I would like to make a few points in relation to your articles on the confused and confusing situation at Trent. As you state: "the president's plan (for the relocation of two of the colleges) has support among many sectors of the faculty." You also say the opposition to the move is "equally strong," but that has not been established.

What has been established is that the president believes she and her administration have the right to make that decision. The board agrees. During a 12-hour period more than 200 faculty and staff signed a petition supporting the president's act. When the faculty association solicited a legal opinion as to whether or not there were legal grounds for challenging the decision, they were advised there was no action likely to succeed.

Finally, of course, the three judges who heard the request for a judicial review said — unanimously and emphatically — that the administration had indeed the right to make the decision. What has also been established is that there is a significant proportion of the faculty who believe that not only does the president have the legal right to make the decision but that it is the right decision to make.

Tom Booth tells us all of these parties are wrong. He is, of course, entitled to his opinion. But this does bring us to the interesting question of CAUT's involvement in the issue.

CAUT provided legal assistance for the application for judicial review, and is now providing the finances for the appeal of the judgement denying the application. But it is doing so without the mandate of either the Trent University Faculty Association membership, or the faculty association executive. This seems to many an outrageous infringement of our autonomy, and to amount to a disenfranchisement of TUFA members. Would it not be an appropriate democratic principle to suggest that CAUT should not interfere in the matter of an individual university unless and until it is invited to do so by the union at that university?

David Glassco
English Literature, Trent University

The Trent president's plan for closing two colleges was rejected by the senate. The board disregarded the senate decision and voted to proceed. CAUT believes collegial governance is crucial for universities. Upholding the rights of elected academic senates is essential to ensure universities maintain academic excellence. Because the Trent University Act is one of the strongest in the powers it gives the senate, the CAUT executive voted to provide legal assistance for the application for judicial review and has now pledged its full financial support for an appeal. There is national significance to this case. If the Trent board gets away with disregarding the role of the senate, it will be open season on university senates across the country. — ed.