On November 7, U of T’s Governing Council held its first meeting of the 2024–2025 academic year. During the meeting, U of T President Meric Gertler delivered his report, Ombudsperson Bruce Kidd discussed concerns about personal safety at the university, and council members debated a motion to condemn antisemitism at the student encampment.
President report
In his president’s report, Gertler commented on the Canadian government’s new regulations on international student study permits, and said that “the changes will have an undoubtedly negative impact on many colleges.”
Gertler noted that while other postsecondary institutions experienced a 40 to 50 per cent reduction in international students, U of T is facing only a five to six per cent decrease. The Varsity was unable to independently verify the reduction in international students. He attributed this to “a lot of hard work by many registrars and deans and people in the Provost Office to minimize the negative impact of these cuts.”
Gertler also provided an update on the university’s commitment to commissioning a retrospective analysis of the university’s experience with the encampment in May and June, noting that a third-party expert will be invited to assist with the review.
“This is something that we normally do following major incidents, and we view this as an essential opportunity to learn from experience and to inform our responses to future challenges of a similar nature,” he said.
The university has consulted with three external organizations that have “specialized expertise” in crisis and emergency management and is finalizing the selection of a consulting firm for the review. Most of the work is expected to take place this semester, with completion anticipated by late 2024 or early 2025.
Cameron Miranda-Radbord, a fourth-year student studying sexual diversity studies, Canadian studies, and critical equity and solidarity studies, is an undergraduate member of the council. He asked whether a similar external review of the sexual violence policy will be conducted in the future.
Ontario government legislation requires all postsecondary institutions to review their sexual violence policies every three years. U of T began its most recent review in October 2021 and completed it in July 2022.
In response, Sandy Welsh, vice-provost, students, said the university is “working [to incorporate] appropriate external reviewers that would allow us to move forward with our policies in the ways that we know our students are wanting us to do.”
Ombudsperson report
The Office of the Ombudsperson is an independent and impartial body that provides advice and assistance to all U of T members with unresolved concerns about their treatment at the university.
Ombudsperson Kidd presented his report for the 2023–2024 academic year, noting that the Office of the Ombudsperson received 320 complaints, slightly lower than the 350 complaints in 2022–2023.
This year, the office received more complaints from undergraduate students, administrative staff, and postdoctoral fellows, but fewer complaints from teaching staff and graduate students, marking a decline from previous years.
“The types of complaints we received were similar to those of past years, with one concerning addition,” the report read. “A spike in concerns about personal safety and discrimination following the October 7 Hamas attack on Israel, the Israeli response, the resulting war, and the ensuing protests, including the encampment at King’s College Circle.”
Lieutenant Governor in Council Member David Jacobs mentioned he was “a little surprised to hear that there was a decrease in the number of complaints.” He found that out of the 500 complaints filed with Hillel Ontario across their nine campuses, 75 were from U of T.
Jacobs noted that “there is a… crack that the students fall through,” which he suggested that the Office of the Ombudsperson recognize. He described the office’s complaint process as “very intimidating” for students.
If students or faculty have a complaint, they can fill out the Request for Assistance Form. After the form is completed, an Ombuds Officer will be in contact with the complainant within two business days.
In response, Trevor Young, vice-president & provost, emphasized the university’s commitment to providing a more detailed report on specific incidents.
“We understand that this is a shortcoming, that the data is not being presented succinctly, and we do appreciate if students or others are not feeling that they’re getting the service they require, or clarity is lacking, we will do better in that regard,” said Young.
Kidd made no new recommendations to the university in the report, but he requested that the administration provide an update on the status of the recommendations from the two previous annual reports on communication, academic integrity, and culture of civility.
Call to condemn antisemitism
During the meeting, Lieutenant Governor in Council Member Robert Cooper raised a correction to the approval of the minutes from the June 27 Governing Council meeting.
Cooper described the last meeting as a “public embarrassment,” referencing the student protestors rallying outside Simcoe Hall during discussions on the encampment.
“We were here for two hours and subjected to a mob that intentionally interfered with the operations of this Council,” said Cooper. “Encampments and intimidation are not a reasonable exercise of free speech.”
Cooper then referenced a motion from the previous meeting, which stated: “that the Council condemn the antisemitism exploding from the encampment and on display at convocation.”
The judge presiding over the university’s injunction case stated in his ruling in July that there is no evidence suggesting any named protesters or encampment members were involved in antisemitism.
At the previous meeting, Governing Council chair Anna Kennedy referenced By-Law Number 2, which requires the Executive Committee to first consider motions before they go to the council. Since this wasn’t done, the motion was ruled out of order.
Cooper claimed the ruling violated their “governing bylaw,” citing Section 53, which states: “No matter not on the agenda may be introduced at a regular meeting unless the introduction thereof be agreed to by two-thirds of the members present and voting.”
He requested a vote after moving to add the following motion to the agenda: “The Governing Council of the University of Toronto condemns the acts of antisemitism that occurred at the encampment, as well as ongoing antisemitism on its campuses. We advise the administration to implement strategies to effectively protect students, faculty, and staff from this form of discrimination.”
Kennedy explained that motions fall under Section 54, which requires them to be sent to the Executive Committee to determine whether they should be added to the agenda.
Cooper wished to challenge Kennedy’s ruling, but other members expressed discomfort voting on the motion without additional background information. The chair then requested approval of the minutes.
After further debate, members voted to challenge the chair’s ruling. Only four members supported the challenge, so the motion to overturn the chair’s ruling failed. The item will be brought to a future meeting.
Editor’s note (November 19, 1:00 pm): This story has been updated to reflect that U of T’s most recent review of the sexual violence policy was completed in July 2022.
