Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

Universities' autonomy is not to be trifled with

CLAIRE MORRIS

From Friday's Globe and Mail

Latest comment posted at 3:01 AM EST 12/08/08

Historically, there has been a struggle for university autonomy, arising from the conviction that a university can best serve the needs of society when it is free to do so according to the dictates of the intellectual enterprise itself ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. Jim Q from Halifax, Canada writes: Without autonomy, nothing a professor, researcher or university says can be taken seriously.

    Imagine if Stockwell Day could micromanage biology departments? Or if Pauline Marois could micromanage History departments? Or if Layton could micromanage economics departments?

    Universities provide us with interpretations we sometimes disagree with, yes, but first and foremost they provide us with facts we cannot always get for ourselves. Without these independent sources of information, our democracy would be doomed.

    Williams' misplaced micromanagement is a dangerous step in the wrong direction.
  2. Richard E. Gower from Ottawa, Canada writes: Newfoundland and Labrador was wrong in their decision to interfere in the Memorial Univerisity hiring issue. This is a clear case of government crossing over its own lane into territory where it does not belong.
  3. Edward Vickers from Edmonton, Canada writes: The Premier of NL is not'micromanaging' the university simply by insisiting on authority already in place to choose a presiden. Laying the foundation for interference on this factor is blatant political bullshit at its best. Mr Williams has no intention of interferring in the 'Biology' department of Memorial University. Formulating an argument of the absolutist fallacy of all or nothing is false. NL has some unique problems both social and economic that require extraordinary solutions. Mr Williams is tackling some of these extraordinary problems in a somewhat 8undemocratic manner but let us give him the benefit of the doubt. Memorial University is a bloated institution with a fixed gaze like most universities in Canada and is generally out of touch in cooperating with Government to solve some of these social and economic problems. Mr Williams is simply insisting on the authority already in place to create an environment of shifting paradigms in an earnest attempt to finally give NL a chance to join the 21 century. Yes I am somewhat concerned with the undemocratic nature of some of his decisions. However, I am certainly willing to admit that extraordinary problems sometimes require extraordinary solutions even though they may cause some temporary damage to true democracy. I think there is a bit of Shakespeare in the loud and shallow protests coming from the university crowd.
  4. R Miller from Halifax, Canada writes: Good!

    Get off the public payroll and gain some real 'autonomy.'

    There's also that pesky little issue of a Provincial law in NL saying that MUN requires approval of the government of the day for the President so why don't y'all get too work on that instead of your pie in ideas like 'educational autonomy.'

    Funny that NL has prospered under Williams direction in recent years and I would trust this particular Rhodes scholar to have a productive say in the choice of President of one of my alma maters...

    With MUN, NL saw 80 something years and virtually no economic improvements to the Province or public well being.

    Good for Williams in being involved in this to try and get a star candidate in their.

    I wish him continued good luck in this process.

    Cheers
  5. Inmate #18330-424 from Coleman Federal Prison, United States writes: Piffle.

    Universities in Canada have never been independent. They are state institutions. Academic's imaginary pretenses notwithstanding.
  6. Inmate #18330-424 from Coleman Federal Prison, United States writes: Richard E. Gower from Ottawa, Canada writes: Newfoundland and Labrador was wrong in their decision to interfere in the Memorial Univerisity hiring issue. This is a clear case of government crossing over its own lane into territory where it does not belong.

    ==========================

    The legislation says the government DOES have that authority.
  7. Karen J Cao from TORONTO, Canada writes: I think the problem is more serious with the intervention of the corporate sector into research (than the public sector), the reason being the ever declining funding from the public sector, universities are forced to look at the private sector and research done under those funding are often muzzled if it contradicts the wishes of that corporation or is done in solely their interests (usually to make profit) and not that of the public good

    there are examples of good corporations of course, however there is a SERIOUS problem with the current model of funding and influences from teh private sector for research - and it is all due to the declining public investments - these issues can't be trivialized, I am greatly disappointed in this article's failure to mention it

    .... then again, does it have to do with teh fact that I live in Ontario and my university struggles to get public funding and so gets instead LOTS of private funding, while our province gives a net $20 billion to other provinces to the point where somehow the maratimes and atlantic provinces (who are suppose to be 'poor' and in need of these equalization payments) are able to support over a dozen universities and colleges while we struggle to support adequately ours?

    just my experience
  8. A Reader from Canada writes: Will Memorial University, from this day forward, not keep silent on the giveaway of Newfoundland and Labrador's raw natural resources until the province first creates a real market economy that is befitting of its natural resource status?

