VICTORIA UNIVERSITY COLLEGE

Dominion, Volume 29, Issue 255, 24 July 1936, Page 7

VICTORIA UNIVERSITY COLLEGE

« Constitution of Council PROPOSED CHANGE AGAIN CONSIDERED Further consideration to proposed changes in its constitution was given by members at the meeting of the council of Victoria University College, Wellington, last night. The general question of the constitution was raised at the previous meeting, when court of convocation wrote asking for the'council’s support of the movement to gain further graduate representation. It was then deferred till the next meeting. The chairman, Mr. P. Levi, suggested that the question be considered in committee. Mr. 11. F. O’Leary, K.C.: Why should it be dealt with in committee? Mr. F. L. Combs said he agreed with Mr. O'Leary. He had had no contact with court of convocation for years. The matter of increased representation should be taken in open council. Mr. O’Leary asked if there was any reason why the subject should be taken 1 in committee. Mr. Levi: Because the discussion will lie reported in the Press. The discussion is not a matter of public interest. Mr. O’Leary: I think it would be, wouldn’t it? _ . Professor T. A. Hunter said at the last meeting the council decided that the students should have representation. The question of increased representation of court of convocation was simply postponed to see whether there should be some further alteration. He did not see any reason why the matter should not be taken in open council. Fixed by Act of Parliament. Mr. Levi-said the council had never had any part in deciding what bodies were to be represented on the council. That was fixed by Act of Parliament. They could, of course, express their agreement 01 otherwise. Mr. Combs: Is it ojien for ue to discuss the matter in convocation’s resolution ? Mr. Levi: We can merely express oui opinion on the point. There is no reason why we should not do that.

The registrar, Mr. G. G. S. Robison,

read the letter from convocation inquiring whether the council would support an increase in the number of convocation’s representatives. The letter stated .that in 1914 it had been agreed to increase convocation’s representation from three to four. They now urged that there be a further increase of two. They suggested and urged .this increase in representation with the good of the college in view. Mr. Levi said the question was peculiar in this way, that the method of election to the council of each university college was different. Mr. O'Leary suggested that further consideration be adjourned till the next meeting. Five members were away, and two of them were court of convocation representatives who had views they would like to* express. While the electing of members to each council was different, there was a certain amount of similarity. In three of the colleges there were four representatives of convocation. Canterbury had six. Professor Hunter seconded the motion. Mr. Levi said that the question would be discussed by the representatives who were appointed by the various bodies concerned. That was the peculiarity of it. It was a delicate matter to deal with. The motion was carried.