*** HEPI is hosting events at the Labour Party Conference and, in partnership with the KCL Policy Institute, at the Conservative Party Conference. Register your interest now by emailing [email protected].***
This HEPI long read was kindly authored by Gill Evans, Emeritus Professor of Medieval Theology and Intellectual History at the University of Cambridge.
With the exception of some alternative providers, British universities normally appoint a Chancellor as their most senior figure. What for? A Chancellor’s responsibilities tend to be ill-defined. There may be no remuneration.
In every category of university, different views may be found of what their Chancellors can or should do in office. In April 2023 BPP, a private for-profit university, said it had selected a Chancellor with higher education experience but also with an interest in ‘programme design, business strategy and Human Resources Management’.[1] Chancellors bringing their own interests and qualifications to their role are similarly to be found in the ‘modern’ (post-1992) English universities. Paterson Joseph, the current Chancellor of Oxford Brookes University, is an actor and novelist.[2] The University of Reading, which gained its royal charter in 1926, has a Chancellor who presents himself as ‘different’ from his predecessors in his qualification for the role.[3] He said on his installation in 2022 that he had ‘partnered with the University to help others develop their innovative ideas for the common good’, before becoming Chancellor, ‘the ceremonial head of the University’. ‘I have been measured up for the gilt-edged robes. I have seen the serious-looking oil paintings of some of my eight predecessors – nearly all of them a Sir or a Lord or a former Cabinet minister. Or all three.’
Why anyone should seek to be a university’s Chancellor or be pleased to be invited is a live question this year because the two universities that invented the office are in need of replacements. Oxford and Cambridge gave themselves Chancellors from their earliest years, alongside the Proctors (procuratores) who dealt with legal difficulties. For centuries the Chancellor’s role was judicial. From 1230 in Oxford and 1412 in Cambridge a Vice-Chancellor was found to be useful as the Chancellor’s deputy. That role has evolved over the centuries, though their Vice-Chancellors are now not Chief Executives and have only vestigial powers.
Oxford’s new Chancellor can look forward to a dignified installation:
at a meeting of Convocation at which the instrument of his or her election under the Common Seal of the University shall be handed to him or her by the Vice-Chancellor and Senior Proctor, together with the insignia of the office of Chancellor, that is, the statutes, the keys, the seal of office, and the staves of the bedels. [4]
Thereafter he may grant degrees, though he will do that in person only at Encaenia, the annual honorary degree ceremony of the University. A Cambridge Chancellor also exercises the fundamental academic power of the University, ‘to call Congregations of the Regent House, and to admit candidates to degrees and titles of degrees’ (Statute A,1,3) [5] and commonly makes an appearance for that purpose. But degree-awarding is not simply a personal power of either Chancellor. When Oxford’s Chancellor grants one of the University’s degree to an honour, he said that he does so with ‘the authority of the whole university’ as well as his own (auctoritate mea et totius universitatis).
Ultimate power in universities lies with their governing bodies not with their Chancellors as nominal ‘head’. The governing body in Oxford is a subset of its Convocation and in Cambridge it is the Regent House, a subset of its Senate (Statute A,III,1).[6] In both cases, these governing bodies are principally made up of of academic and academic-related staff. They still debate and vote but they now number several thousands, and cannot conduct all their business by meeting in person. It is of the essence of these bodies that their members are equals, all alike having a digital vote. The Chancellors do not preside, in person or at all.
Oxford and Cambridge are exceptions from the requirement of Schedule 6 of Further and Higher Education Act of 1992, which set the requirements for the membership and headship of university governing bodies, which are usually called ‘Councils’. [7] Schedule 6 requires a Council to consist of between twelve and twenty-four members plus ‘the person who is for the time being the principal of the institution, unless he chooses not to be a member’. This is normally the Vice-Chancellor. Oxford and Cambridge have their Councils of about two dozen members appointed by Congregation in Oxford and the Regent House in Cambridge. To these most business is delegated, but they may only make ‘recommendations’ to their governing bodies with which the ultimate decision lies. Again the Chancellor has no role.