    Memorial University was complicit with regard to the exporting of the province's natural resource by the mere fact it didn't say a word to the contrary.

    Someone has to assure that this NEVER happens again.
  9. Richard E. Gower from Ottawa, Canada writes: To: Inmate #18330-424 from Coleman Federal Prison, United States who wrote: The legislation says the government DOES have that authority.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The thing about some decisions that are made because legislation allows them to be made is that while they may be legal, they are not right. You may call academic freedom a pretense, but so are most of all the other 'freedoms' that we enjoy, as many of them are limited by legislation in some way, supposedly for reasons of public safety, etc. In a democratic society, legislation is supposed to be used as protection for the populace, not power for the state. When the state begins to use legislation as a club, this is misapplication. In the case of the hiring issue at Memorial University, Newfoundland and Labrador was wrong.
  10. Brian Lowry from Fredericton, Canada writes: Edward Vickers & R Miller -- privately funded universities are certainly a viable option, but are you willing to accept the considerably higher average salaries for professors that come with a public/private system?

    Personally, the only reason I moved back to Canada after getting my PhD in the US was our public university system -- I could have easily been making twice as much with better opportunities had I been willing to sell my soul to a two-tier educational system (where only the chosen few wealthy and bursary-supported dirt-poor can attend top universities).

    If we adopt the US system here in Canada, not only do we introduce two-tier education, but we open up direct, unvarnished competition with the US (much higher salaries, even at state colleges) -- who's going to pay for that?
  11. Private Unorganized Taxpaying Worker from Bolshevism., Canada writes: If the universities want to be fully autonomous, perhaps they should remove their snouts from the public trough. Granted, I went to a great university in ontario and got a solid education in part funded by the taxpayers, I also saw many a great abuse of power there.

    Registrar's office paper pushers making 99,900 a year, unionized professors teaching 2 classes a week making 200k, and a variety of overpaid janitorial and other staff.

    If universities want unlimited autonomy perhaps they should provide some accountability. Starting with admissions might be a good place.
  12. Jim Q from Halifax, Canada writes: Look, if Williams wants to appoint his President, fine. But if he wants to get a good one, then he has to stop micromanaging ineffectively. But waiting until the offers are made and then veoting? He's really messed up morale at MUN and he'll frighten off anyone with any pride from going through the same humiliating process.

    This is administrative incompetence at its worst.

    As for those who say privatise our universities: fine. That will be
    $100 000 for your BA, BComm or BSC. For less quality. Say, how many working families have that hanging around? Hey, for a Medical Degree, it would be a measily $350-500 000. Hold on, I got that in my back pocket....

    No? Well I guess university's just for rich kids. And I guess our economy will have to do with fewer doctors, engineers, trained lawyers, social workers, accountants, bankers, teachers, diplomats, nurses researchrss for cancer, alziemers or criminology, international political systems and all those lovely conservative think tanks like Canada West .....not that we needed any of these, anyways....
  13. Edward Vickers from Canada writes: Mr Brian Lowry, Where is this conversation relating to private universities coming from, certainly not from me, at least not yet. If you are going to debate my position on the issue please confine your remarks to what I said, not what you would like me to have said.
  14. J Hare from Saskatoon, Canada writes: Jim Q, but your fogetting everything about market economics. If there is a desire for a service someone will have to compete to meet that price. Universities who churn out degrees would have to compete and eventually prices would drop. Welcome to the infomation age.

    James Hare
  15. Jim Q from Halifax, Canada writes: J Hare from Saskatoon, Canada writes: Jim Q, but your fogetting everything about market economics. If there is a desire for a service someone will have to compete to meet that price. Universities who churn out degrees would have to compete and eventually prices would drop. Welcome to the infomation age.

    James Hare

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Not at all, James Hare. Capital market economics work to the benefit of money, specifically, what those with capital want to produce more capital. I could bore you with the history lesson, but we both know that every human system has its kinks and foibles that require hard work and planning to work out.

    The free market provides what CAPITAL wants, not what people want. This is crucial. Rich capital holders don't want the 'best people' to succeed: they want their children to succeed. Therefore its in their interest to fund their own children and not other people's children. Universities become less rigorous and competitive as the entrance requirements fall to meet supply. Everyone suffers as the result of declining practice in medicine, law, commerce etc.

