Frequent Flyer Gillespie Delays the Arrival of Answers

Nick Whelan

Former University Principal Iain Gillespie has DECLINED an invitation to appear before parliament alongside former university management staff and has not indicated whether he will appear in future.

Gillespie said he could not attend as he is away ‘travelling’.

Former Principal, Iain Gillespie

It has also been revealed that the university’s Chief Operating Officer, Jim McGeorge is also unable to attend as he is still employed by the university. Last week, current university senior management attended a grilling in front of MSPs, in which concerns were raised regarding potential negligence, incompetence and questionable judgement in financial management.

This comes after Gillespie’s quick December departure, in which he left with little to no explanation, and chose not to speak publicly regarding his move. Little has been revealed of his whereabouts in the last 3 months, but it seems as though he is trying to put distance between himself and the university.

Gillespie has faced significant criticism regarding his previous travels abroad. Notably, a trip to Hong Kong in which he claimed £4700 for his flights.

The next Parliamentary meeting was set to happen on April 2nd; however it is now clear it will have to be postponed beyond the spring parliamentary recess, which is between the 5th – 20th April.

In contrast to Gillespie, the former Director of Finance Peter Fotheringham, and former Vice-Principal Wendy Alexander, have said they are willing to present themselves in Parliament.

Despite former Principal Gillespie’s potential role in the accumulation of the £35m deficit, he cannot be legally compelled to attend. MSP Michael Marra said in a Townhall meeting last week that Gillespie should attend, in order to“clear his name”.

Significant questions remain surrounding the timings of departures, who knew what and when, and the extent of the financial mess the university is in. Recently, the Scottish funding council (SFC) published the terms of reference for their external investigation into the scandal.

It encompasses a broad range of investigatory avenues, with particular focus on the timings of decisions, what information was made available to management, and whether there had been misrepresentations made at the time to staff.