DA L H O U S I E U N I V E R S I T Y
A P P R O V E D M I N U T E S
O F
S E N A T E M E E T I N G
SENATE met in regular session on Monday, 23 September 1996 at 4:00 p.m. in the University Hall, Macdonald Building.
Present with Mr. Colin Stuttard in the chair, were the following:
Adams, Andrews, Apostle, Archibald, Birdsall, Bleasdale (Secretary), Bradfield, Brett, Cameron, Camfield, Conrod, Dickson, Doolittle, Egan, Farmer, Hartzman, Hobson, Hooper, Kay-Raining Bird, Kiang, Kimmins, Klein, Lee, Maloney, McIntyre, Moore, Morrissey, Oore, Patriquin, Pereira, Ricketts, Rosson, Ruedy, Scassa, Siddiq, Sutherland, Taylor, Traves, White, Wrixon.
Regrets: Clark, Lovely, Russell, Shafai, Starnes.
96:097.
Call to Order
Mr. Stuttard called the meeting to order.
96:098.
Adoption of the Agenda
Mr. Stuttard noted that the nominations under item 4 were not directly from the Nominating Committee and would be presented by the Secretary. The Agenda was adopted as amended.
96:099.
Approval of Minutes of Previous Meeting
At page 13, line 6, the word "explained" was inserted after "Ms. Hobson", and the minutes of the 9 September Senate Meeting were adopted as amended.
96:100.
Matters Arising
Mr. Stuttard pointed out that, in response to Mr. Andrews= question concerning information flow, at 96:092 in the Minutes of the 9 September Senate Meeting, the Chair, or anyone else, could have noted that the relevant excerpts of the draft minutes of Senate committees are frequently circulated with Senate agendas, as was the case for the issue under discussion. The Steering Committee minute 96:027 from the June 7 Meeting, referring to an ad-hoc committee on Senate Regulations, was included with material for the 8 July Senate Meeting.
Mr. Kimmins congratulated the new Secretary of Senate on the excellent minutes; Senate always seemed very fortunate in the quality of its secretaries.
96:101.
Senate Nominating Committee - Nominations
Ms. Bleasdale moved
that Senate approve the nominations of Tom Cromwell,
Donna Meagher-Stewart, Frank Lovely, Hermann Wolf,
Julia Wong and Gordon Beanlands to the University Tenure
Panel.
After the requisite calls for further nominations, Mr. Stuttard declared the proposed individuals elected.
Ms. Bleasdale moved
that Senate, on the recommendation of the Dean of Law, appoint Candace Malcolm to serve on the Panel of Student-Discipline
Officers for the term September 1996 to August 30, 1997.
After the requisite calls for further nominations, Mr. Stuttard declared Candace Malcolm elected to the Panel of Student-Discipline Officers.
96:102.
Annual Reports
Mr. Stuttard introduced the 1995/96 Annual Reports that had been distributed with the agenda for the 9 September Senate Meeting. Mr. Bradfield moved
that Senate receive the Annual Reports of the Senate
Discipline Committee, the Senate Committee on Instructional
Development, and the Senate Library Committee.
As a member of the Senate Committee on Instructional Development, Mr. Lee wished to express his personal disappointment that the student representative had not attended any of the Committee meetings. This Committee demonstrated Dalhousie's commitment to teaching and the enhancement of teaching, and both the University and the student body would benefit from regular student representations at its deliberations. Ms. Conrod voiced similar concerns about the difficulty of getting the student member to attend meetings of SAPBC, a committee which regularly addressed issues with a direct impact on students, such as proposed tuition increases and teaching. Mr. Birdsall was equally disturbed that the student representative did not attend the Senate Library Committee meetings, since students were the biggest users of the libraries. He hoped the student government could encourage student representatives to turn out to all Senate committees. Mr. Adams, on behalf of the DSU, apologized for past attendance failures, and hoped to remedy the problem for the future.
