Canada's newest university is under an academic cloud as the result of a boycott by the national organization of university professors. In an advertisement placed in the Vancouver Sun and the Globe and Mail, the Canadian Association of University Teachers (CAUT) warns potential employees that unlike other universities, the Technical University of British Columbia (Tech BC) does not provide academic staff with an "assured role in determining and directing teaching and research."

The boycott commenced July 28 when Bill 30, the Technical University of British Columbia Act, passed third reading in the B.C. Legislature. The CAUT and its provincial affiliate, the Confederation of University Faculty Associations of British Columbia (CUFA/ BC), warned B.C. Education Minister Paul Ramsey in a July 3 letter that the legislation was fundamentally flawed as it lacked an academic senate, and gave extraordinary powers to the board of governors to determine teaching and research priorities at the institution. Under the circumstances, "the members of CUFA/BC and the CAUT Executive Committee have authorized severe sanctions should Bill 30 pass third reading as is," the letter states.

Those sanctions, detailed in a June 19 resolution of the CAUT Executive Committee, include recommending to "faculty associations across Canada, and to faculty members elsewhere in the world, that they not take academic or administrative appointments at the Technical University of British Columbia until such time as its governance arrangements include the provision of an academic Senate or its equivalent, and as its legislative basis removes threats to academic freedom."

"There is no academic freedom at Tech BC," CAUT president Bill Bruneau said in an interview. "The legislation is quite explicit in this respect. Faculty members at this institution will have to go cap-in-hand to the board of governors to receive approval for research projects."

Bruneau is referring to section 8(2)(a) of Bill 30, which requires the board of governors to "approve strategic program and research directions and policies, including instructional program and research priorities, program objectives and desirable learning outcomes."

"This legislation puts control over the fine details of teaching and of research in technical fields into the hands of a board of non-experts," Bruneau said. "It is really quite breathtaking."

Furthermore the minister announced that there will be no tenure at the new university.

"Tenure means that faculty have a guarantee of free speech, the right to make open criticism within and without the university, and can conduct independent research without fear of reprisals. They can only be dismissed for just cause," said Dr. Donald Savage, former CAUT Executive Director. "It is incredible," he said, "that an NDP minister should lead the right wing charge against free speech in the academy."

Education Minister Paul Ramsey has been strangely quiet on the issue, offering his only substantive comments in a July 8 letter.

"I must say that I am concerned and disappointed by the content of your letter and the actions which you are apparently advocating," Ramsey wrote. "I had hoped for, and expected, a more forward-thinking response."

Ramsey defends the legislation and the "economic development" mission of Tech BC on the grounds that the history of post-secondary education in British Columbia is a history of expansion through diversification.

"No single type of institution can meet society's diverse and changing needs," Ramsey wrote. "The Technical University of British Columbia (Tech BC) will be unique because it is intended to play a unique role in our system."

B.C. college and institute instructors are also displeased with Tech BC. In a June 26 letter to Ramsey, College Institute Educators' Association of B.C. (CIEA) president Ed Lavalle asked if establishing Tech BC was effective use of limited post-secondary dollars.

"The $2.8 million recently announced funding for the Technical University would support 450 to 500 full-time equivalent students in our current post-secondary education system," Lavalle wrote.

Lavalle also warned of the apparent duplication of existing programs, and questioned whether Tech BC is the right solution for the Fraser Valley, which is where the campus will be located.

"If (Tech BC) is intended to serve a Fraser Valley focus, it is unlikely to succeed as currently proposed," Lavalle wrote. "Building a university to deal with low participation rates, in this case, is like building a penthouse without bothering to build a foundation."

Lavalle called on Ramsey to launch an independent review of the alternatives to Tech BC.

"The appointment of an individual to study the issues would permit the government to look at different directions and at the same time ensure people in the Fraser Valley receive the services they need," Lavalle wrote.

The CIEA proposal has been endorsed by CAUT, CUFA/BC, the Advanced Education Council of B.C. (representing college and institute boards of governors and presidents), and the Canadian Federation of Students (B.C.).

Both Ramsey and Ron Dickson, chair of Tech BC's interim board of governors, have publicly dismissed the professor-led boycott of the institution.

"I don't think their campaign will have staying power," Dickson said in an August 15 article in the Vancouver Sun. "We expect to have some very well respected faculty."

In a July 2 letter to Bruneau, however, Dickson tells a different story. "We are sincerely concerned that such an important professional association as yours with a long tradition of defending the unique and special role of universities in our society is troubled by our attempts to date to develop a truly unique and innovative institution," Dickson wrote.

"Because we are of course concerned about opposition from your internationally respected organization, we would like to know what stage your deliberations have reached ...Our hope is that our two organizations may yet develop a cordial and cooperative working relationship."

"Sadly, Dickson did not respond to our offer to go with the Tech BC board to government to have the legislation amended prior to third reading," Bruneau said. "I still hope the board is interested in cooperation."

An editorial in the July 30 edition of the Vancouver Sun calls on Tech BC's detractors to "Be open to a new U," while a editorial in the Surrey Leader of the same date acknowledges the objections raised by CAUT and CUFA/BC.

"The omnipotent board, not necessarily consisting of education experts, could tailor research towards business interests rather than society's needs," the editorial states. "Teachers' hands could be tied by profit-minded corporations. Students could be primed for employers' desires rather than their own best interests."

"Inexcusably, the government saw this bombshell coming for months and chose to ignore it... Local MLAs have instead spent time arguing over location (Cloverdale vs. Whalley) when this more fundamental flaw lay festering."

Robert Clift is executive director of CUFA/BC.

For further information consult the Tech BC boycott web site: http://cufabc.harbour.sfu.ca/tubc/