Examination of Witness (Questions 132-139)
BILL RAMMELL
MP
31 JANUARY 2007
Q132 Chairman: Can I welcome the Minister
to our proceedings, but also say, and it is a fine point, that
to be honest about this, I started off thinking that looking at
Bologna was not going to be that interesting, but as we take evidence
I think it gets more and more interesting and quite concerning
too. This is a very serious challenge for higher education. I
confess, as a sinner, I have repented and I find it very interesting.
What do you think Bologna is going to achieve for UK higher education?
Bill Rammell: I do not think we
should overstate it, but it is an important process. It is about
comparability and compatibility of higher education qualifications
across the broader Europe. It is about mutual recognition and
it is about aiding mobility, both of students and academics. It
will give students, importantly, a wider choice of course programmes,
if we get this right, and particularly through the Diploma Supplement,
if employers better understand what the different qualifications
are across the broader European area, it will give employers a
wider pool of recruits to chose from. There is a lot of economic
evidence that with mobility of labour, with migration, you actually
add economically to your GDP. If I look at it exclusively from
the UK perspective, if we do not properly engage with this process,
given the significant benefit that overseas students have brought
both to our universities and to our economy as a whole, if we
are not demonstrating that people who come here get a qualification
that is recognised throughout the broader European area at a time
when there is increased competition internationally for overseas
students, I think we could face some worrying competition. So,
I think it is necessary, I think the process has moved in the
right direction, but we certainly need to see further progress.
Q133 Chairman: Are there any threats
to UK higher education that perhaps when we started this process
we did not perceive that we have to guard against?
Bill Rammell: I think the positive
is that actually if you look at the detail of Bologna, certainly,
for example, in terms of the three-cycle framework, it is very
much moving to the system that we have got. The increasing focus
(and this was explicitly made clear in the Bergen Communiqué
two years ago) is on learning outcomes and not time served, and
that has been one of the historic debates about this, where elsewhere
in the broader Europe it is almost the number of months and years
you have undertaken a qualification rather than the level that
you have actually achieved. So, I think all of that is positive.
I think the risks are that if we do not continue to take it seriously,
in the long-run (and I do not want to over-state it) our institutions
could become less competitive internationally and in an increasingly
globalised environment I think that would be a concern. I think
as well we constantly have to monitor and watch to ensure that
this does continue to be bottom up with strong engagement from
universities themselves, not top down, and that it is about comparability
and it is not about standardisation. For example—I am sure
we will come on to this—I think there are some concerns
in the way that the European Credit Transfer System operates.
We have made representations to the Commission. Those are currently
being looked at, but I think we need to ensure it is not about
standardisation, it is not about uniformity, it is about translation:
if you have undertaken a higher education qualification in the
University of London, that it is actually comparable in terms
of what it means with the Sorbonne or elsewhere in the broader
Europe.
Q134 Chairman: Even those of us who
are pretty strongly pro European are aware that education is not
part of the Commission's remit. You have just said you have written
to the Commission. What the hell has it got to do with them?
Bill Rammell: In terms of a formal
and over-arching role, the Commission does not have that; nevertheless
it is represented within the Bologna Process. Bologna is much
wider. After this year's conference it is likely to be 46 countries
as compared to the 27 within the European Union, but the Commission
does have a role. The overarching qualifications framework within
the European higher education area is agreed at the Bologna Conference.
One of the things that was first raised in the Berlin Conference
and then reinforced at the Bergen Conference was that it would
be useful to have a system of credit transfer to apply to that
overall framework. The only credit transfer system that is in
existence at the moment is the European Credit Transfer System,
which originally arose out of the Erasmus Programme. I think that
one level can be useful, and certainly a majority of UK higher
education institutions do use it as a translation device, but
I think there are a number of areas where that goes too far, it
moves in the wrong direction, and we have made representations,
as indeed have other Member States, and very welcomely the Commission
is looking at that in the first part of this year and has agreed,
importantly, to involve Member States within that.
Chairman: We are going to drill down
on that. Stephen.
Q135 Stephen Williams: Good morning,
Minister. When we had Universities UK in last week they said that
the Bologna Process was a sector-led initiative, a bottom up process.
Is that how you see it?
Bill Rammell: Yes, I do. Let me
be clear from the beginning. At an important level it is inter-governmental,
in that the signatories on the document are governments, it is
the Minister responsible for higher education who applies for
their country to become part of the Bologna Process, but the Bologna
Declaration itself makes explicitly clear that the involvement
of higher education communities is crucial for the success of
the overall process. I think, thus far, a major part of its success
has been that it has been bottom up and voluntary and respectful
of higher education autonomy. At the Bologna level universities
are involved, for example through the European Universities Association.