    Public universities are a crucial part of the same classical liberal program that gives us free market economics: free and equal competition. Its in everyone's interest for the cream to rise to the crop. But if 75% of the population can't afford university, then you're cutting out a lot of potential cream.

    So choose the conservative, classical liberal option. Support affordable merit-based education.
  16. Dr, Lisa Cavalier from GravenhurstGravenhurst, Canada writes: If you want autonomons, then you structure their minds. If you want creative free thinkers, then you allow freedom of expression! It is your choice!
  17. J Hare from Saskatoon, Canada writes: Jim Q, you are trying to make a distinction that is difficult to support. You are implying that money (capital) possesses free will. Capital is used by people so this septeration is faulse. I'd point out that only a decline in Medical practicioners would be a real problem for Canada. Lawyers and Commerce not so much (personally feel better off without). On another point we all know what else rises to the top don't we? Aside from this, buissness is not longer based on family units for anything over a small or possible mid size. Larger companies require a level of expertiese in their employies. They can either hire them or train them. Both are possible. Also as education is a service (same a MacDonalads but less filling) there is commpetition for offering this service to the public. This is different from research that occurs in the same building and should not be confused. What a lot of people are objecting to is tax money being spent by Universites without democratic oversight (its our money after all). Setting up a system that says, give us alot of tax money (and we will still charge you to come and study here) and we will tell you, after the fact what we spent the money on. Many find this a bit gauling. If you accept public money then you are answerable to the public or at least you should be. James Hare
  18. J Hare from Saskatoon, Canada writes: Dr, Lisa Cavalier, I think you miss the point. This isn't about freedom of thought, just oversight of tax dollars.

    James Hare
  19. R Miller from Halifax, Canada writes: Thanks Conrad...

    Here's the deal, you academic freaks !

    We live by the rule of law... The Government of NL has legislation saying that it has the authority to veto the President of MUN...

    The academics have a bunch a egghead whiners complaining that they have a right to 'academic autonomy...'

    See if you can find that one in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms...

    Sorry eggheads, rule of law trumps a nonexistent right... I have got to vote in favour of the ELECTED Premier of NL on this one...

    Good luck in finding a MUN University President that is acceptable to both parties... and remember that Danny Boy wants a star.

    Cheers
  20. Jim Q from Halifax, Canada writes: People wonder why academic independence is important. I can think of eight excellent reason:

    1. Erasmus
    2. Darwin
    3. Galileo
    4. Descartes
    5. Newton

    The above people had to deal with government interference (Darwin excepted). They all went against official policy. And if government had directly interfered with their work, our world would have been the worse for it.

    6. the Inquisition
    7. Scope-Monkey trial
    8. the Saudi heresy laws

    If official policy is able to interfere with the acquisition and distribution of FACTS, the fruits of public research, then we are on our way to tyranny, ignorance and disaster.

    Now, Williams clearly has not gone this far, but many on this board sound like he should have the right to.

    Politicians are singularly ill equiped to make academic appointments. Their political survival depend on people believing the world behaves in a certain way (Conservative or Liberal world view, etc.) It is too tempting for politicians to suppress new research and professors that clash with their political program.

    Governments set priorities by providing specific funding for specific research and teaching programs. They can withdraw it at anytime. Universities compete for this funding. This is more than enough to ensure value on investment.
  21. Jim Q from Halifax, Canada writes: R Miller from Halifax

    If you want a star, you need to make them feel like they'll be respected. No-one wants to be a government lapdog. They'd be the laughing stock of the academic world.

    Think about it. You publicly humiliate two candidates and show that the selection process is meaningless. Would you want to go through that?

    Good luck, Danny Boy!
  22. Carbon Blob from Sector 7G, Canada writes: I believe in the principle of acedemic freedom, but at the Professorship level. Why does the President of the university have to be 'free'? They are just glorified managers and fund-raisers anyway.

    I think what is at issue here is the need to reform the post-secondary education system in NF&L, and perhaps across Canada. We need to introduce career focused institutions such as Polytech's in each province and better links between the colleges and the univeristies.