In response to a question concerning that part of the Library Committee's Report dealing with the challenges facing scholarly communication, Mr. Birdsall assured Senators that what he called the crisis in scholarly communication was, indeed, a priority for the coming year. The libraries were preparing a strategy document concerning alternative methods for dealing with the problem at Dalhousie, and would be presenting their recommendations to the Senate Library Committee, he hoped in October, and subsequently to Senate.
The motion was CARRIED.
Senate received the Annual Reports of the Senate Discipline Committee, the Senate Committee on Instructional Development, and the Senate Library Committee.
96:103.
Dal/TUNS Merger
Mr. Stuttard drew attention to the notice of motion which had been submitted by Mr. Traves and circulated to members by e-mail. Mr. Traves moved:
that Senate approve the establishment of a Search Committee for a Dean
of Computer Science, composed as follows:
1. Four members of the Computer Science Faculty (two from TUNS,
two from Dalhousie), to be elected by each respective faculty.
2. Two students (one from TUNS, one from Dalhousie) (nominated
by each respective computer science student society).
3. Two members representing the profession and industry -- one
nominated by the Canadian Information Processing Society, and
one nominated by the Software Industry Association of Nova Scotia.
4. One member elected by and from the Faculty of Engineering at
TUNS and one member elected by and from the Faculty of Management
at Dalhousie.
5. The Vice-President (Academic) of Dahousie and the representative appointed by the President of TUNS will co-chair the Committee.
6. The Search Committee will report to the President of TUNS and the President of Dalhousie.
7. If the selection of the Search Committee is made before the date
of amalgamation, the Presidents will forward their unanimous recommendation to the Boards of both Universities.
8. If the selection is not made by the Search Committee until after
the date of amalgamation, the Presidents will forward their
unanimous recommendation to the Dalhousie Board and the TUNS
College Board, in accordance with their respective terms of
reference as agreed by the two Boards.
Mr. Traves reviewed the key provisions of the motion. He explained that the architects of the proposed Search Committee, and of the whole search process, were attempting to find an ad-hoc method which would effectively operate, on the one hand, within the guidelines designated by Dalhousie Senate's regulations with respect to the selection process for academic officers and administrators, and, on the other hand, within the regulatory framework set out for a similar process in the TUNS Faculty Association Collective Agreement. Mr. Traves felt that after considerable consultation, particularly with the faculty members in the two Computer/Computing Science units, as well as with the TUNS Faculty Association, he could now propose a process which captured both the spirit of those documents and the wishes of those most directly affected by the process. He clarified that any additional arrangements respecting Board powers would be subject to subsequent agreements between the Board at Dalhousie and the Board at TUNS. The arrangements had been approved by our colleagues at TUNS, and now awaited approval by the Dalhousie Senate.
Mr. Kimmins laid before Senate a concern which had been brought to his attention by the Chairs in the Faculty of Science, and a concern which he shared: that the Faculty of Science was a stakeholder in the area of Computing Science, yet would not have representation on the proposed committee. The evolution of the discipline of Computing Science suggested the value of representation on the committee from the Faculty of Science. As a discipline at Dalhousie, Computing Science had begun in the early 1980s within the Faculty of Science, and continued to be housed within the Faculty of Science. In 1981, Computing Science became a division within the Department of Mathematics, Statistics and Computing Science. In contrast, at its inception at many universities, Computing Science had been seen more as a technical training, and consequently had been associated with Faculties and Schools of Engineering. Over the past roughly fifteen years, at most research universities, though not all, the discipline had become more closely associated with the liberal traditions of the academy, was now seen not so much as a technical training but as a partner within the liberal traditions, and was most often a constituent school or department of either a Faculty of Science or a Faculty of Arts and Science. Out of respect for the tradition at Dalhousie and for the broader recent trend, and in the interests of both Dalhousie and TUNS, Mr. Kimmins moved an amendment to the motion
that item 4 be amended to read ATwo members elected by and
from the Faculty of Engineering at TUNS, one member elected
by and from the Faculty of Management at Dalhousie, and one
member elected by and from the Faculty of Science at Dalhousie".
