding Council’s Financial Recovery Methodology, and a forecast on the University’s potential liability expenditure (minute 13.2, paper Court (25) 22 refers).

Introducing the paper (paper COURT (25) 17), the Head of Financial Reporting and Analysis advised that the outturn forecast for financial year 2024-25, as at Period 9, was for an operating deficit of £1.0m, adverse to budget by £0.5m. Additional expenditure of £1.2m relating to a provision for SFC recovery would also be taken during the year, increasing the deficit to £2.2m.  

As at Period 9, the Revolving Credit Facility (RCF) was drawn at £5m with cash balances of £8.3m. The current borrowing tranche was due for repayment on 16 June 2025, and it was planned to reduce borrowing by a further £2.5m, leaving £2.5m outstanding. As at Period 9, QMU remained compliant with the loan covenants, and was expected to remain compliant with significant headroom across all covenants. The forecast closing cash balance was £5.8m, in accordance with the Treasury Policy. The closing RCF balance was £2.5m, including £2.6m of capital expenditure related to the campus data network refresh and other expenditure.

Court RECEIVED a paper on the budget for the financial year 2025-26 and financial forecast for subsequent years for approval and submission to the Scottish Funding Council (paper Court (25) 18). The Finance and Estates Committee had approved the draft budget for recommendation to the Court at its meeting on 10 June 2025 (minute 10, paper FEC (25) MINS 02 refers). 
As set out in the paper, the budget had been prepared against a challenging external context. The Principal had flagged the ongoing financial pressures in his report (minute 6 refers), including the impact of the real terms public funding cut along with the reduced attractiveness of the UK to international students and increasing competition for Scottish and UK students. While QMU had worked hard to diversify income, particularly in relation to transnational education and online provision, this had been insufficient to counteract continued inflationary pressures and unavoidable cost increases. Such increases included staff costs due to the annual grade point increment, an unexpected increase in Employer’s National Insurance Contributions, and non-staff costs. In addition, some of the anticipated savings from working more efficiently as a benefit of Project Evolve had not yet materialised.  
Introducing the headlines from the draft 2025-26 budget, the Head of Financial Analysis and Reporting advised that the projected operating deficit was £2.9m, increasing to £3.8m after restructuring and exceptional items. Total income was projected to decline from the current financial year by £0.1m, and total expenditure was projected to increase by £0.6m. Cash balances would reduce to £4.1m in FY 2025-26, with the Revolving Credit Facility (RCF) still drawn at £2.5m. Further borrowing would be required to mitigate reductions in cash balances, although QMU would remain loan covenant compliant over the period. As advised earlier by the Principal, corrective action was planned to improve the operating deficit to £2.6m and £2.3m in the financial years 2026-27 and 2027-28, respectively. 
The Chair of the Finance and Estates Committee noted the challenges of developing the budget given the high degree of uncertainty around underpinning factors, including the SFC position regarding clawback (minute 13.2 refers). Having discussed the position at length, the FEC had taken the view that the proposed actions were sufficient to address the deterioration in financial performance and that the suggested metrics to monitor progress would ensure oversight and accountability commensurate with the scale of the challenge. 
In discussion Court members covered matters including the following:
Investment Plan: Clarification was sought from lay members regarding whether it was possible to reduce or defer any of the planned expenditure. Members were advised that the investment plan within the paper reflected the draft position (subject to quarterly review) and that there would be further prioritisation through the established procedures for approving capital renewal projects. The investment plan within the paper deliberately included a detailed breakdown of costs (for example under IT) to ensure transparency both in terms of accounting and risks, for example risks associated with cyber security. 
Scheme of Delegation: Members were offered assurance that there was appropriate oversight. Nonetheless, it would be open to the Court to exercise further oversight should this be deemed necessary.
Staffing costs: A QMU staff member highlighted their concerns around the likely impact of the deterioration of the budget and associated control measures on staff morale and wellbeing. Related to staff costs, clarification was sought regarding the purpose of the £0.5m allowance for casual staff. In response, it was explained that this was not a new budget and that it covered payments to seasonal staff, External Examiners and Visiting Lecturers, amongst others. Assurance was provided also that there would continue to be some scope for investment in new staff with a £0.5m contingency set aside, additional to the 0.7m for actively recruiting vacancies. 
Dialogue with SFC around recovery: Members acknowledged the importance of continued dialogue with SFC around funding recovery, at both a sector and institutional level. At this stage, there was uncertainty on whether SFC would provide its position on recovery in advance of the submission of the budget. The Principal suggested that he remained optimistic, on the basis of conversations, that clarification would be provided shortly. In the meantime, the lack of certainty presented challenges both for the University and the auditors, for whom it would also be difficult to form a view of the accounts without a clear sense of direction. 
The Convener of the Audit and Risk Committee stated that he would expect provision for full recovery for under-enrollment to be accounted for in the year in which it had been experienced. This had implications for the forecast outturn in 2024-25 and the forecast budget for 2025-26. He urged that the SFC position be established and that a prudent approach be taken to this matter in budget planning. It was critical that the position was established with clarity before signing off the financial statement and year end accounts. Members were advised that there was discussion with the external auditors currently on the matter, and that the SFC was being pressed hard on the matter. The Vice Chair concurred that it was important that the SFC position ensured consistency across the sector in terms of the basis on which institutions were preparing financial statements and forecasts.
Financial reporting: Work to develop the reporting format would continue under the auspices of the Finance and Estates Committee to further develop accessibility and transparency of complex financial information.
Having discussed, the Court APPROVED the draft budget presented for submission to the Scottish Funding Council in June 2025. 
In response to a query about further updates, members were advised that there would be an extraordinary meeting of the FEC in August, as well as the first meetings of the Audit and Risk and Finance and Estates committees prior to the next meeting of the Court. In the interim, the Principal committed to writing to the Chairs of the Finance and Estates and Audit and Risk Committees and to the wider Court membership were there  significant developments in the financial projections.

