You may not listen to your teacher, but what if you had 60,000 of them? That is how many academics the Canadian Association of University Teachers (CAUT) claims to represent.
In two months they will begin deciding whether to censure Carleton. A censure means 60,000 teachers, librarians, and researchers across Canada would be told not to work at our university. Why?
In 2010, Carleton received $15 million to create a new graduate program in political management. The program launched in 2011 with money from Clayton Riddell and direction from Preston Manning, former leader of the federal Reform Party.
The program was described as cross-partisan, but faced accusations to the contrary. The donor agreement was eventually released.
It was discovered that Riddell and Manning together had effective approval of the program’s budget and hiring decisions. Through the program’s steering committee they could also advise on curriculum, scholarships, and bursaries.
The university revised the agreement to remove hiring decisions from the committee. However, the budget’s approval remains in committee control.
The CAUT has a strong argument against the private approval of university budgets.
Universities need money, and donors are a legitimate source. But legitimacy ends when universities lose control over spending, regardless of whether that money was donated.
Donors get bragging rights and a sector stocked with educated people. They should not get financial control of a program that benefits from the reputation of a public institution.
Donors need to be satisfied, but the quality of the university’s teachers is more important—something censure could affect. Ultimately, a donor’s contribution is meant to better the school.