Mr. Traves thought Mr. Kimmins' concern was legitimate and understandable, but argued that if we followed his logic we might conclude that we needed to add a representative from the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences also, as the Computing Science discipline connected with more than the Faculty of Science. The proposed committee would already have twelve members; if we went to fourteen, or possibly sixteen, an already large committee would become hopelessly unwieldy. Mr. Traves explained that the suggestion for a representative from the Faculty of Management had come from Computing Science faculty members at Dalhousie, who anticipated a closer, stronger, and fruitful working relationship with the Faculty of Management. Mr. Traves was concerned that we keep sight of the purpose and proper functioning of a search committee. Historically, the rationale for having people from outside an academic department or Faculty participate in a search for a chair or a dean had been to inject into the process someone who reflected a set of academic intellectual interests, but not a particular Faculty position, and who might be slightly less emotionally involved in the selection process.
Mr. Traves added that another primary concern for him was the time that would be lost in taking an amended proposal back to TUNS for approval. Rather than delay the process further, would members please feel confident that the search process would involve full consultation with the affected parties and stakeholders. Short-listed candidates would tour both campuses and meet with interested groups. Would that be a sufficient method of addressing the concerns raised by the Dean?
Ms. Hobson addressed one of the trickiest parts of this search process: the fact that the TUNS's search was governed by their Collective Agreement, while Dalhousie's was governed by Board and Senate-approved policy. From our point of view, the relevant section of our Governance Document appeared to be the provision Athat consultation should be at the Faculty level", that Athe decision on the precise size and composition of the Committee must .... be left to the Faculty@. In this instance, the Faculty in question was not the Faculty of Science, but the Faculty of Computer Science to be created by the two institutions, Dalhousie and TUNS. To be consistent with the spirit of our Governance Policy, we need to respect the advice of the computer scientists.
Mr. Kimmins understood the difficulties involved in modifying a motion at this stage, and accepted that the Search Committee would consult widely. But he remained concerned that the proposed committee would represent very well the interests of the technical side of the discipline, but would lack adequate input from those who represented the interests of a liberal education.
The proposed amendment was lost.
Returning to the main motion, Mr. Ruedy shared Mr. Kimmins' concerns, partly because he did not see anybody on the proposed Search Committee who explicitly represented the Faculty of Graduate Studies. Without moving a specific amendment, he asked that those involved in the selection of the Search Committee, and the Vice-President Academic in particular, remain careful to identify, and be sensitive to, the needs of that constituency. In response, Mr. Traves reminded members that we were not talking about the amalgamation of two downtown computer colleges. We were discussing two academic departments with established graduate programs, with faculty who engaged in the full range of scientific inquiry, and who taught both undergraduates and graduates.
Mr. Klein asked for clarification concerning the constraints imposed on this Search Committee by the TUNS Collective Agreement. Mr. Traves explained that the categories set out in the TUNS Collective Agreement were essentially the same as those outlined in our Governance Policy.
The question was called, and the motion was CARRIED.
96:104.
Meeting Times - October and November
Mr. Stuttard noted that less than 50% of members had responded to the e-mail request regarding their availability for Senate meetings at 10:00 a.m. on Friday, October 11 and 10:00 a.m. on Friday, November 8. Of those who had responded concerning October 11, eleven had indicated they could not attend, one had been uncertain, and ten had said they could. Was it safe to assume that the 50% who had not responded would all turn up on October 11? Would anyone who had not responded, but who would be unable to attend, please indicate so, now. A quorum for this meeting was crucial, since it was the session for approval of degrees for Convocation. The meeting scheduled for November 8 was not as crucial, and could be cancelled if Senators so wished. Fourteen had already indicated their inability to attend on November 8, including himself. We could revise the schedule of Senate meetings to include only the second meeting of the month for November, if necessary.