Court RECEIVED an update on progress with the Land Development Project (paper Court (25) 19). The Chief Operations Officer highlighted key points as noted below:

Local Development Plan (LDP): The local authority consultation process to produce an updated LDP was ongoing. The University continued to engage with the planning department based on its recently updated Masterplan Delivery Strategy (MDS)

Edinburgh Innovation Hub: The build contract was subject to delays of circa ten weeks. However, any consequential delays to the Hub becoming operational had been mitigated to four weeks through the contractor maintaining the access dates for Client Fit Out Works. 

As noted earlier in the Principal’s report (minute 6.4 refers), the Hub was scheduled to become operational from 13 October 2025 and to be completed within the approved budget of £36m. Activities to ensure operational readiness for the opening remained on schedule.  Matters noted within the Mobilisation Plan for the consideration of the Finance and Estates Committee were as follows:

•    An independent review of the proposed strategic and operational governance arrangements for the Hub.   
•    The preparation of a Marketing and Communication Strategy, inclusive of proposals for Hub launch and opening ceremony.
•    A reassessment by the Hub Director of all key components of the operational budget in advance of an update to the financial model being published. 

Edinburgh Innovation Park: The JV partners continued to monitor the opportunities and timescales associated with the wider park development including discussion around the potential arising from a prospective City Deal.

Edinburgh Innovation Hub Strategic Engagement Board (IHSEB): As noted in the Principal’s report (minute 6.4 refers), the Board would direct the University’s engagement with the Innovation Hub and its contribution to the development of the wider Innovation Park. 

In terms of Hub occupancy, it was advised there had been a good level of interest and discussions were progressing well with a potential anchor tenant. Longer-term, members were reminded of the aspiration for a diverse occupant mix.

Members looked forward to the opportunity to visit the Innovation Hub on 22 October 2025, prior to the Court meeting. It was agreed that the Hub governance diagram and associated PowerPoint slides would be reissued and that a reminder of the link to the Hub Intranet site would be included in the minutes. The Court would receive further updates at future meetings on matters including the JV structure and benefits realisation.

