Memorandum 109
Submission from Trevor Mayes
SUMMARY
My evidence is based upon my appalling experience
at the University of Wales Lampeter as a mature student in 2002-03.
I have two professional qualifications with 16 years experience
in social work, and to my cost got myself involved in an argument
in defence of the disadvantaged. In return for doing what I considered
to be a public duty I was falsely accused of plagiarism, intimidated
during an examination and falsely accused of malicious harassment.
Using my life experience and professional training,
I have for the last six years attempted to seek a remedy for a
situation that the University of Wales Lampeter considered routine
and that an expert has informed me is a typical case. I have used
all conceivable means of seeking a remedy but while procedures
are in place, there is no regulatory body to ensure that they
are complied with.
Here is a summary of the main issues.
— Academic independence used to hide maladministration
and financial irregularities.
— No jurisdiction for the financial regulators
the Higher Education Funding Council for Wales (HEFCW) to intervene
in financial mismanagement, despite claims to the contrary. The
disregard demonstrated by HEFCW for its statutory duties has led
to a situation whereby unlike its English counterpart HEFCE it
will be the Charity Commission that will undertake the role of
regulator for Welsh Universities under the Charity Act 2006.
— No brief Quality Assurance Agency (QAA)
to intervene in institutionalised abuse, and quote have "no
locus in these matters". Despite claims its job is to reassure
the public about standards in higher education.
— The failure of the Welsh Assembly to
implement the Higher Education Act 2004.
— The Visitor and OIA replacing the courts
without the same safeguards for what is a course of public justice
for students.
— The connection with the Church in Wales
that is more concerned with politics than religion, to the point
whereby its charitable status is now in question.
— The refusal of the University of Wales
to implement any complaints procedures.
— No right of any complaint to University
auditors concerning financial irregularity.
— The removal of the power of intervention
by the Auditor General under the Local Government Act 2000 by
the Public Audit (Wales) Act 2004.
— Failure of the Public Interest Disclosure
Act 1998 to offer any protection to student whistleblowers.
— Secrecy concerning student complaints
and offending universities.
MAIN POINTS
ARISING FROM
THE ISSUES
ABOVE
1. A combination of the above factors has
led to a situation whereby the truth about what really goes on
inside our Universities is kept from the public domain. Positive
change resulting from any form of wrongdoing or structural failure
can only take place if the public knows what is going on. Unlike
other forms of public service there is no public accountability,
consultation, or inquiry of what went wrong at the University
of Wales Lampeter.
2. Given recent much publicised criticisms
of public services, the public are being misled into thinking
that higher education institutions are regulated according to
the public's understanding of the concept. The fact is that these
institutions are accountable to nobody and the old adage that
power tends to corrupt is true, as these institutions have been
corrupted by absolute power.
3. I have been advised by an expert on the
management of universities that the only way to bring this sort
of maladministration to light is by publishing it in a newspaper
or journal. While this has happened and the QAA have made criticisms
of Lampeter based upon my complaints it does not tell the true
or whole story
4. Together with this false perception of
regulation, the public like to think that our universities are
beyond reproach and they must know best. Therefore, it is impossible
for any student to get any story published, as they are not going
to be believed. There is of course publishing to the internet
and having done that I was subjected to threats of legal action
and a high court injunction from both the University of Wales
Lampeter and the Federal University of Wales to conceal maladministration,
gross misconduct, perverting the students' complaints procedures
and financial irregularities etc. This use of public money to
conceal your own corruption is a nice perk if you can get it,
unfortunately we are all banned from complaining about it.
5. Having failed to silence me that way
I am now subject to being discredited over the Internet on certain
sites that have a connection with the University of Wales or a
Welsh University. While technically this may be a breach of the
Public Order Act and libellous, I cannot take action as nobody
is going to believe me in the first place. Therefore, the lack
of regulation leads to a situation whereby these issues pervade
the Internet without being resolved to the detriment of all concerned.
6. The introduction of tuition fees and
student loans with additional help for the disadvantaged has opened
up access to higher education for those who would have otherwise
been subjected to the social class gatekeeper system, whereby
mainly middle and upper class students gained entry to university.
I suggest that the reported 75% drop out rate for this category
is down to the Universities of finding some way of getting rid
of those who are not wanted or who complain.
7. What better way of doing this than a
fabricated accusation of plagiarism, after all Universities UK
held a week long conference of this very important issue. Once
an accusation of cheating has been made, then students can say
goodbye to their career and university education for nobody is
going to believe that the university has got it wrong let alone
fabricated the results. That is why I have attached evidence of
how anti plagiarism software is being used by universities to
discredit students who complain or who they want to get rid of,
safe in the knowledge all they need to do is tell lies as nobody
is going to question their academic judgement; least of all the
regulators.
