Select Committee on European Scrutiny Thirty-First Report


17 Modernisation of Europe's universities

(27493)

9166/06

COM(06) 208

Commission Communication: Delivering on the modernisation agenda for universities: education, research and innovation"

Legal base
Document originated10 May 2006
Deposited in Parliament16 May 2006
DepartmentEducation and Skills
Basis of considerationEM of 26 May 2006
Previous Committee ReportNone
Discussed in Council18-19 May 2006
Committee's assessmentPolitically important
Committee's decisionCleared

The document

17.1 The Commission's Communication is based on its belief not only that the universities can make an important contribution to the achievement of the Lisbon objectives for growth and jobs but also that they are not fulfilling their potential and require modernisation.

17.2 The Communication comments on what the Commission perceives as the weaknesses in the present state of European universities. They include excessive control and regulation by Member States; inadequate linkages between universities, industry and society; insufficient funding of research and universities; obstacles to the mobility of students and teachers across national borders; and the failure of the universities to provide enough suitable degree and non-degree training and retraining to meet the changing needs of the labour market. The Communication also sets out the action the Commission believes that Member States and the universities should take to overcome these deficiencies and ensure that the research and education of Europe's universities achieves the excellence required for international competition.

17.3 Much of this is not new: notably, many of the ideas are to be found in:

  • the Commission Communication "Mobilising the brainpower of Europe: enabling the universities to make their full contribution to the Lisbon strategy":[50]
  • the draft Recommendation on "further European cooperation in quality assurance in higher education";[51] and
  • the Commission Communication on "Implementing the renewed partnership for growth and jobs — developing a knowledge flagship: the European Institute of Technology".[52]

17.4 However, this Communication contains some new proposals, including the following:

  • the EU should aim to devote at least 2% of its GDP to higher education;
  • the proportion of graduates who have spent at least one term or semester abroad or with experience in industry should double;
  • national grants and loans to students should be portable anywhere in the EU;
  • no applicant should have to wait more than four months for a decision on an application for recognition of his or her academic or professional qualifications by another Member State; and
  • integration of its graduates into the labour market should be one of the indicators of the quality of a university's performance and rewarded in regulatory, funding and evaluation systems.

17.5 The Communication says:

    "The Commission is not a direct actor in the modernisation of universities, but it can play a catalytic role, providing political impetus and targeted funding in support of reform and modernisation."[53]

It intends to do this through the open method of coordination,[54] disseminating best practice and supporting Member States' efforts. It also intends to contribute to the modernisation of the universities through its use of EU funds, such as the 7th EU Research and Development Framework Programme and the Structural Funds. Moreover, the Commission believes that the proposed European Institute for Technology "will act as a flagship showing the value of [a] modernised approach and mode of governance and partnership with business".[55]

17.6 The Commission "invites the Council and the European Parliament to give a clear message about the EU's determination to achieve the necessary restructuring and modernisation of universities, and to invite all concerned to take immediate steps to take this agenda forward".[56]

The Government's view

17.7 The Minister of State for Higher Education and Lifelong Learning at the Department for Education and Skills (Bill Rammell) tells us that the Government regards the Communication as a useful addition to the debate on university reform. The Government supports the Commission's analysis and agrees that fundamental reform is needed. It is keen, therefore, to encourage the Commission to support peer learning and the exchange of good practice.

17.8 The Minister adds, however, that the Government has reservations about some aspects of the Communication. For example: the Government believes that it is for each Member State to decide for itself:

  • to what extent student grants and loans should be portable elsewhere in the EU;
  • how much to spend on higher education rather than being expected to set a target of 2% of GDP; and
  • whether to increase the proportion of people taking part in mobility programmes (doubling the number who spend at least a term or semester abroad would be difficult for the UK, both as a sender and as a host).

Conclusion

17.9 The Commission's diagnosis of the need for university reform and its prescription for change are familiar from previous documents. We agree with the Government that the Communication makes a useful contribution to thinking about university modernisation. We also agree with the Government, however, that it is for each Member State and university to decide what reforms are required and that EU targets for funding or student mobility are not appropriate.

17.10 The Communication is not binding and there are no questions that we need put to the Minister about it. We are, therefore, content to clear the document from scrutiny. We draw it to the attention of the House because of the importance of the universities' contribution to the economy and society.


50   See (26525) 8437/05: HC 34-i (2005-06), para 34 (4 July 2005). Back

51   See (26046) 13495/04: HC 34-viii (2005-06), para 11 (2 November 2005). Back

52   See (27325) 6844/06: HC 34-xxiii (2005-06), para 4 (29 March 2006). Back

53   Commission Communication, page 11. Back

54   The March 2000 European Council defined the open method of coordination. It is designed to help Member States progressively develop their own policies. It involves: European guidelines and timetables for short-, medium- and long-term goals, with quantitative and qualitative indicators and benchmarks; translating these European guidelines into national and regional policies; and periodic monitoring, evaluation and peer review. Back

55   Commission Communication, page 11. Back

56   Commission Communication, page 12. Back


 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2006
Prepared 26 June 2006