A University is likely to have a Visitor, a successor to the university’s ‘founder’ notionally carrying continuing responsibilities on his behalf after his death. In the numerous universities created by royal charter, the Lord Chancellor acts on the King’s behalf as Visitor. A Visitor’s decision on matters within his or her jurisdiction is final but that jurisdiction has been substantially reduced. The Higher Education Act of 2004 transferred the Visitor’s powers to respond to student complaints to an independent adjudicator and removed powers in employment matters, leaving Visitorial jurisdiction solely over questions arising about the University’s internal legislation.[8] Visitors are therefore likely to be called upon to exercise their powers only very rarely.
Oxford and Cambridge had no founders and consequently have no Visitors. Legislation has partly filled the gap. Under the Universities Act of 1825 the Chancellors as well as the Vice-Chancellors of the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge have the power to appoint and swear Constables. Each Constable is appointed for one year from 1 October, and their part-time contracts are renewable. On appointment Constables swear an oath to carry out their duties, faithfully and have all the powers of a constable within the University.[9] Cambridge has a ‘Court of Benefactors to membership of which the Chancellor may from time to time admit major benefactors of the University’ (Statute IX,3). Since the legislation of 1856 and 1877 the Cambridge Chancellor has had the power to resolve ‘any doubt’ arising ‘with respect to the true meaning of any statute’.[10] [11] In Oxford, its Statute XVII fills that gap with a provision for reference to the Vice-Chancellor and appeal to the University’s Appeal Court if there are ‘disputes over the interpretation or application of statutes and regulations’.[12]
The role of Chancellors in younger universities lacks even this limited consideration of their purpose and their powers. They tend to be regarded as ‘ceremonial’. The University of Buckingham, a private not-for-profit university, explains that ‘the Chancellor is the ceremonial head of the university’ to ‘represent us on the public stage and provide invaluable guidance and advice.’ Its present Chancellor is Mary Archer, someone very much on the ‘public stage’, but also described as qualified for the office as a scientist in her own right and an experienced Chair and patron of various external bodies. She is thus seen as a reputation-enhancing figure for Buckingham.[13]
However Oxford found it faced strong internal opposition and reputation-damaging headlines this year when it sought to give a Nominating Committee something of a ‘sorting hat’ role in the listing of candidates for the vote of Convocation for its next Chancellor. The Oxford Gazette of 16 May recorded a climb-down. A Chancellor’s Election Committee was now to ‘play no substantive role in the election of a Chancellor’. Nevertheless it might establish the ‘timeline’ for the process of election; ‘advertise the role’ and ‘establish the information to be provided to candidates’.
In Cambridge, Varsity’s February 2024 article seemed unalarmed when Lord Sainsbury’s resignation as current Chancellor was announced.[14] But Cambridge may be wise to remind itself of its own past controversies over nominations for the election of its Chancellor.[15] The Statutes created by Cambridge in 1926 under the Oxford and Cambridge Act of 1923 had required only that 50 members of its Senate should have signed a nomination to approve a candidate for election as Chancellor. However in 1953, after the confused election of Lord Tedder in 1950, Cambridge created its own Nomination Board. This proved to be inefficient at the next election, failing to nominate Prince Philip as Chancellor before the deadline so that an extension had to be permitted.
After an unsuccessful attempt in 2014 to review the Nominating Committee for its Chancellor it was decided to let the matter rest until a new election came into view, with the Nomination Board to ‘review from time to time methods for voting in an election to the office of Chancellor and to promote by Grace of the Senate such method or methods (in addition to voting in person) as it may recommend’. [16] The Board was abandoned the University only in January this year.[17] It was replaced with nomination by fifty members of the Senate (Statute A,I,7).
