The administrative integration of the hospital and the university was on the agenda yet again. This time it related to further explanation from the University Council of the letter to the Executive Board which set out the reasons for the resounding no vote. Some issues raised in the letter: the non-medical faculties run the risk of getting lost in a ‘health university’, and the administrative integration could also have negative consequences for the Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences. Furthermore, employee participation has not been organised well; the dual role of the hospital president is another sticking point. In the plan, they would hold two board positions: one on the five-member “Executive Council” (responsible for MUMC+) and one on the MUMC+ Executive Board, including both the hospital and FHML. “This creates a fundamental conflict of roles and gives this person a disproportionate amount of influence over the whole organisation.” In short: “The question arises whether the Maastricht model actually creates more problems than it solves.”
Despite all the criticism, the University Council is in favour of a closer cooperation, argued Raymond Luja, academic staff representative.
Feasible governance model
In terms of the feedback on the plans themselves – such as the four research themes, including sustainability and a healthy society, and the choice for a combined student welfare centre in Randwyck – that won’t be truly relevant until there is a feasible governance model, said Luja. The proposed model “hampered discussions of that”.
How forward?
“How can we move forward from this,” Teun Dekker, chair of the University Council, asked the Executive Board. Habibović: “We have not received all the responses yet [the response from the hospital Staff Council came a day later]. As soon as we have, we will analyse them and formulate a response.” She expects that response will be completed before the next University Council (committee) meeting (8 or 22 April).