Within this country the major driver of this is the UK Higher
Education Europe Unit, which is owned by Universities UK and the
funding councils. For example, at the Bergen Conference two years
ago, in negotiating the detail of this, I sat side by side with
Drummond Bone, the President of EU UK, and that will be the case
in London this year, and we do work hand-in-glove with our universities
in this country.
Q136 Stephen Williams: If what you
said is right, that there will be 46 higher education ministers
taking part in this conference in May in London later this year,
is that a model that all your fellow higher education ministers
adopt across the Bologna area?
Bill Rammell: I would be stating
the obvious if I said that working in any arena where you have
got 46/47 higher education ministers or, indeed, any ministers,
is a challenge, and, bluntly, that is a challenge that we face
in the European Union at the moment. When we move to a Europe
of 27 it is even bigger within the larger number of countries
that we have got. However, in terms of this being bottom up, there
are different systems of higher education across the European
Union. One of the reasons that, I think, we have been very successful
in this country, arguably, compared to others elsewhere in Europe,
is because of that respect and concern for autonomy at universities
that they drive their own vision, they are responsive to the market
in a real sense. That is less so elsewhere in Europe. Nevertheless,
the framework that we have all signed up to does respect that
autonomy. What we need to do is to watch it very carefully and
monitor it and ensure that at that supra-national level that respect
for autonomy is maintained.
Q137 Stephen Williams: What I would
like to get at, Chairman, is the UK's model of higher education
institutions being autonomous bodies that jealously guard their
independence and that you are, therefore, a light-touch higher
education minister, perhaps, compared to your European counterparts.
Is there scope for tension within the Bologna Process because
of that if overseas universities are a little bit more state-controlled?
Bill Rammell: As long as we watch
it carefully, I do not think that that difference in cultural
approach to this affects the over-arching international framework.
However, there is a difference in terms of the way these issues
are delivered within nation states. For example, the Diploma Supplement
(which I am sure we will come on to), we are strongly urging the
UK higher education institutions to use that supplement as a key
means of translation across the broader Europe. However, we cannot
stipulate that. In some countries the Ministry for Education will
simply say every university has got to sign up to this. They are
able to do that. That is a different kind of system. I happen
to think our system is preferable; nevertheless I do not think
it impedes the way that we are addressing these issues.
Q138 Stephen Williams: Whatever the
outcomes of the ministerial conference later this year be, you
might seek such a clarification that broad policies are the responsibility
of the team of ministers but the actual implementation and detail
of the degree programmes, and so on, is fundamentally a matter
for the on-the-ground institutions?
Bill Rammell: In terms of the
importance of reform, more generally, of higher education within
Europe, that is something that we have strongly argued for, and
we will use opportunities within the conference to pursue that
argument. The model that we have in this country of autonomy,
of mission specialisation, of a broader funding base, a close
connection with the economy, we started that debate at the Hampton
Court summit when we had the EU Presidency. We will continue that
and we will look for opportunities within the Bologna Conference
to put those views forward. Nevertheless, I would not want to
create an impression that the fact that not everybody is yet at
that position within other European countries actually imposes
a burden on us in the way that we take these things forward, because
I do not think it does.
Q139 Stephen Williams: I know Fiona
wants to ask about the EU, so I will lead her into that and then
hand over. The Minister mentioned the role of the Commission.
When we were in Australia looking at higher education over there,
there was a real tension in between the federal governments that
constitutionally had no remit over education and the state governments
that did. Bologna has a wider family membership than the EU. Nonetheless,
the Commission appears to be getting involved in it. Yesterday
the Minister and I were discussing the European Institute of Technology,
which appears to be another area where the EU is getting into
education which constitutionally is supposed to be outside its
remit. Is there a danger here of mission creep by the Commission
in Brussels?
Bill Rammell: As a convinced,
constructive pro European who sees the benefits of nation states
across Europe working together where you can achieve more together
than you can achieve on your own, nevertheless I do recognise
what you say when you talk about the danger of mission creep.
I think the Commission has a role within this process. It is not
a leading or a guiding role and there are all sorts of other issues,
but this is much wider than the European Union. Nevertheless,
we do need to monitor that role. For example, when you look at
the European Qualifications Framework—it is a separate issue
but it links into Bologna—which covers qualifications much
wider than just higher education qualifications, I think there
is sometimes tension that the Commission may be attempting to
overstep its competence in that area. We have pushed back strongly
on that issue. Also the European Credit Transfer System which
I talked about, the credit transfer translation device, I think
in a number of areas has actually gone too far, and we have pushed
back very strongly on that and we are getting a review. I think,
as is often the case within the European Union, you have to watch
this issue very carefully and where you have a concern you have
to intervene on it.
|
