**********************************************************
Following is a question by the Hon Paul Chan Mo-po and a written reply by the Secretary for Education, Mr Michael Suen, in the Legislative Council today (June 30):
Question:
There have been grave public concerns over the governance and transparency of publicly-funded organisations (including funded institutions) in recent years. Apart from safeguarding academic freedom in and institutional autonomy of funded institutions, the University Grants Committee ("UGC") also ensures that the governance and transparency of the decision-making process of such institutions can meet public aspirations, as well as the effective use of public funds. Yet, quite a number of stakeholders of funded institutions have, in recent years, raised queries of different extents on the governance and transparency of the decision-making process of such institutions. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council if it knows:
(a) what requirements UGC has imposed on the operation of the councils of funded institutions at present; whether the meetings of such councils have to be held in public, and whether the dates, agendas, papers, briefing materials, reports and minutes of their meetings have to be made public; if so, since when each of these funded institutions has started to adopt such arrangements; if not, the reasons for that, and of the criteria based on which funded institutions determine if the meetings of their councils should be held in public and the relevant information should be made public; if there are no such criteria, of the reasons for that;
(b) whether funded institutions had, in the past three years, made public the attendance rates of members of their councils at meetings of the councils and their committees; if they had, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and
(c) whether UGC will issue guidelines or implement any regulatory measure to enhance the governance and transparency of the decision-making process of the councils of funded institutions; if it will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
Reply:
President,
(a) and (b) The eight higher education institutions funded through the University Grants Committee (UGC) are autonomous statutory bodies established pursuant to their respective ordinances. Owing to their different historical background, philosophy and religious beliefs of the institutions, the provisions of the ordinances for the eight UGC-funded institutions are not the same.
Each institution has set up its governance structure in accordance with its own ordinance. Generally speaking, a council is established as the supreme governing body of an institution. Matters concerning the basic operation of the council, such as convention and adjournment of meetings, quorum, conflict of interest, transaction of business, establishment of committees and delegation of powers, are prescribed under the ordinance.
To strengthen communication with the public and enhance transparency, the UGC-funded institutions have indicated that they would make public the decisions and policies made by their councils as appropriate while observing confidentiality. Their practices and criteria for disclosing the dates, agendas, papers, briefing materials, reports/minutes of council meetings are set out at Annex 1. Their practices for disclosing the attendance records of the meetings of their councils and the committees under them are set out at Annex 2.
(c) In Higher Education in Hong Kong - Report of the University Grants Committee published in 2002, the UGC recommended that the governing bodies of UGC-funded institutions should carry out a review of their governance and management structures to ensure that they are fit for purpose. The report also set out the features of an adequate model of institutional governance, including ensuring the governing body has appropriate lines of accountability and transparency of process. All the UGC-funded institutions have completed the fitness for purpose review of their governance and management structures. Major areas covered by the reviews included the size and composition of the governing bodies, the relevant governing ordinances and applicable codes of practices. The institutions have been following up the recommendations of these reviews, including making legislative amendments.
Ends/Wednesday, June 30, 2010
Issued at HKT 14:16
NNNN