8. The suggestion by Gordon Brown for mature
professionals to return to university to top up their qualifications
with a degree needs to be carefully considered and accommodation.
The admissions and induction of mature students with professional
qualifications and life experience needs to be treated with due
respect. Single parents or those with family commitments and specifically
women who are the main managers of the home must also be shown
due consideration. This does not mean preferential treatment but
the institutionalised practice of making life difficult must stop.
At Lampeter, I witnessed the deliberate setting of unrealistic
time scales for the completion of assignments to make life difficult
for the above disadvantaged groups.
9. The Students Complaints Scheme under
the Higher Education Act 2004 not only requires an independent
adjudicator it also needs to be regulated to prevent maladministration,
perversion and obstruction by those responsible for its implementation
and management. Universities should not be able to simply make
up the rules as they go along, make false accusations, add extra
requirements or tell lies concerning compliance to protect themselves
from liability.
10. Legal loopholes in the Higher Education
Act 2004 need to be closed, the findings of the Office of the
Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education (OIA) must be made
binding and penalties for perverting what is a public course of
justice must be introduced. Moreover, the regulators must guard
against Universities carrying out any act of retribution such
as marking down assignments against students who complain.
11. The Federal University of Wales must
be required to comply with the requirements of the Higher Education
Act 2004, HEFCW guidelines for HEI's and the Nolan Committee to
implement complaint procedures for students and the public to
use. I have written to the HM Queen as Visitor but as her duties
have been taken over by the OIA she cannot intervene. The OIA
cannot intervene as they have no complaints procedures, this not
only guarantees an unblemished record it also obstructs my legal
right to pursue the matter with the OIA. HM the Queen has however,
written to the first Minister of the Welsh Assembly on this issue,
his response was to place her letter on file as it said nothing
new. I have also written to the Chancellor HRH the Prince of Wales
but unfortunately he cannot get involved in personal issues, quite
how the failure of the University of Wales to comply with the
law is a personal issue is something he failed to explain.
12. The OIA is itself not wholly independent
being four fifths owned by the Universities and does not meet
the standards set by other independent organisations such as the
Charity Commission. Having said that I do not wish to discredit
any good work they have done and my comments should be seen as
ways the OIA could be improved and other models of independence
should be adopted to improve the image of impartiality.
13. Whistle blowing, legal loopholes and
failure to comply with the requirements of the Public Interest
Disclosure Act 1998. The Act with regard to trainees under section
47k is flawed as it applies to nobody. Moreover, the law needs
to change to include students blowing the whistle on these sorts
of issues, and Universities such as Lampeter must be made to comply
with the law by having a policy for public display.
14. The market dominance of legal giant
Eversheds in representing around 100 of the 133 or so universities
in England and Wales should be referred to the Office of Fair
Trading. In my opinion, it acts against the interests of students
as consumers as it may have lead to a culture of bullying to prevent
complaints being made to the OIA. Moreover, it may also serve
to prevent what academia fears most and that is the introduction
of OFSTED style inspections the loss of academic independence
and state run education. However, my concerns are more to do with
accountability and whatever regulation it takes to stop this from
happening to anyone else.
15. Eversheds were instrumental in setting
up the OIA which may account for the procedure of requiring a
"Letter of Completion" stating that the students complaints
procedures were fully complied with. Although Lampeter produced
such a letter that was a blatant pack of lies with impunity in
the knowledge that Eversheds would threaten legal action to keep
this fact from being made public. That leads to the fact that
unlike its Scottish counterpart the OIA has not as yet named and
shamed English and Welsh Universities. It has also lead to the
belief that the OIA is a panacea for all complaints whereas in
fact its criteria make any complaint of this nature extremely
difficult.
16. The University of Wales Lampeter is
a failed institution and in keeping with recent comments from
government ministers on these sorts of issues the public have
a right to know why things went wrong, and that the people should
be held accountable for their failings. This should apply to Lampeter
before any merger with Trinity University College Carmarthen goes
ahead to avoid a repetition of the same mistakes. Were the University
of Wales Lampeter a school, a FE College or Social Services Department
it would have been taken over, a police investigation would have
been carried out and those responsible for this sort of corporate
incompetence and maladministration would be summarily sacked.
