Bulletin Spring‧Summer 2003

I n agreement w i th the Sutherland Report of the U n i v e r s i ty G r a n ts C o mm i t t ee and the government, the Task Force believes that Hong K o n g n e e ds as a m a t t e r o f u r g e n c y to ‘strategically identify and create a small number o f institutions capable of competing at the highest international levels'. The Council concurs that for the benefit of the community, and especially future generations of university students, C U HK should contribute to the establishment of such an e l i te i n s t i t u t i o n. The status quo is not sustainable, either for H o ng K o ng or for its universities, because i n a competitive wo r l d, those who do not advance w i l l be overtaken — Hong Ko ng by other cities and our universities by other universities in the region. I n the short to me d i um term there are not likely to be fundamental changes in the principles and methodology by which universities in Hong Ko ng are funded (namely, largely according to student n umb e r s ); l i k ew i se the level o f such f u n d i ng is not l i k e l y to i mp r o v e. Thus the resources required to achieve excellence can only come w i t h r e l a t i v e ly large student numbers, w h i c h w i l l a l l ow a u n i v e r s i ty to a c h i e ve economies o f scale, to command critical mass, to offer a sufficiently wide range of courses, and to exert influence. But the present size of universities in Hong Ko ng is too small for this purpose, and there is little chance in the foreseeable future for the university sector in Hong Kong to expand further. Given these constraints, the Task Force is of the view that integration between C U HK and another university of comparable strength and mission wo u ld be a good way to achieve this goal. This constitutes a strong prima facie case to pursue integration w i th HKUST. The integration wo u ld be desirable, and i f the right conditions were provided, also feasible. Nevertheless, in the event of an integration between C U H K and H K U S T, there w o u ld be many issues and difficulties w h i ch cannot be addressed by C U H K alone, in particular the resources r e q u i r ed f or a r e l a t i v e ly smo o th transition. The C o u n c il o f C U H K h o p ed that the g o v e r nme nt w o u l d take these matters into consideration and give the University its response as early as possible. Task Force to Advise on Institutional Integration Membership* • Dr. Lee Hon-chiu, chairman of the Council (Chairman) • Dr. Edgar W.K. Cheng, Council Member • Mr. Roger K.H. Luk, Council Member • Mr. Anthony Neoh, Council Member • Prof. Kenneth Young, Pro-Vice-Chancellor • Prof. Liu Pak-wai, Pro-Vice-Chancellor • Prof. Jack C.Y. Cheng, Pro-Vice-Chancellor • Prof. Rance P.L. Lee, Head, Chung Chi College (representing the colleges) • Prof. P.C. Ching, Dean, Faculty of Engineering (representing the faculties) • Prof. Richard M.W. Ho, Registrar • Mr. Jacob S.K. Leung, Secretary of the University (Member and Secretary) • Mr. Terence C.W. Chan, Bursar • Ms. Yan Hau-yee, Lina, chairman of the Convocation • Prof. Kwan Hoi Shan, president of The Chinese University of Hong Kong Teachers' Association • Mr. Li Wing-yuen, Aaron, president of The Chinese University of Hong Kong Staff Association • Mr. Cheung Yiu Kuen, president of The Chinese University of Hong Kong Students Union (until 28th February 2003) • Mr. Mak Kwan-wing, provisional president of The Chinese University of Hong Kong Students Union (from 1st March 2003) • Mr. Lee Hok-bun, second student representative of The Chinese University of Hong Kong Students Union • Mr. Chiu Chun-hung, representative of the postgraduate students nominated by the Dean of the Graduate School after due consultation *ln their official capacities as indicated The Council of C U HK was appreciative of the efforts made by members of the Task Force, whose recommendations were made after months o f extensive study and objective, rational and careful deliberation. The Council also thanked all staff, students, alumni and other members of the University who had contributed their views on such an important matter, which wo u ld affect the University's future development. For details of the Report of the Task Force to Ad v i se on Institutional Integration, please c o n s u l t h t t p : / / w w w . c u h k . e d u . h k / d o c / i i/ report0328e.pdf. Institutional Integration 27