Members considered a recommendation from the University Senate that the Division of Dietetics, Nutrition, Biological Sciences, Physiotherapy, Podiatry and Radiography (DNBSPPR) within the School of Health Sciences be restructured to form two separate divisions, namely: ‘Dietetics, Nutrition, Biological Sciences and Radiography’ and ‘Physiotherapy and Podiatry’ (paper Court (25) 20). 

Members were reminded that, under the University’s Statutory Instrument, the functions and duties of the Court included the ‘setting up within the University such departments, schools, faculties and other units of organisation and delegating to them, in accordance with paragraphs (10) to (12), such functions, duties and powers as it sees fit’. 

As set out in the minutes of the Senate meeting held on 7 May 2025 (paper Court SEN (25) Mins 02), the Division of DNBSPPR had successfully grown in terms of new programmes, with commensurate growth in staff and student numbers.  Due to the fact that DNBSPPR continued to follow a growth trajectory through the development of new programmes and further expansion of transnational partnerships, there was a need to review the operational structure of the Division. The decision to undertake the review was informed by insights gained from internal data and corroborated externally by a SUMS Consulting benchmark exercise conducted for the University as part of Project EVOLVE. 

In line with the University’s Organisational Change procedure, there had been a period of consultation with staff in the School of Health Sciences and with the Trade Unions, during which staff had been consulted on two different models for splitting the Division based on headcount data to ensure an equitable distribution of staff (headcount and FTE) between the two Divisions formed. Following the closure of the consultation period, the feedback gathered throughout this process, which evidenced strong support for the new Divisions, was considered by the Deputy Principal, and the Dean of the School of Health Sciences, with support from Human Resources. 
Subject to the approval of the Court, the organisational change would be implemented from 1 August 2025, or as soon as a Head of Division for Dietetics, Nutrition, Biological Sciences and Radiography had been appointed. The current Head of Division would become Head of Division for Physiotherapy and Podiatry. 

Court members requested further clarification on the process and timeline for appointing the new Head of Division, with some QMU staff members expressing concern about the additional cost at a time of recognized financial challenge, including how this might be received by the wider staff population within the context of planned stronger control over staffing decisions. In response, the Principal advised that the cost of the new post had been built into the budget. Careful consideration had also been given to the risks of not restructuring, and this had informed the organisational change process. 

The appointed trade union academic staff member challenged the proposal on the basis of the number of managerial posts within the university, and a suggested imbalance between management and non-management posts. In response, Court was advised that all posts suggested for recruitment were subject to detailed and careful scrutiny by the Strategic Planning and Resources Group. Additionally, the term ‘manager’ was applied to a range of roles from grade 6 upwards, with academic staff in management roles also undertaking core learning and teaching activity. 

Informed by the Senate recommendation, the Court APPROVED the organisational change. An update on the timing of restructure and appointment of the Head of Division would come to a future meeting. 

The Court CONSIDERED a paper, supported by the University Senate, concerning the member composition of the Senate.

 

Members were reminded that the University’s Statutory Instrument stated that the functions and duties of the Court included: appointing and regulating committees of its own members or committees of its own members and other persons. As such, the composition of the Senate was a matter for the University Court.

 

Members were advised also that the current composition of the Senate dated from November 2016, when the University Court had agreed revised membership in response to the legislative requirements of the Higher Education Governance (Scotland) Act 2016: .  As set out in the Act, more than 50% of the membership needed to be formed from elected staff and students.

 

Specifically, members were invited to approve revision to the ‘elected’ membership of the Senate, with such membership being proposed as being reduced from three per Division to two. This proposal was prompted by the recommendation that the Division of Dietetics, Nutrition, Biological Sciences, Physiotherapy, Podiatry and Radiography (DNBSPPR) be divided into two divisions, with such restructuring resulting in an increase in elected Divisional representatives from 21 to 24, with commensurate increase in the overall size of the Senate. The full rationale and impact was set out in Paper Court (25) 21.

 

The Secretary advised that transitional arrangements would be put in place to manage the reduction from three to two members per Division. As set out in the Senate minutes (paper SEN (25) MINS 02), consideration had also been given to the extent to which a reduction in elected members could limit opportunity for development and academic promotion, with membership of senior committees being an aspiration for many staff. It was suggested that there were many such opportunities open to staff through the standing committees of the Senate and of the Court (e.g., EDC). Members were asked to note also that criteria for academic promotion were under review, including those relating to committee membership and other institutional engagement.