In appointing Cambridge’s current retiring Chancellor in 2011 the Nomination Board proposed Lord Sainsbury but additional nominations were invited from members of the Senate. This produced three candidates: the local grocer Abdul Arain, the actor Brian Blessed and the barrister Michael Mansfield. Lord Sainsbury got the majority of first preference votes but it was not a run-away majority. It is too soon to know who will come (or be put) forward this time. At a Cambridge Council meeting in February 2024, it was suggested that a ‘Draft Role Description’ for the new Chancellor would be needed. The Report mentions only the need for ‘diverse field of high-calibre candidates’. The Council Minute of 24 March adds the need to ‘ensure that the candidates have a good and fair experience’ and the importance of protecting ‘the reputation of the University’. So is it a matter of character or qualification? Cambridge’s Council suggests that a lifelong appointment might put off a number of potential candidates, with the further possibility that, ‘with a lifetime appointment, a Chancellor could become unable to carry out the duties of the office but be incapable of resigning (or unwilling to do so)’. It foresees reputational risk.[18][19] A ballot was called on this proposal, to take place in late October 2024.[20] Only then can the process of appointment begin.
In the present round, Oxford has quickly attracted consenting nominees. The names of Imran Khan, Lord Hague of Richmond, Lord Mandelson and Elish Angiolini have been reported, though active members of legislatures and those active in politics are now to be discouraged from standing. Oxford has published a job description with a deadline of 18 August. The University ‘is seeking candidates who can demonstrate’:
- outstanding achievements in their field and the ability to command respect beyond it;
- a deep appreciation for the University’s research and academic mission, its global community, and its ambition to remain a world class research and teaching university;
- the ability and willingness to enhance the reputation of the University locally, nationally and abroad.
Applicants from a diverse range of backgrounds are warmly welcomed.[21]
The competition for a Chancellorship elsewhere may be less easy to observe. Will it be attractive?
[1] https://www.fenews.co.uk/education/bpp-university-appoints-professor-martyn-jones-as-chancellor/
[2] https://www.brookes.ac.uk/about-brookes/structure-and-governance/chancellor
[3] https://www.paullindley.uk/journal/a-new-kind-of-chancellor-for-the-university-of-readings-second-century
[4] Council Regulations 2 of 2002
https://governance.admin.ox.ac.uk/legislation/council-regulations-21-of-2002#collapse1426061.
[5] Statute A,I,3.
[6] Statute A,III,1.
[7] Revising Schedule 7A to the Education Reform Act of 1988.
[8] Now https://www.oiahe.org.uk/
[9] https://www.proctors.cam.ac.uk/directory/constables
[10] The Universities of Oxford and Cambridge Act (1877) contains at s. 52, with reference only to Cambridge, an amended version of s. 42 of the Cambridge Act of 1856.
[11] Statute A,IX,2.
[12] Oxford Statute XVII.
[13] https://www.buckingham.ac.uk/about/governance-structure-and-committees/university-chancellor/
[14] https://www.varsity.co.uk/news/27006
[15] The story has been told by A.W.F.Edwards in a series of articles in the Oxford Magazine between 2011 and 2014, 0th Week Hilary Term, 2011; 0th Week Michaelmas Term, 2011; 0th Week Trinity Term, 2012, 0th Week Michaelmas Term, 2014 and Fifth Week Michaelmas Term, 2014.
[16] Reporter, 14 May, 2014. The Grace proposing the new Ordinance was withdrawn, Reporter, 20 October 2014.
[17] Reporter, 17 January, 2024, https://www.reporter.admin.cam.ac.uk/reporter/2023-24/weekly/6725/section1.shtml#heading2-6
[18] ‘Topic of concern to the University: Change to the Pro-Vice-Chancellorships: Notice in response to Discussion remarks ‘, Reporter, 5 June, 2024.
[19] ‘Topic of concern to the University: Change to the Pro-Vice-Chancellorships: Notice in response to Discussion remarks ‘, Reporter, 5 June, 2024.
[20] https://www.admin.cam.ac.uk/reporter/2023-24/weekly/6751/section1.shtml#heading2-5
[21] https://www.ox.ac.uk/about/organisation/university-officers/chancellor/chancellor-applications