    Perhaps what is at issue here is really a resistance to this idea and turf protection by the university.
  23. J Hare from Saskatoon, Canada writes: Lets see:

    1. Erasmus 1466-1536
    2. Darwin (doesn't count)
    3. Galileo 1564-1642
    4. Descartes 1596-1650
    5. Newton 1643 - 1727

    So the latest account from the above thinkers was what 1727? Thats nearly 300 year ago? Then you list the inquisition (which one?) and the Scope-Monkey trial which occured nearly over 80 years ago? Saudi Arabia is a long way away and really doesn't apply here. I dont' think any of these are good examples and are not comparable to what is happening in NFLD. I'd go further and ask, do you know who the two candidates were who applied for the job? We know the president was on because he said so but the other? How can they both be embarrassed if a) we don't know who they are and b) were mearly rejected from a job interview. We've all been turned down for work so why should that be a point of shame?

    James Hare
  24. J K GALBRAITH from Canada writes: Inmate: Actually most universities started out as private institutions and it was only when governments realized the importance of university education either through sending veterans or for economic purposes that they began to provide significant funding

    Private: I am not sure where you get the idea there are professors taking home $200,000 a year for teaching only a couple of classes. If you look at the Salary Disclosure Act information from Ontario for the last few years, you will see most tenured profs are making between $120k to $140k at the larger universities.

    A Reader and R. Miller: This is at least the second forum that both of you have blamed Memorial for either contributing or not fighting hard enough against the economic exploitation of Newfoundland over the last 50 to 80 years. However, neither of you have provided any substantial evidence to support that view. Where is your evidence to support such a claim?

    R. Miller: While NL is doing better economically under Danny Williams, I think the jury is still out on how much credit Williams should get and how much the price of oil has contributed to a stronger economic performance. With oil over a $100 a barrel, I am not sure that even Joey Smallwood could have screwed things up.
  25. Daniel Cunningham from Victoria, writes: I'm all for academic freedom - otherwise, with the current band of theo-conservatives in power we would be teaching Intelligent Design as a science course in our colleges & universities.
  26. A Reader from Canada writes: J K GALBRAITH from Canada writes: Inmate: With oil over a $100 a barrel, I am not sure that even Joey Smallwood could have screwed things up.....

    I am sure you are right on that one, but that statistic needs to continue for a long time in order for a province like NL to catch up with the great economic conditions which have been created over the past 50 years in some of the Cdn. Provinces, like Ont. and Alberta.

    As for the statement contributed by me that MU kept silent on the exporting of NL's raw natural resources, I think I should know. I have lived in NL for as long as the province has been part of Cda. with the exception of 5 years when I lived outside of the province, and I have been very observant with the daily News and NOT once did I hear a word to the contrary from Memorial University on anything which was transpiring. If anything MU facilitated the movement of the raw natural resources to other areas of Cda. to keep economies running where the raw resources where destined.

    I remember attending an Oil symposium in St. John's put off by MU and I couldn't believe my ears what I heard.
  27. J K GALBRAITH from Canada writes: Reader: If professors do not speak out or or comment on issues publicly, then I suggest it may be a leftover drag from the Joey Smallwood era where many people did not feel comfortable challenging him and may not have thought they would be supported by the university administration. The situation where there is only one university in a province is far different than in other provinces where there are many universities and professors and other staff can have some choice at what institution they work at. In other words, there may have been a self-imposed chill against speaking out on certian issues.

    At the same time, I would reiterate my points from yesterday that Memorial did not negotiate the Churchill Fallls electricity deal with Quebec, establish a low age for dropping out of school undermining the importance of post-secondary education, or for poor management of the cod fishery. These political decisions are far more important in the economic history of Newfoundland than anything that Memorial has or has not done. Keep the focus on the right issues.
  28. A Reader from Canada writes: K GALBRAITH Memorial did not negotiate the Churchill Fallls ....

    YOU ARE RIGHT, but that should not have precluded MU from speaking out on matters which were pertinent to the good economic health of the province.

    When MU saw NL's raw natural resources migrating to other parts of Cda. and the world to create economies, it should have spoke up. My issue is why MU not take a stance and object, given that there were no real market economies created in NL and NL was forever cajoled by the rest of Cda. because of it, yet the rest of Cda. was on the receiving end of NL's natural resources.