 

Finally, members were advised that the number of places per Division on the Senate would continue to be based on the ‘Senate’ rather than the ‘House’ model of representation, i.e., irrespective of size, each Division had an equal number of places round the Senate table. Discussion in the past had considered whether elected representation should be proportionate, but the basis of that calculation had been difficult, with proportionate membership open to flux in staff or student numbers. A first-year review of implementation would highlight any issues arising from the revised composition.

 

Informed by the Senate recommendation, the Court APPROVED the revision to the ‘elected’ membership of the Senate, with such membership being reduced from three per academic Division to two per academic Division.

Court RECEIVED the Unconfirmed minutes of the meeting of the Finance and Estates Committee held on 10 June 2025 (paper FEC (25) MINS 02). All matters for the attention of the Court had been covered earlier on the agenda. 

13.1 Minutes of unreserved business
Court RECEIVED the Unconfirmed Unreserved minutes of the meeting of the Audit and Risk Committee held on 11 June 2025 (paper AUDIT (25) MINS 02). Matters arising are considered at Minute 13.2 below. 
13.2 Matters arising
Court noted, as a matter arising from the meeting, a briefing on the Scottish Funding Council’s Financial Recovery Methodology, and a forecast on the University’s potential liability exposure (paper Court (25) 22).
As set out in the paper, SFC policy was noted as being that universities should fill the target number of funded student places that it provides, and that SFC ‘may’ recover funding if universities under-enrol or over-recruit against funded places. Any recovery amount (also known as clawback) would be deducted from the monthly Main Teaching Grant spread over the academic year following the notification of a liability, rather than as a bill to be paid. The University had been advised previously of recovery related to a liability for under recruitment of Initial Teacher Education arising from academic year 2022-2023, which it had been advised would be deducted from the Main Teaching Grant in 2026-27. 
Forecast maximum recovery evaluations set out in the paper had been based on shortfalls within the different SFC price groups. It was suggested as unlikely that QMU recovery would extend to total liability outlined, supported by precedent where waivers and rate-cuts had been granted. This was particularly the case in relation to the controlled numbers, where both the historical experience and the strategic importance, as designated by the Scottish Government, suggested that full recovery was significantly less likely. 
Members noted the paper and its contents in the context of the detailed discussion on the level of provision for, and accounting treatment of, SFC recovery for under-recruitment reported under Minutes 7 and 8 above. 
13.3 Minutes of Reserved Business 
Court RECEIVED the Unconfirmed Reserved minutes of the meeting of the Audit and Risk Committee held on 11 June 2025 (Appendix to paper AUDIT (25) MINS 02). One matter was brought to members’ attention.
13.4 Matter arising: Renewal of contract for internal audit services (minute 12 refers)
Court considered a recommendation from the Audit and Risk Committee to proceed with a three-year renewal of Henderson Loggie’s appointment as internal auditors under the APUC framework, with the potential to extend by 1 +1 years (3+1+1). 
As set out in the minutes, there had been an option under the existing agreement to extend the contract for a further year. However, given that the University was also preparing to undertake an external audit tender, members had agreed it would be preferable not to run both processes concurrently. Under the proposed arrangement, Henderson Loggie would maintain its current fee, which was below the framework cap, for the first year, with fees for subsequent years subject to negotiation, but not more than the capped amount under the framework. 
In considering the alternatives open to the University, ARC members had expressed confidence in the quality of service provided by Henderson Loggie over the past three years. Henderson Loggie was commended for delivering clear, well-structured reports, facilitating constructive discussions, and demonstrating a strong understanding of the University’s operations. Feedback from those directly involved in audits indicated that Henderson Loggie’s team was thorough, knowledgeable, and effective in communicating complex issues in an accessible manner.
Court APPROVED the recommendation from the Audit and Risk Committee to proceed with a three-year renewal of Henderson Loggie’s appointment as internal auditors under the APUC framework, with the potential to extend by 1 +1 years (3+1+1). 