Mr. Lee thought it might be a little risky to proceed with the October 11 meeting, on the assumption that we would have a quorum. If we did not have a quorum we would not have a Convocation. He added that 10 a.m. was a peculiar time for a Senate meeting, given that it conflicted with the teaching schedules of many members. Mr. Kimmins asked whether we could schedule the October 11 meeting for the previous Monday. He suspected he could count on one finger the number of people from the Faculty of Science who would be free to meet on a Friday morning.
Ms. Conrod pointed out that the Registrar's Office probably would not be able to give us the names of graduands a week earlier. In this instance, the timeline for approving degrees gave Senate little flexibility. However, she hoped the present discussion would remind members of the importance of sending their regrets in to the Senate Office when they did not plan to attend a meeting. That gave the Officers the opportunity to reschedule at the eleventh hour.
Mr. Bradfield suggested that he, and others like him who taught at 10:30 a.m., could come for the first twenty minutes of the meeting to help establish a quorum. It was agreed to advise all Senators that we would schedule the approval of degrees at the beginning of the meeting, and to request that they attend as much of the meeting as possible. Mr. Stuttard suggested we revisit the November 8 meeting at the next meeting.
96:105.
Notice of Motion
Mr. Stuttard asked members to consider the notice of motion submitted by Mr. Andrews, and distributed with the Agenda:
that the Senate of Dalhousie University opposes the
application of the Federal Goods and Services Tax (GST) or
Provincial Sales Tax (PST), or any harmonized GST/PST to the
sale of books.
Mr. Andrews reminded Senators that when the Federal Government had introduced the GST there had been substantial opposition to the inclusion of books, particulary since they were not subject to the Provincial Sales Tax. That campaign had not been successful. Over the past months the Federal Government and the Governments of some Provinces have been discussing abolishing the GST by blending it with Provincial Sales Tax. The Premier of Nova Scotia and the Minister of Finance have agreed that they are not in favour of extending the blended Sales Tax to cover books. As a result of these on-going deliberations over new ways to tax books, the "Don't Tax Reading" coalition has revived across the country. The Senate of Dalhousie now has the opportunity to make its mark on a national issue, and an issue which directly affects Dalhousie's students and scholars.
Ms. Sutherland was in favour of the motion, as far as it went, but concerned that it was limited to books, and might better be broadened to include periodicals, what we call journals, which were separate from books under the GST regulations. We could support the abolition of the GST on books alone, in the interests of basic literacy. However, if we wanted to take a more self-interested approach and address the impact on scholarly endeavours, we needed to add periodicals to the motion. Since a major portion of that segment of the library's budget devoted to acquisitions goes towards periodicals, the motion would go much further in alleviating the pressure on libraries' budgets if it called for the removal of the GST and the non-imposition of the PST on both books and periodicals. Ms. Sutherland moved that "and periodicals" be added at the end of motion.
Mr. Lee was afraid the amendment might do what had been suggested, make the motion appear directed exclusively by self-interest. If we stuck to the original motion, we would give our local Member of Parliament the moral support and the ammunition she needed to take this issue to the Federal caucus. In a meeting the previous week, Ms. Mary Clancy had been considering the question of how Minister Paul Martin could find the money to replace the roughly $150 million loss of revenue which changes in the tax provisions would mean.
Mr. Birdsall was not convinced that adding Aperiodicals" would make the motion appear one of self-interest, and if he did, he was not sure that that would be a bad thing; the University already experienced extraordinary difficulties in providing materials for both students and faculty. Mr. Doolittle moved to amend the amendment to read "periodicals used for educational purposes@. This would attach our motion more clearly to the laudable goal of encouraging literacy.
