榴莲视频

Government bailouts a ‘moral hazard’ for universities, says Peck

<榴莲视频 class="standfirst">Most institutions in trouble can find balance between income and expenditure on their own, according to prospective new OfS chair 
三月 4, 2025
Source: iStock/bunsview

Universities should be able to sort out their financial issues on their own and avoid the “moral hazard” of having to be bailed out by the government, according to the prospective new chair of the English regulator.

Addressing MPs as part of his selection process to?become the new permanent chair of the Office for Students (OfS), Edward Peck said the financial autonomy of institutions should be taken seriously both in good as well as more challenging times, warning that government intervention would take providers too far into the public sector.

The?outgoing vice-chancellor?of Nottingham Trent University said he would use the role to encourage more collaboration between universities, while attempting to relieve some of the regulatory burden on institutions and deprioritise areas of the OfS’ work.

But, if confirmed in post, Peck’s?four-year term will inevitably be dominated by the issue of university finances after the regulator predicted last year that?three-quarters of institutions were heading for deficits?without evasive action.

With some?institutions currently being supported by OfS-appointed consultants?owing to the precarity of their finances, Peck told the House of Commons Education Committee hearing that he would seek an urgent briefing to understand if these pressures were “particularly acute because they haven’t yet got through all the cost reduction measures that would enable them to balance income with expenditure”.

A lot of institutions are “still on that journey”, Peck said, and will get to a point where they are able to find a balance. If there are institutions where the market has changed so much that further intervention is required, it would be a government decision over whether to support “reconfiguration”, he said.

“If an institution genuinely has a non-viable position and is not prepared to take that kind of action, I’m not sure the government should step in with what’s been called a bailout,” he said.

“There’s an issue about that in terms of moral hazard, it seems to me. There may be questions about…universities and colleges and other providers becoming public sector organisations, which I think we want to avoid. And practically, where is the cash coming from?”

Peck, who revealed he had briefly been a member of the Labour Party, is seen as a more sector-friendly appointment than the?previous permanent chair, James Wharton, who was a Conservative peer with no higher education background.?

But he said he would always “put the interests of students above institutions when it is the right thing to do”, citing his opposition to foundation degrees that have been criticised by some for being used as “cash cows” by institutions without much benefit for students.

Peck said he was one of the first vice-chancellors to advocate for a regulator and had supported the OfS since its inception but that it had at times “misunderstood independence as meaning distance”.

Addressing concerns about overburden, Peck said there was a need to look again at whether all interventions were risk-based, citing a recent OfS focus on transnational education activities as one area that could be seen as less of a priority “with everything else going on”.

Free speech however was “absolutely crucial”, he stressed, adding that institutions found not to be following codes of practice should expect “robust regulatory action”.

On collaboration, Peck said that he felt the OfS could offer “sensible guidance” to help institutions in close geographical proximity work out how to prevent cold spots in provision developing, adding that he felt the Competitions and Markets Authority – seen as a key potential barrier to such activity – would be open to a conversation that “protects choice”.

Other priorities for the regulator included working out how to regulate more modular provision as the new?Lifelong Learning Entitlement comes on stream.

On widening access, Peck said he wanted to seek a better understanding of what happens to the hundreds of thousands of people who register with admissions service Ucas every year but do not go on to accept a place.

Peck, who has acted as the government’s?Student Support Champion since 2022, said he was open to the idea of incorporating an emphasis on student?mental health in initiatives such as the Teaching Excellence Framework, recognising that “student support is as important to many students as the academic input they receive”.

tom.williams@timeshighereducation.com

请先注册再继续

为何要注册?

  • 注册是免费的,而且十分便捷
  • 注册成功后,您每月可免费阅读3篇文章
  • 订阅我们的邮件
注册
Please 登录 or 注册 to read this article.
<榴莲视频 class="pane-title"> Reader's comments (7)
Wow wow Mr Peck seems to be a know it all ......lets be clear about one thing the OfS imposes very high regulatory costs on UK Universities and this means a lot of bureaucrats need to be employed by the Universities to report to the OfS. Lets slash the reporting requirements and get rid of the excess bureaucracy and senior management teams that all spend so much time doing things (much of which is actually negative) just to please the OfS. This will then free up hundreds of millions if not billions to actually improve the student experience.
They're not banks, you know, private corporations which serve little useful purpose and engage mainly in gambling.
Slashing the need for regulatory reporting and related compliance will also free up academic's time spent writing up quality assurance reports and conducting all manner of surveys (of questionable value) to feed into the OFS reports. Work at university now is more of form filling, endless meetings and report writing than doing research. This micromanagement is what is killing universities.
I have yet to hear of a single positive thing that the OfS has done.
A very well-informed and thoughtful stance being taken by the new OfS Chair. Agree that Us can remain ‘a going concern’ (taking, say, a three year view) if a credible restructuring plan is supported when necessary by overdraft cash and that hence there should be no need for bail-outs (even if the funding for such could be found given the parlous state of public finances!). The messy issue is the degree to which some Us are over-borrowed and even worse if debt restructuring is needed…
Universities should not be businesses. It is a fundamentally wrong stance, and has done the sector enormous damage. The shambles that is the OfS is more of a symptom than cause of this. Not seeing any change in attitude from this new chair, sadly. And all those forms we have to fill in - tick-box exercises, waste of time, they go into a void.
new
Moral hazard indeed. This specifically applies to the management who get off the hook after having ruined the life of many staff and students. In the corporate world with such shoddy performance as some have demonstrated, those at the helm would all have been named and shamed and/or sacked. The regulator should first and foremost take a closer look at the governance structure and decision making processes within universities. This is the fundamental cause of the UK universitys' problems.
ADVERTISEMENT