“The 2012/13 audit of North Glasgow College”
Item 4 is a section 22 report entitled “The 2012/13 audit of North Glasgow College”. Committee members have written submissions from Glasgow Kelvin College and from the Auditor General regarding the report. Do members have any comments on either of those submissions?
I was surprised to learn that we must wait another three months for Glasgow Kelvin College to complete the task of looking at the remuneration committee of the college board. The college’s submission also makes a point of restating
“the commitment of Glasgow Kelvin College to the highest standards of corporate governance”.
If the college is adhering to the highest standards of corporate governance, why must we wait three months for a report? All that we want is an audit trail and a minute of what happened. It seems an awfully long time to wait, given that we wrote to the college in May.
One of the issues is the fact that we have a new college looking back at the actions of a predecessor college. There is, therefore, not necessarily complete continuity. The question should be whether the college will investigate the issues thoroughly. Whether we get a thorough report will influence what we decide to do.
Do any other members have any comments to make on the submissions from Glasgow Kelvin College or from the Auditor General, who has given us the names of the members of the remuneration committee?
When exactly will the issue come back to the committee? That might be an unfair question. Is it going to be October?
It could be. It depends on when we get the response from the college. Members will be aware that we have a strange timetable for the next three to four months. It could well be after the October recess.
Do we agree to note the submissions in the meantime?
Members indicated agreement.
Previous
Section 23 Report