This article was originally published on 10-2-2026 and updated on 11-2-2026, 12-2-2026 and 26-2-2026
SBE: NovUM member wants “to pause” integration
10-2-2026
The administrative integration of MUMC+ and Maastricht University should be paused. It should first be clear what the integration will mean for the students and for UM as a whole, and whether the plans won’t damage the reputation of the School of Business and Economics (SBE). That is what student member Ignacio Bellido Pazos (NovUM) said during an extra SBE Faculty Council meeting last Friday.
The faculty currently scores highly in various rankings, emphasised Bellido Pazos, but if the impression were to be given that UM is predominantly a ‘health university’, that might scare off potential SBE students. He said he would prefer “to pause” the integration.
Bellido Pazos is not the only SBE council member with questions. The faculty may not be directly involved, but it will be affected by any potential consequences. For example, why have they chosen for the whole university to be integrated (“the rationale behind that decision is a bit weak”, said council chair Huub Mudde). There were also question from members about the financial risks (will the university be held responsible for any financial shortfalls by the hospital?), and the new governance model (will the university be subject to the whims of the board members for health?).
FASoS: “I still see many red flags”
11-2-2026
Won't MUMC+ end up having too much power over the university? And what does a non-medical faculty gain from ‘merging’ with the hospital? These were the main questions raised on Wednesday at the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (FASoS), where the faculty council had organised a meeting for staff and students.
With only about ten people attending, interest was not overwhelming, but that did not diminish the concerns. “This plan is always presented as something that is good for all faculties, but is that really the case?” sighed one student. Those present could think of advantages for FHML, but what about for themselves? “Those are not clear.” And what about the board's argument that the university and the hospital are stronger together in view of possible cutbacks? “I have no idea if that's true”, said one staff member. “And even if it is really necessary, is this then the best way to go about it?”
One staff member still sees “many red flags. The deans of the faculties are losing power. They will soon only be represented by the rector within the five-member umbrella board. And what if that rector also has an FHML background, as is currently the case?” Other attendees pointed out that FHML and the hospital are responsible for the vast majority of the total budget. “How will the balance of power be distributed? Under the current plans, the question is whether MUMC+ can have more influence on UM than vice versa.”
University Council member Janosch Prinz, who also works at FASoS, agreed that there still are “serious questions”. One staff member expressed a sentiment that had already been voiced at the SBE a few days earlier: “Why the rush? Can't we take more time, so that we can build in more certainties?”
Law faculty: “Does this even comply with the law?”
12-2-2026
Just like in the FHML Faculty Council, in the Law Faculty Council, the proposed dual role for the hospital’s CEO is causing concern. “That person will soon have double the power”, several council members said during Thursday's meeting. Here, too, the question of ’why’ was raised: “What are they trying to solve with this intervention?”
Raoul Spronken, council member representing the support and maintenance staff, said he sees advantages in a closer integration of the hospital and university (“It would make it easier for me [he is a project leader at the educational institute] to transfer to the hospital”), but nevertheless expressed concern: could decision-making become more complicated? And wouldn’t the influence of faculty councils diminish? Council member Anna de Jong, representing the academic staff, had “legal questions”: do some of the proposed new structures comply with the Higher Education Act? She did not specify which structures she was referring to.
And what about the impact of the proposed integration on the Law faculty? That remains unclear, according to the student representatives. Especially with regard to the distribution of the available funds. Dean Jan Smits – for whom this was the last council meeting, as he is stepping down – said he was “not really concerned” that more and more money will soon be going to the MUMC and healthcare-related research: “The university and the hospital have separate funding streams; you can’t combine them.” What is possible, the dean said, “is to create a joint fund for shared initiatives”. He referred to the dual roles in the new governance model as “a well-known issue. I hope a solution will be found.”
FPN: “Previously had problems with administrative cooperation with the hospital”
26-2-2026
The ‘why question’ was also discussed within the Faculty Council of Psychology and Neuroscience, says chair Michael Capalbo, speaking on behalf of the council. “What problem does this solve? We would supposedly be stronger together, but we mainly see that people in The Hague are concerned about employment in South Limburg. Are you then going to strip a hospital of its academic status or close the university? We don’t really see that happening anytime soon.”
Although FPN members believe that applying for joint research funding might become easier, they mainly see disadvantages to administrative integration. “How will dilemmas such as academic freedom versus generating revenue, or curing patients versus providing education, be resolved? What will happen to faculties that have much less funding? What about the councils? Will there still be enough checks and balances? As a non-medical faculty, will you still have enough influence compared to the large medical bloc?”
Then there is Maastricht UMC+ itself, which, in the council’s experience, has not been the most reliable partner. “In terms of research, we work very pleasantly with the people at the hospital, but at the administrative level we run into problems. For example, their medical ethics committee wanted to dissolve ours, and the discussions about Scannexus [the fMRI scanners used by both FPN and the hospital] have often been difficult.” In addition, the work culture at the hospital is very different from that at the university. “Employee well-being there is not in a good state, given the recent report on social safety. In this case, will the larger party learn from the smaller one?”
Peter Doorakkers and Dennis Vaendel