    Why couldn't MU have made a statement to set matters in the right perspective? Either NL uses its resources to create industry or it sends it off to create economies elsewhere. Nobody can have his/her cake and eat it too. Shouldn't MU have told the province to keep the resources at home? It would have been much better for MU to have operated in a wel oiled economic province, wouldn't it?
  29. Josh Gould from Canada writes: I don't understand why MUN should be held responsible for 'speaking out' - I've no doubt that professors affiliated with MUN did just that, but it is not the rule of a university as a corporate body to wade into political decisions.

    Anyhow, the responsibility lies, as ever, with a long series of NL governments and, I should add, the voters that elected them.
  30. A Reader from Canada writes: Josh Gould - you are partially correct in saying the responsiblity lay with a long series of NL governments, but once it was determined that those governments were inept and were not performing the job that they should have been performing, then the Institution of Hiigher Learning should have ceased being silent and should have spoke up vociferiously.

    It should have been a cinch to have created a real market economy in the province of Newfoundland and Labrador, given its abundance of raw natural resources and its fine geographic location, but it didn't happen since the focus was on shipping those coveted raw resources off to other locations in Canada for the maintenance and creating of industries.
  31. G S from Canada writes: Interesting the shift of language in this story. At first the hue and cry was about academic freedoms; and some of us found that a stretch, particularly because government wasn't supressing the work of a Galileo, but exercising a veto of an administrative appointment, which right it does have by legislation, as Conrad pointed out above.

    Now the phrase is 'autonomy of the universities', which to my view would be a more accurate characterization of the issue.

    So compare to the courts, for example: because government formally makes appointments it doesn't mean that the judiciary is not independent.
  32. vanessa stirling from Canada writes: Academic freedom is incredibly important. The situation in NL has made the province look completely ridiculous and the university will have a terrible time trying to find anyone, let alone a 'star' to take on the position. The Board of Regents' first choice has now withdrawn his name from the search (as I would too, given how poorly he's been treated).

    For all those who say that the government should have a say because they fund the university, here are some facts: the province contributes about 57 percent of the university's annual budget. It also appoints about 57percent of the members of the Board of REgents. Therefore, it does have a say already.

    Danny Williams is a bully who is used to getting his way. And bullies are never good leaders.
  33. G S from Canada writes: And when people disagree with vanessa, she resorts to name-calling.
  34. Carbon Blob from Sector 7G, Canada writes: vanessa stirling from Canada writes: 'the province contributes about 57 percent of the university's annual budget'

    Where do you get these 'facts'?

    According to their 2007 Financial Statement they had $387million in Revenue and $264million of that came in the form of Government Grants, or 68%. $24million came was Other (which is mostly R&D funding also from the government); $54million came from student fees (or 14%).

    and I repeat...'I believe in the principle of academic freedom, but at the Professorship level. Why does the President of the university have to be 'free'? They are just glorified managers and fund-raisers anyway.'
  35. R Miller from Halifax, Canada writes: Geez, are you people still talking here...

    I already put my put down on this one...

    The guy with the law on his side and the legislation to prove it (In this case, Rhodes scholar, Danny Williams) trumps the whining of a publically funded Board of Regents braying for a 'right to educational autonomy' that has absolutely no legal basis...

    From my perspective, MUN should know all about these kinds of legal issues, already.

    Contracts and the rule of law dominate hearsay and whining... :)

    Jim Q... Thanks for that list of candidates for MUN President...

    Do you have a contact number for Mr. Galileo ?

    Maybe, the MUN Board of Regents should contact some of those folks that you mentioned to see if they are both available and acceptable to the elected Premier as next President for MUN...

    PS... Sorry for calling you MUN academics, eggheads...

    Cheers
  36. R Miller from Halifax, Canada writes: Carbon Blob from Sector 7G from Canada writes:

    Perhaps what is at issue here is really a resistance to this idea (career focused institutions) and turf protection by the university...

    Gee, do you think so ?

    Of course, the nurses that hospitals trained twenty years ago in a mere two years were so vastly inferior to the ones that the universities are graduating in four years today ?

    Now, we have a nursing shortage in Canada, but twice as much of the potential workforce stuck in university getting their degree.

    That makes total sense, eh ?

    The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

    Cheers
  37. too old from Canada writes: Carbon Bob right on. This position is a management position was when I went and still is. The biggest part of this is ensuring funding and pubic relations with the alumni and Gov.

    Like it or not Williams has the legal right and responsibility to oversee this process.

