At Victoria, everybody's getting it. The cuts, that is. In line with a decision made at University Council in late May, our share is being divided up among nearly all areas of university expenditure. Broadly speaking, it's a sensible policy. But in some circumstances it has meant that the particular importance or needs of an area have not been fully acknowledged. The library is such a case.

The library loses $15,000 from its grant and $10,000 from salaries through the non-appointment of staff. The salaries figure comes on top of the previous freezing of a number of positions, so that the library is now operating with notably less staff than it considers desirable.

The $15,000 from the grant is an even more dubious saving. At last week's Council meeting the Acting Vice Chancellor (John Tomlinson) described it as a "devaluation hedge." The library, as a large scale importer of books, needs that hedge. Now the university has removed it and the Budget has announced a 5% devaluation. By the end of the year, that figure is likely to be considerably higher.

This can only mean a significant reduction in the amount of books and periodicals the library will be able to buy for next year. Already, our library is the worst financed (per effective full-time student) of all university libraries. Clearly, the blanket cuts imposed on the whole university will have an unjustifiably severe affect on this area.

The Students Association has policy stating that the library, as the university's central resource centre, should have special priority status. This view is not shared by the university administration. The Library Committee has passed a motion alone the lines of VUWSA policy but the Committee of Vice Chancellor and Deans has not responded favourably.

To be fair to Tomlinson, the $15,000 has not been simply removed: it has been "placed on reserve." The idea is that if need for the money becomes particularly pressing, or if it is found that enough has been saved in other areas, it will be freed up.

The problem is, most of the savings this university was required to make have been made in this way. If the money is "freed up", we won't save enough. What a way with concepts these academics have.

At the forum on Wednesday (12 noon) and the Organising Meeting that will follow it, action on the library will be discussed. Come along and make your views known.

Reserves

Some other universities have met the cuts by eating into their reserves. That's what reserves are for, after all. But at Victoria, uncommitted reserves stood, at the time of the last university budget, "at a mere two percent of our annual expenditure" (Tomlinson's report to Council.) The administration has taken the view that it would not be prudent for them to be reduced any further.

How the Knife is Being Weilded

Victoria's share of the $3 million cut is $400,000: three quarters of it to come from the 1979 Jan-Dec year and the remainder from 1980. In addition, increased power charges will add about $110,000. So Victoria must reduce its expenditure by $410,000 this year. The following is taken from a report "Reductions in the Block Grant 11" presented to Council by Tomlinson.

Funds and Grants Being Placed on Reserve

The withheld monies begin with $100,000 of funds once at the disposal of the Registrar. But that isn't a padded expense account. $80,000 of it should be for the maintenance of major buildings. Our buildings are not all in a good condition; deferred maintenance, as everyone knows, leads to increased costs later on.

The rest was to be for upkeep of the grounds and site and for the acquisition and maintenance of furniture and Registry equipment. (The grounds on this campus, of course, don't need to be kept up: they should be dug up and planted.)

Over $50,000 has been taken from academic departments and facilities, including the Computing Services Centre, "for essential running expenses and equipment and materials." The Research, Equipment and Publications Funds have been stripped of $40,000. The Leave Fund has lost $20,000. the library $15,000, and a miscellany of other allocations have also been reduced.

Tomlinson states that he is "now confident that the University's financial position for 1979 is reasonably secure". He follows this with the somewhat contradictory statement that "the measures... can only be viewed with considerable disquiet."

In that latter statement, he is quite right. I have already noted that the funds "placed on reserve" make up the major part of the total redaction. Tomlinson says, "Because of the essential - on some cases critical part that the majority of these allocations play in maintaining the University's fundamental activities, a primary objective in the forthcoming months will be to ensure that these reserved funds are returned in full to the parent funds at the earliest possible date." He also says, "In the event that the financial outcome of the economy and salary saving measures described in b) and c) (running expenses and salaries - see break-down above), assessed in conjunction with the block grant funding provided for 1980, is inadequate to enable the full restoration of the majority of the reserved allocations, the University's situation will be one for the deepest concern." (the 1980 grant hasn't been announced yet, but you can stake the Minister's salary that it won't be good.)

[unclear: ings] on Running Expenses

[unclear: includes] such items as cleaning, power and fuel, [unclear: g] and stationery. Several staff members have [unclear: ap-ly] suggested that their rooms should only be [unclear: clea-kly]. In fact, this his been the practice with most [unclear: e] time. Tomlinson notes that "many of these of economy have been thoroughly explored [unclear: du-e] lean years of the present quinquennium."

[unclear: also] says, "It may prove difficult to identify and [unclear: y] the results of this complex exercise, but I hope [unclear: e] reduction in budgeted expenditure may reach [unclear: 0]." Note "I hope may reach". The expectation [unclear: onal] savings being made so that areas like the can have their funds released is clearly [unclear: unrea-]

[unclear: ary] Savings

Some years now, the University has been care- [unclear: nsidenng] the overall needs of the university when [unclear: fing] position becomes vacant. Part of the aim freeze positions that might not have priority [unclear: sta-thus] save money. That process has now been [unclear: d] so that no appointments are being made [unclear: ex-ose] of the utmost urgency.

At present, New Zealand universities are 540 academics short compared to 1974 levels. This figure will inevitably rise rapidly, leading to: increased loads for those staying, reduced curricula and straight out cuts in the number of students entering universities. Unlike some education areas, student numbers are still rising and are expected to do so (if no restrictions are imposed and it doesn't become economically impossible for potential students to come) well into the 1980s.

In the last two months, approval for filling posts has been withheld in Accountancy Education, Law, Political Science, the Centre for Continuing Education and the Computing Services Centre. Probably many others have not even been advertised. Approval has been given for filling other positions in Accountancy, Business Administration, Education, History, Law and the Registry and Library.

Overall Objectives

This university, officially, continues to take the cuts more or less lying down. Come along to the forum on Wednesday and find out why. Tomlinson will be there.

Simon Wilson.