A marriage of convenience?

The circumstances of the proposed merger of the University of Edinburgh and the Edinburgh College of Art are not entirely fortuitous. Earlier this summer, we were promised a thorough consultation and told that 2013 was the earliest possible date for a merger to take place. Now, however, we hear that financial expediency may have forced the acceleration of these plans. ECA’s lack of transparency about the state of their balance sheets has led to rumours of fiscal instability at Lauriston Place. The negotiations thus far have taken place behind closed doors, leading to claims that we are witnessing a “hostile takeover”.

The merger is not, in itself, a bad idea; who can argue with a free and egalitarian exchange of academic expertise and resources? But rushing the process, and attempting to force two very different institutions together mindless of their histories and their traditions, has the potential to prove a costly mistake. ECA is rightfully proud of its small, collegiate community and its well-respected academic stature. Its staff and students will not take kindly to becoming the University’s Department of Art.

The question of representation is a crucial one. ECA’s student president acknowledges the possibility that her position may disappear as a result of the merger. There is yet to be a frank and open discussion of how ECA’s 1,600 students, with their distinct geographical and representative culture, will be represented in the new unified institution. The priority must be to ensure that they possess an equal voice; they must not feel disenfranchised or outcast. The campuses may remain physically divided, but in spirit there can be no division.

In principle, The Journal supports the merger - as long as it is a union of equals, properly considered and carefully executed. If money truly is the force driving this merger forward, then so be it: we must act to protect the future of art education in Edinburgh. In any case, improved access to various resources for students at both institutions can only make their educational experience richer. The two already share a close bond, and there is no reason this cannot continue to grow and develop to the benefit of all students and staff.

If there is resentment about the nature of this marriage-cum-bailout, however, we run the risk of ending up in a ‘staying together for the kids’ scenario - a situation that rarely ends happily.