A REPORT about pay and conditions in higher education, published last year, sparked anguish in some quarters, glee in others. The committee responsible for the Independent Review of Higher Education Pay and Conditions consisted of representatives of academic staff trade unions, employers and independent members, and was chaired by Michael Bett, the chairman of telecoms giant Cellnet. Its recommendations covered future mechanisms for determining pay and conditions, management and staff development, action against sex discrimination and much more. Above all, it emphasised that recruitment and retention of academic staff in higher education will continue to be problematic if salary levels do not recover.
During debate on the report in the House of Commons, Evan Harris, the Liberal Democrats鈥� spokesperson on higher education鈥攚ho has many academics living in his West Oxford constituency鈥攚arned MPs that higher education funding in Britain fell by 1.1 per cent in 1999. Malcolm Wicks, the junior education minister, replied that Britain would be investing an extra 拢295 million this year compared with 1999. But, to a chorus of sceptical comments from Opposition parties, he added that it was not the government鈥檚 job to set individual pay rates. 鈥淚f we had that power, we would be accused of being control freaks.鈥�
Ian Pearson, who prior to becoming an MP was chief executive of the West Midlands Enterprise Board, raised the plight of lecturers in information technology, accountancy and law. He said that if such people are any good, they can earn two, three, or four times more in the commercial world than in academia. He suggested that the universities should look to the private sector for a solution.
Advertisement
Wicks鈥檚 rejoinder was that not everyone is motivated only by money. However, he admitted that some universities face severe problems trying to find suitable staff to teach accountancy and IT. They may want to see if employees from suitable firms would like to teach in universities on a part-time basis.
So, is that to be the road for the new millennium? I hope not. Part-time lecturers can be useful, but surely not at the core of university studies.
HAVING participated in 15 adjournment debates on the Lockerbie air disaster, I found the report on laser-based explosives detectors riveting (快猫短视频, 23 October 1999, p7). Surely a detector, such as that developed by Andrew Pipino of the US National Institute of Standards and Technology, would have prevented the bomb from being smuggled onto Pan Am flight 103? The plane exploded over the small Scottish town of Lockerbie in 1988 killing all 259 people on board. And the Boeing 747 ploughed into the town itself, killing a further 11 people.
Pipino鈥檚 system is so sensitive it can sniff out single molecules of target substances. I asked Chris Mullin, a junior minister in the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR), what he knew about the device.
Mullin replied that a recent International Civil Aviation Organization workshop on the detection of explosives concluded that optical detection techniques hold huge promise. In addition, he said the DETR funds research and development into the detection of weapons and explosives. As a result, a prototype laser-based system has been developed for detecting traces of explosives. 鈥淵ou can be sure we shall follow the developments of this additional technique with great interest,鈥� said Mullin.
This is good news for the relatives of Lockerbie victims who have been pursuing their cause for more than a decade.
