|
Back to Science Homepage
29 January 2003
SAC grappling with crisis in funding
The Courier
28 January 2003
THE FEBRUARY board meeting of the Scottish Agricultural
College is shaping up to be a crucial occasion.
Its budget is under extreme pressure, with the
Scottish Executive proposing major cutbacks in its grant for SAC's
education services.
Basically, the Executive is planning to slash
30% in real terms off the SAC budget over the next three years.
In cash terms there will be a reduction of £1.658
million to just short of £4.9 million in 2006.
Professor Bill McKelvey, the principal and chief
executive of SAC, is on the record as saying this drastic reduction
in funding will result in job losses and fewer facilities available
for students.
In addition, phase two of a report conducted by
the accountants Deloitte & Touche into SAC will shortly be published.
The first phase, which concentrated on SAC's objectives,
markets and services, was published in October 2002.
One of the key recommendations of that report
was that SAC should concentrate its activities on “land-based
industries rather than rural industries."
That advice has now been incorporated in the SAC
mission statement.
However, it is abundantly clear that SAC's greatest
problems relate to funding and the diverse location of its facilities.
In their first report Deloitte & Touche chart
the pattern of funding, first from the Scottish Office and then
the Executive, over a 10-year period from 1991/92 to 2001/02.
In 1991/92 total grant aid paid to SAC was £18.26
million while a decade on this had declined to £17.88 million.
The peak year for funding was 1995/96 when SAC
received £19.93 million.
Deloitte & Touche estimate that if inflation
had been taken into account SAC in 2001/2 would have needed just
short of £23 million just to stand still and not the £17.88
million paid out by the Executive.
Inevitably, this decline in real funding has put
enormous pressure on SAC's resources and resulted in several years
of operating losses.
The last accounts to March 31, 2002, show a deficit
of £884,000 on top of a loss of £3.1 million in the
previous year.
The latest set accounts actually show a surplus
of £360,000.
However, this is largely as a result of the realisation
of surplus assets, including land and houses.
Professor McKelvey admitted yesterday that SAC
faces serious difficulties.
He said, "The drop in funding is disappointing
and makes it very difficult to respond and in one sense it pre-empts
the Deloitte & Touche report.
It is clear that we will have to rationalise,
because there is no choice.
I find that at odds with both the Executive's
Forward Strategy for Scottish Agriculture and the Custodians for
Change document.
"Both of these papers suggest that there
is a need for more training and education, and not less.”
It now appears, however, that SAC will have to
bite the bullet and decide whether it can continue to operate from
three campuses - Edinburgh, Craibstone near Aberdeen and Auchincruive
in Ayrshire.
Almost 12 months ago the SAC board indicated that
its preference was based on disposing of Auchincruive, but entering
into an arrangement with Paisley University at a site in Ayr.
This provoked a furious reaction in south-west
Scotland which in turn prompted Rural Development Minister Ross
Finnie to call on SAC to delay any radical moves until an in independent
survey was conducted by Deloitte & Touche.
Professor McKelvey has always maintained, however,
that any radical changes will be made only after full consultation
with the farming industry and other interested parties.
Further Reading Recommended by Land-Care
Scottish Agricultural College (2002). Response from SAC Board to
Phase1 Deloitte & Touche Report on SAC’s Objectives, Markets
and Services.
(Filed 29 January 2003, www.land-care.org.uk,
click here
to view).
Deloitte & Touche (2002). Phase 1 Report to the Board of Directors
of SAC. Objectives, Markets and Services for SAC.
(Filed 29 January 2003, www.land-care.org.uk,
click
here to view).
Editorial. Scottish Agricultural College - what is going on?
(Filed 17 October 2002, www.land-care.org.uk,
click here to
view).
|
