Education minister Eppo Bruins. Photo: ANP HH / Peter Hilz Universities and colleges are terminating programmes, closing departments, and laying off personnel. Education minister Bruins says he does not know whether these things are the results of his budget cuts. How does he circumvent criticism?
A scenario likely to occur with some frequency in the coming period: a university cutting its expenses, and the House of Representatives demanding justification from the minister. What is his opinion, and can he address the issue?
GroenLinks-PvdA asked critical questions about a drastic reorganization at the University of Twente. In his answers, minister Bruins chooses a line of arguments that he can effortlessly apply to other examples in the future. What is he doing to evade criticism on his policy?
1: Blaming other causes
Fewer students, increased costs, local issues… The minister wants to ‘note that different factors affect the financial position of institutes’, he writes. Hence, it is not all due to his budget cuts, he claims.
2: Lack of comprehensive view
Bruins does not know whether the reorganisation in Twente is unavoidable. ‘I cannot assess what critical factors apply for specific institutes.’ He also feels that institutes need not keep him apprised. ‘I do not have a comprehensive view of the institutes’ plans regarding lay-offs or termination of faculties.’
3: Shifting responsibility
Moreover, Bruins is not responsible. Austerity measures are ‘the institutes’ responsibility’, he writes. Elsewhere, he argues that ‘how they implement (budget cuts, ed.) is up to the institutes themselves.’
The administrations themselves are accountable ‘to the co-determination and the internal supervisory structure’, meaning that he need not keep an eye on the local budgets.
4: Trust the system
A programme or faculty may be terminated here and there, but that’s all in the game. ‘I trust the institutes will make diligent choices regarding their research and education programmes’, the minister states.
5: Rerouting the problem
‘Are you aware of the impact this has on the shrinking region of Twente and its ambitions to develop into a top-tier green technological region?’, GroenLinks-PvdA asked the minister, referring to the reorganisation.
Certainly, the Bruins replied. But he diverts the concerns towards the universities and colleges, as they, and not he, must make carefully considered choices. Bruins” ‘I expect institutes to make these choices while keeping societal and regional challenges such as employment market scarcity and prosperity in mind.’
6: Calling for patience
The cabinet is aware that a drop in student numbers is an issue for education institutes in the region, especially if they are barred from recruiting too many international students. Some programmes may disappear, which has a negative impact on the local economy. This calls for ‘a plan on how to implement a future-proof range of programmes in tertiary education’, the minister states.
A future-proof range of programmes will be achieved in the future. We can only view it from afar. More funding for institutes is not an option. The minister expects ‘stabilisation of funding’ to lead to a sustainable solution, which is nowhere near being achieved.
7: Leaving no room
He knows little, is not responsible, and future solutions are far removed. But the destruction of knowledge is taking place now, says GroenLinks-PvdA. Is the minister willing to reconsider the budget cuts or, at least, offer tailored solutions for some institutes?
The answer is no. ‘The cabinet stands by its decisions and considers the cuts on research and education realistic and achievable.’
8: Letting others navigate
Bruins admits that he, as the minister, is ultimately responsible ‘for a national spread of education programmes’. He aims to investigate ‘with the sector’ how to maintain the current range and prevent programmes from disappearing from the Netherlands entirely.
But he offers no guarantees. ‘Changes in the available education programmes are normal. The world changes, as do domains and student preferences.’
He declines to take responsibility. ‘It is up to the institutes to determine how to keep education afloat’, he writes. Among the suggested options are merging small programmes, broadening programmes, and ‘offering education together’.