    What the bunch here are concerned about is that this might catch on and some others smarten up and have a look as well.
  38. Bobby Dy from Canada writes: Private Unorganized Taxpaying Worker, you have simply fabricated those numbers. Here is a link to the current salaries available at the University of Alberta. You'd be hard pressed to find too many people earning 200K. http://www.uofaweb.ualberta.ca/aasua//pdfs/Salary%20Scales%20for%20Full-Time%20Academic%20Staff%202008-09.pdf
  39. R Miller from Halifax, Canada writes: too old from Canada writes:

    What the bunch here are concerned about is this might catch on and some others smarten up and have a look as well.

    It sure is starting to seem that way !
  40. john chuckman from Canada writes: Danny Williams has all the instincts of a thuggish tyrant.

    He has no business in the university's properly conducted affairs.

    Of course, he also had no business taking down the national flag over a money issue, teaching the children of his province that you get what you want by throwing a tantrum.

    And he had no business ignoring the poor people whose cancer tests were faulty, something he was informed of early and chose to do nothing.

    It really is hard to see how the province could come up with a premier of poorer ethics.
  41. Paul Wallnutz from Canada writes: I wonder how much autonomy the President of the College of the North Atlantic has? Would any of the academics care if the province appointed this person, or is the university "special" in this regard?

    Carbon Bob is right...there needs to be better integration between the colleges and the universities, and the universities always resist this. I agree that perhaps we need a third type of institution for career type degrees like Nursing, Engineering, Business, etc...call it a Polytech if you will. The universities don't do a good job in these fields.
  42. too old from Canada writes: I have a couple of friends in the States who are full professors and they earn well over 300k and spend very little time actually teaching but plenty of time flying all over the world giving talks on their expertise.

    The actual teaching is done by teaching assistants who also earn a better than average salary then of course we have the assistant professors and admin staff.

    David does quantum mechs and she is in womens issues and you have to wonder how much they actually contribute to the State they live in. Universities are closed societies needing some politican (substitute elected) oversite.

    If Williams is trying to do this then more power to him.
  43. R Miller from Halifax, Canada writes: john chuckman from Canada:

    Yawn.

    You haven't been paying attention here have you.

    Thanks for your name calling now please move on unless you have something of value to say here.

    BTW As the elected Premier, Williams (a Rhodes Scholar) signs the cheques for MUN and in fact, he does have the Provincial legislation to prove that he can veto the Board of Regents choice for President of MUN.

    The MUN Board of Regents is just being obstructionist that Williams is trying to institute some positive shake ups at MUN IMHO. Williams is an incredibly smart man who has turned a perpetual have not province into a have one.

    Again, excellent post, Paul Wallnutz from Canada.

    Cheers
  44. R Miller from Halifax, Canada writes: Oh, and Danny Williams if you happen to be reading this...

    Might I suggest that you have a look at the Emergency Medicine Program CCFP (EM) at MUN too since we are on the topic of MUN officials being obstructionist...

    Why should it be 18 months when the standard in the rest of the country is 12 months ?

    Does NL now have so many Emergency Doctors that it can afford to tie up the services of some for an additional six months over those programs in the rest of the country ?

    Cheers
  45. G S from Canada writes: I'm amused that those arguing for academic freedom or institutional autonomy are the same ones who quickly revert to bashing the province and its premier. Otherwise, the arguments being presented are to my view merely tautological -- viz., that independence is important because independence is important. Uh-huh.

    Let's take a lot at academic freedom at MUN specifically, shall we? Only a few months back, CAUT released a report concluding that the faculty of medicine at MUN had interferred with the academic freedom of Dr. Cathy Popadiuk. "...she was subjected to continued harassment and bullying that VIOLATED HER ACADEMIC FREEDOM and damaged her professional reputation." [emphasis mine]
    http://www.popadiukinquiry.ca/

    It is MUN administration, not government, that limited academic freedom at this institution. One more reason I don't have a problem with government involving itself as per its legislated authority. Transparent disclosure is not sufficient -- MUN needs better administration than it has had.
  46. R Miller from Halifax, Canada writes: G S from Canada:

    Thanks for also noting that in your last post...

    I couldn't agree with you more ...

    There is also a very good reason that I would believe Premier Danny Williams here more than the MUN administration that many posters ("from away") wouldn't understand.

    I could share with you details of a similar experience that I had at MUN that was quite similar to that experienced by Dr. Popadiuk, but I would prefer to leave those issues in the past...