Mr. Birdsall thought we were becoming much more subtle than anyone who considered our motion would be; we would be lucky if an assistant to the Assistant Deputy Minister saw this letter. The key was to identify ourselves with the broad movement across the country. The motion should be as simple as possible. Mr. Brett supported the amendment to the amendment. Since we probably did not want to exempt Playboy and Time from the GST, "periodicals" seemed too broad. Mr. Farmer responded that periodicals such as Time might be useful at some level of the educational system, though he doubted the same could be said for Playboy or Penthouse. It would not be easy to draw the line as to what periodicals would be used for education, in which case it would be safer to leave off the amendment to the amendment.
The proposal to amend the amendment was lost. The amendment was then CARRIED.
Speaking to the main motion, now amended, Mr. Bradfield suggested that we might tell the Minister of Finance that simply removing the tax deduction for business lunches could save over $200 million dollars. This was only one of a number of tax exemptions or loopholes that could be removed to help the Minister cover the anticipated shortfall in revenues that would result from supporting literacy and education.
The motion was CARRIED.
Mr. Andrews assumed that the Chair would convey a letter to the Minister of Finance, the Prime Minister of Canada, the Premier of the Province, Mary Clancy, MP for Halifax, the President of the Association of Universities and Colleges in Canada, and the President of CAUT. The Chair agreed.
96:106.
Call for Honorary Degree Nominations
Ms. Bleasdale asked members to consult the notice circulated with the agenda concerning nominations for Honorary Degrees, and highlighted the important provisions concerning the submission and vetting of proposals. Given that the Terms of Reference of the Honorary Degree Committee had been revised recently, members of the Committee would likely be scrupulous in adhering to the correct procedures and rules. In particular, those submitting nominations should make certain they had two seconders and attempt to include all relevant information requested. The broader and more comprehensive the appended biography, the more likely that a candidate could be considered seriously.
96:107.
Report of the President
Mr. Traves reported that we have now completed the Senior staffing in the advancement area of the University. The Board of Governors had confirmed the recommendation of the Search Committee that Ms. Dale Godsoe be appointed the new Vice President for Development and Alumni Affairs. With this, and the recent appointment of Michelle Gallant as Director of Public Relations for Dalhousie, we were now in an even stronger position to press ahead with the general advancement and fund-raising efforts, and develop a more coherent communications strategy.
96:108.
Question Period
Mr. Bradfield asked whether the administration will follow past practice and put advertisements announcing this latest senior administrative appointment in the business section of the Globe and Mail and other newspapers. If so, how much would this cost? Mr. Traves would consult with the Globe and Mail and get back to Mr. Bradfield as to their advertising rates. As for the issue of disseminating this type of information, that would need to be looked at in the context of our broad communications' strategy.
Mr. Andrews returned to the question he had asked at the last Senate meeting: the implications of the Dal-TUNS merger on the conferral of degrees next April. The President's answer then had suggested that in discussions concerning the timing of the merger, little thought had been given to the significance of the date of the merger with respect to the academic year. He found it puzzling that two academic institutions whose formal academic year-end was June 30 would choose to merge on March 31. Was he right in thinking that in the discussions leading up to the merger there was no consideration given to effecting the merger at the juncture of the academic years?
Mr. Traves responded that at one point during discussion of the timing of the merger July 1 had been considered, for the reasons Mr. Andrews had outlined, though he was not sure that the date of amalgamation had a lot of significance in terms of normal academic functioning. Certainly, the implications for graduation had been considered. However, April 1 is the start of our fiscal year, and given the budgetary implications of the merger they had settled on March 31 for practical purposes. From his perspective it was desirable to bring the process to a close as quickly as possible. Concerning degree-granting, there was a clause in the memorandum of agreement between the two institutions which stipulated that we would "grand-parent the students". He assumed that any student who entered TUNS while it was TUNS, and wanted to get a TUNS degree, would be entitled to one. If students wanted a Dalhousie degree, after amalgamation, the appropriate Senate Committee would need to examine the question.
96:109.
Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 5:25 p.m.