17. The Public Audit (Wales) Act 2004 that
took away the power of the Auditor General for Wales to intervene
in an HEI with regard to financial mismanagement under the Local
Government Act 2000 should be repealed. New legislation should
prevent the fraudulent use of public funds to pay solicitors to
threaten students with legal action in order to conceal individual
and corporate maladministration, contrary to the Company Act 2005
and relevant Charity Acts. Clearly, this relates to staff and
officers of a university telling lies with regard to compliance
with procedures so they can then come under the protection of
the university and receive free legal assistance to conceal their
own corruption. Moreover, I have evidence that University Councils
or the Audit Committee are deliberately lied to by officers obtain
funding to defend legal action or a tribunal to conceal maladministration.
As the law stands, there is nothing to stop this blatant act of
fraud from happening or hold the offenders to account.
18. The role of the Church in Wales regarding
the governance of Higher Education Institutions and its involvement
in political activity needs to be reviewed. The involvement of
the Archbishop of Wales in the political pressure group Tomorrows
Wales to change the way we are governed is not illegal. The issue
is that political activity is not a charitable purpose, and should
such a political pressure group be involved in the management
of any form of education, which demands 100% compliance with charity
law. Politics was in my opinion one of the reasons why the then
Visitor to the University of Wales Lampeter Carl Cooper dismissed
my complaint after three years of pressure, which included the
absurd act of taking out a claim against him in the county court
for Malfeasance in Public Office to force him to hear my complaint.
Many people like myself feel very strongly that as we are a secular
country the Church should stay out of politics.
19. Going to university is a very big undertaking
and given the structural disadvantage students face with regard
to any redress for being victimised, or subject to predatory behaviour,
they should be designated as "vulnerable consumers"
for a variety of reasons. The main one being that the average
student leaves university with an average debt is around £15,000
this in itself is a big inducement not to rock the boat in the
knowledge of ending up with a large debt for nothing. Moreover,
it is quite common for students to owe their university in excess
of £750, what is frightening is the use of threats of bankruptcy
or financial inducement by universities to conceal maladministration.
In this situation a student cannot make a counterclaim as the
courts will not deal with any issue that comes under the remit
of the OIA and the required undertaking by the student not to
repeat any allegations in return their "reasonable offer"
would rule out any future claim being made.
20. University Councils, its members and
officers should be introduced to the concept of public accountability
in accordance with the 7 principles of public life, guidelines
issued by the Funding Councils and the Committee of University
Chairmen. The University of Wales Lampeter is a case whereby the
University Council does not work as they do not know what their
duties are or pass the buck to avoid taking any form of action.
The supervisory role of Council lay members does not work if only
because they cannot rely on officers to tell them the truth.
21. The suicide risk to students where there
is institutionalised abuse, serial bullying and blatant concealment
of maladministration by university officers and council is unacceptably
high. It is common knowledge that such tragic actions are more
likely when the rules and procedures are perverted, lies are told,
evidence fabricated and destroyed, the complainant is subjected
to character assassination, threats are made, legitimate concerns
are dismissed as wild allegations and any form of investigation
is obstructed by those in authority.
22. There was an inquiry carried out a few
years ago that concluded the student suicide rate was average
for the population, what I did not see was an assessment of the
risk as required by any health and safety issue. Common sense
tells us that as Universities are social institutions and that
students have a purpose in life, it puts them in a low risk environment
and group, therefore an average suicide rate would suggests that
it is too high.
23. The former head of the OIA Baroness
Deech said that Universities have no sense of natural justice,
various newspaper articles have reinforced this view, which maybe
partly responsible for the "radicalisation" of vulnerable
students as there is no lawful remedy to the issues that I have
raised from my personal experience. Following the recent raids
under the anti terrorism act and the connection with John Moores
University in Liverpool my information website has received a
number of visitors using the search term "Lampeter Terrorists",
clearly there are a number of people asking the same question.
24. For all the above reasons we need for
a University Commissioner to oversee a network of university ombudsman
to protect students as vulnerable consumers, ensure universities
play it by the rules, and that the overall reputation of our universities
is not damaged by the events at the University of Wales Lampeter.
25. Please see
Appendices I,[383]
a fabricated allegation of plagiarism of 25% generated by Eve
2.4. Appendix II383 Page 1 of a fabricated allegation of plagiarism
of 19% generated by Eve 2.3 a different version of the same software
four minutes earlier. It took a three year battle to obtain evidence
of their allegation.
Appendix III383 the correct result which demonstrates
that the software is inaccurate and with the removal of the inaccuracies
of a quote and title removed the plagiarism is zero.
May 2009
383 Not published. Back
| 
