On Wednesday morning, the Board announced that the university will cut 30 million euros over the next five years. The most drastic measure is the proposed termination of the international track in Psychology, which attracts some 200 students annually. With this move, the Board hopes, together with other universities, to get the Balanced Internationalisation Bill (WIB) off the table. Should the bill be passed, universities fear that many English-taught programmes will fail the associated Test for Foreign Language Education (TAO) and that many more English-taught programmes will have to be scrapped.
‘A devil’s dilemma’, is how Board president Annetje Ottow and vice president Timo Kos describe it to Mare on Wednesday morning. ‘It’s our job to explain our administrative considerations behind this decision.’
What were those administrative considerations?
Ottow: ‘There is a societal call to restrict the intake of international students. From the many discussions we’ve had with various political parties and the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science, it’s become apparent that something needs to be done about this intake. It’s not just the governing parties that think so, by the way. If the cabinet were to fall tomorrow, the problem would not be solved just like that.’
Kos: ‘We don't want to be deaf to those societal calls.’
Ottow: ‘This is our response to balance the intake of international students. In these harsh and difficult circumstances, we find this reasonable. But we’re not going to negotiate. We will only abolish the English-taught track in Psychology if the language test for existing programmes is taken off the table. This is how we aim to save all other English-taught bachelor’s programmes. This has been a very tough administrative decision: it’s a bitter pill for Psychology, but it’s to prevent much worse. Our backs are against the wall and we have to choose between several evils. We’ll start phasing out the programme in September 2027 at the earliest.’
How did the programme respond?
Ottow: ‘The staff were told on Tuesday afternoon. They are angry and they’re saying: “Why me?”’
Kos: ‘We can very well imagine that this creates a sense of powerlessness and that people are angry. But we can’t make it any better than it is.’
What if The Hague thinks this counter-offensive is insufficient and the WIB and TAO still go ahead?
Ottow: ‘Then the higher education sector will shrink dramatically and we will have to face all the misery we’re currently trying to prevent. We’ll be at the mercy of the gods.’
Kos: ‘Then multiple programmes will be cut, because the language test is incredibly strict. It probably won’t just be the English Psychology track that will fail the test, but International Studies and many other programmes as well.’
Why do you think terminating the English-taught bachelor’s programme in Psychology will be enough?
Kos: ‘The universities’ assessment is that this has a good chance of success.’
Ottow: ‘We’re getting the same signal from the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science.’
The cuts will also affect the International Institute of Asian Studies (IIAS), the Academy of Creative and Performing Arts (ACPA) and the Honours Academy, among others. Why were these chosen?
Kos: ‘We finance the work of the people in these institutes, but we don't receive funding for it from the government. So we pay for this out of our own pocket and we’ll now start scaling back on that. If we didn’t make cuts here, we’d have to take the money from somewhere else. With this move, we’re protecting our government-funded education and research.’
Ottow: ‘We looked at how we could minimise the impact on our core tasks: education and research. The Honours Academy will be cut by 50 per cent over a four-year period. That’s a major cut, because we’re talking about a reduction of two million euros on a budget of four million. They offer students all kinds of extra-curricular activities and work on great and important projects, but unfortunately, we can no longer afford it.’
How will the cuts be phased in?
Kos: ‘We’re starting next year with about five million euros, which will increase steadily to 30 million by 2030. After that, we’ll maintain the annual reduction of 30 million euros. That’s about five per cent of the total government contribution. This is separate from the money we will no longer receive, i.e. the starter and incentive grants of approximately 30 million euros. That amount has already been taken out of the multi-year budget.’
Ottow: ‘To be clear: these are cuts based on the outline agreement. The cuts made by, for example, the Faculty of Humanities are separate from this, because their budget deficit is unrelated to the reduced government contribution. Instead, it’s due to a decrease in student intake.’
Will cutting 30 million euros be enough to regain financial health?
Ottow: ‘We think this could be enough, but the measures outlined so far don’t reach that total yet.’
Kos: ‘For example, we’re not sure yet what the five per cent cuts to the support services will look like. We know we’ll need to save about 6.5 million euros there by 2030, but whether that will come from, say, communications, HR, or real estate hasn’t been decided yet.’
Will the cuts affect staff?
Ottow: ‘We have to be honest about the fact that the cuts are drastic and that it’s possible they might lead to a reorganisation. But the scale is still uncertain. We are, of course, involving the participation body throughout this entire process and we will do everything we can to minimise the damage.’