Discussion was brief and confused at the March 4 Governing Council meeting that approved a new policy dictating how U of T disposes of unethical stocks. Although the meeting was the third hearing of the hotly-debated policy, representatives of both students and staff on U of T’s highest governing body were misinformed about what the policy actually says. One governor has since said that student and staff representatives on the body have so little voting power that it may not be worth their time to keep up to date on board affairs.
The divestment policy was a revision of one the University Affairs Board rejected last November. On Feb. 2, UAB approved a modified version, which requires the president’s committee to be approved by the GC. The modified proposal also contained a preamble stating that divestment from social and political issues must reflect the neutrality of the university on most matters.
“You know what? I must confess my ignorance on that issue,” said governor P.C. Choo after the meeting. Choo abstained from voting on the policy.
“My other concern is this: I am one of two governors representing staff. There are eight students. Combined, we will still lose, because there are 40 other governors,” said Choo.
The recently approved divestment policy does away with a committee of five governors, replacing them with an advisory committee of financial experts selected by the president to make divestment recommendations.
Ken Davy, a part-time student representative on GC, asked a question presuming that the advisory committee would consist primarily or wholly of social justice experts rather than financial ones.
U of T’s VP business affairs Catherine Riggall fielded that question. Without stating that the advisory committee would not consist of any social justice experts, she noted that “There’s also no reason that other people can’t be consulted.”
“In past committees where we’ve looked at [divestment] issues […] we have in fact consulted outside to get other people’s expertise when necessary,” said Riggall.
“I did not have a solid understanding of the advisory committee,” said Davy after the meeting. “I’ve been very involved with trying to get some essays done.”
Susan Eng, the other governor who posed questions to council about the policy, seemed to be under the impression that the university gave its investments ethical prescreening. President Naylor corrected her at the meeting.
Thomas Felix, co-chair of the Responsible Investment Committee, told The Varsity that he had hoped to give governors a briefing on the policy’s background before the vote, but RIC received no speaking time at the GC meeting because it apparently gave too short notice.
“There was clearly an inability to inform the governors as we’d hoped before the meeting,” Felix said. “Having not been able to get on the agenda, for lack of sufficient notice, we had nonetheless prepared [a] document and a Powerpoint to briefly summarize and clarify such misconceptions.”
RIC was not allowed to show their Powerpoint presentation at the meeting, for procedural reasons.