    Suffice it to say that the term, "educational autonomy" (which has no basis in law really ) could be used as an umbrella in this country to protect a group from any outside examination so they can act without any regards to Canadian law or written contracts -- In that respect, "educational autonomy" is not something to be encouraged by the Government of NL and the elected representatives that are footing the bills.

    Hopefully, the MUN Board of Regents can get to work on working with the elected Premier on choosing a new President that is acceptable to all parties.

    If the Board of Regents won't do that willingly, one should be asking, "why won't they ?"

    Cheers
  47. G S from Canada writes: R Miller, I've appreciated your comments as well. Otherwise it'd have been a bashfest, but it's actually been an interesting thread...

    Further to your argument that there is no such right as educational autonomy, I'd say the point is that there is no such thing as an absolute right. Having a right to free speech does not mean you have the right to yell "fire" in a crowded theatre, as JS Mills put it. Rights are always balanced with other rights, and an absolute right for someone could become tyranny from someone else's point of view.

    So the university's right to "freedom" or "autonomy" is going to be limited; sometimes by the conflicting rights of individuals, like Dr. Popadiuk, or sometimes the conflicting rights of society expressed through their democratically elected government, etc. As Edward Vickers noted above, its a fallacy to argue all or none.
  48. R Miller from Halifax, Canada writes: G S from Canada:

    Great post -- I am always encouraged by hearing the informative thoughts of other well informed posters like Paul Wallnutz, Edward Vickers and yourself on these threads who rise above the name calling.

    I wonder how many of these other alarmist posters are career academics ?

    For me personally, this thread did turn out to be VERY interesting and revealing about some of the actions of the saints that currently run MUN that seem to feel that they should have an autonomy superior to the Provincial laws.

    Groups claiming rights that they don't really have seem very scary to me.

    I wonder if the G&M plans a rebuttal piece to this argument of Claire Morris? Rex Murphy, perhaps?

    I sure hope so.

    For some reason, there seems to have been several failed attempts to bash Premier Williams recently.

    Not sure why that is, but it is interesting given when he is so popular among voters in NL and has done such a great job in turning the Province's finances around. NL is now a have Province while others seem to be heading the other direction.

    Change scares people, I guess.

    All the best.
  49. Jim Q from Halifax, Canada writes: J Hare: The reason that most of the high-profile fights for academic freedom are in the past is that most governments have evolved into responsible democracies that respect academic freedom, especially freedom of appointment. So you're right, Hare, this IS practically unheard of in modern, western democracies.

    The fact that this sort of thing is so incredibly rare should be sending off warning signals left, right and centre. This is a step backwards.

    And whether or not Williams has the right to be involved, we should all admit that he's become involved in a highly irresponsible and incompetent way. Either be involved from the beginning, or stay out. Keep expectations clear. Don't be a Johnny-come-lately to the process and mess everything up at the last minute.

    This is an example of procrastination and incompetence at its ugliest.
  50. Against the crowd from Burlington, Canada writes: Universities are sanctuaries for lefties who can't get real jobs. They shouldn't be independent. The recent no pro-life groups and the crap that eminates from university radio stations is embarrasingly stupid.
  51. Jim Q from Halifax, Canada writes: Against the crowd from Burlington, Canada writes: Universities are sanctuaries for lefties who can't get real jobs. They shouldn't be independent. The recent no pro-life groups and the crap that eminates from university radio stations is embarrasingly stupid.

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There are idiots everywhere. Been to any highschools or hospitals recently? How about a corporate board meeting.

    However, I'd hardly call the discovery and unraveling of DNA, the rise of modern economics, the business and tech spin-offs, a functioning legal system and trained medical apparatus are in any way "embarrassing."
  52. R Miller from Halifax, Canada writes: Jim Q from Halifax:

    To quote a great academic:

    "Don't be a Johnny-come-lately to the process and mess everything up at the last minute."

    Take your own advice -- the academics lost this thread days ago... There is no legal basis for a claim of "educational autonomy."

    Premier Williams wins again... The status quo in NL will not do.

    Academics are no more saints than anyone else. They should be subject to Provincial laws.

    Now, put up that big "comments are closed" sign, please G&M editors.

Comments are closed

Thanks for your interest in commenting on this article, however we are no longer accepting submissions. If you would like, you may send a letter to the editor.

Report an abusive comment to our editorial staff

close

Alert us about this comment

Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.

Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.