 

Court RECEIVED the Unconfirmed minutes of the meeting of the Senate held on 7 May 2025 (paper SEN (25) MINS 02). Matters for the attention of the Court had been mostly covered earlier on the agenda under the discussions around Divisional structure (minute 10 refers) and composition of the Senate (minute 11 refers). 

One item was brought to members’ attention, with members noting Honorary degrees would be conferred at the July 2025 graduation ceremonies to:

•    Lucinda Bruce-Gardyne, Doctor of Business Administration, in recognition of significant contribution to business and to public service.

•    Shona McCarthy, Doctor of the University in recognition of significant contribution to the creative arts.

•    Carol Rogers, Forensic Operation Lead, Police Scotland, Doctor of the University in recognition of significant contribution to public service. 

A fourth recipient had been confirmed following the meeting of the Senate as follows:

•    Ashley Jensen, Doctor of the University in recognition of significant contribution to culture and the creative arts. 

Court RECEIVED the Unconfirmed minutes of the meeting of the Nominations Committee held on 25 April 2025 (paper NOM (25) MINS 01). The following matters were brought to members’ attention:

15.1    Membership of the University Court and its committees (minute 6 refers)

Court APPROVED the recommendation that lay members Guy Smith and Janet Archer be appointed to serve a second term of office on the Court from 1 October 2025 to 30 September 2028. 

15.2    Chancellor of the University (minute 7 refers)

Court NOTED formally the appointment of Parick Grant as Chancellor of the University. Patrick would be installed formally as Chancellor at the graduation ceremony on the afternoon of Monday 7 July 2025. 

Court RECEIVED the Unconfirmed minutes of the meeting of the Equality and Diversity Committee held on 3 April 2025 (paper EDC (25) MINS 02). There were no matters brought to members’ attention. 

It was agreed that consideration would be given to including a session on EDI within the programme of pre-Court briefings and updates on the wider work of the University. 

Court RECEIVED the Unconfirmed minutes of the meeting of the Health and Safety Committee held on 25 March 2025 (paper H&S (24) MINS 05). There were no matters brought to members’ attention. 

Court marked the retirement, after six and three years respectively, of Lay Court Members, Dr Arturo Langa and Carol Sinclair. 

On behalf of the Court and the University, the Chair was delighted to be able to thank Carol in person for her three years of service. Carol responded by thanking members for making her feel so welcome and noting the significant positive developments at the University during her period of tenure, including the progress that had been made with the Innovation Hub. She advised that her decision not to continue for a second tenure was due to her professional commitments as a ceramic artist and maker. She wished the Court and the University well for the future.

The Chair expressed her regret at not being able to extend in person Court’s sincere thanks to Arturo for his six years of service. Arrangements would be made to provide the gift prepared for presentation to Arturo. 

The University Court would meet on the following dates in Session 2025-26:

Wednesday 22 October 2025 at 3.00pm in the Boardroom
Wednesday 17 December 2025 at 3.00pm in the Boardroom
Wednesday 18 February 2026 at 3.00pm in the Boardroom
Wednesday 22 April 2026 – Strategy Day – all day event
Wednesday 24 June 2026 at 3.00pm in the Boardroom

Members were advised of the potential of an additional Strategy Day in the Autumn, confirmation of which would be advised separately.

The Chair closed the meeting by wishing members all the best for the summer. She noted also that she was looking forward to the graduation ceremonies on 7 and 8 July 2025 and the opportunity to celebrate with the graduands, their families, University staff, and Court members.

20.1     COURT STRATEGY DAY

 

Court RECEIVED the notes of discussion held at the Court Strategy Day on 16 April 2025.

 

20.2     TOWARDS A NEW ERA OF COLLABORATION

 

Court RECEIVED the report of the published in June 2025.

Glass panelled wall of Queen Margaret University Campus, taken from the patio area
International Community
A crowd of people at one of QMU's Open Days
Open Days and Meeting Us
Some QMU students walking on campus
Study Here
Group of students smiling and talking together, QMU campus, Edinburgh
Fees and Funding