University board’s lack of disclosure called ‘wholly inadequate’
The University of Saskatchewan’s board of governors administers more than $300 million in public funds each year and its refusal to disclose basic information about its activities and decision-making processes is “wholly inadequate,” a leading governance expert says.
While Crown corporations and publicly-traded companies provide reams of disclosure, the provincial governments have never forced universities to be transparent, and as a result, they are Canada’s “last bastions of ineffective governance,” according to Richard Leblanc, an associate professor of law, governance and ethics at York University.
“Opaque transparency always is a red flag for possible abuse,” Leblanc said. “I’m not saying this applies to (the University of ) Saskatchewan, but you don’t know. You don’t know if there’s any abuse or mismanagement or waste at a university … And this is the trick that universities do: They put (disclosure) at such a high level that it becomes meaningless.”
The U of S, which is expected to receive at least $314 million in public funds this year, is governed by the University of Saskatchewan Act. The 43-page document outlines the composition of the board of governors and gives it broad powers to administer virtually all “matters respecting the management, administration and control of the university’s property, revenues and financial affairs.”
The board’s activities, however, appear to be shrouded in secrecy.
Unlike the University of Regina, the U of S board — which consists of the university’s president, chancellor, students’ union president, five provincial government appointees, two members elected by the senate and one professor — does not publish meeting agendas or minutes. Instead, it releases a short summary of each meeting, days or weeks after it is adjourned.
In a prepared statement, university secretary Beth Bilson said “openness, transparency and accountability are principles and values central to our university and all three of its governing bodies — university council, university senate and the board of governors.”
Bilson said in the statement that while it is not required to do so, it makes board agendas and minutes available “when appropriate.” However, she continued, “this is normally not possible in the case of the board of governors because board documents may include proposals that have not reached completion (and) items covered by confidentiality and privacy policies or legal privilege.”
“The university, through the board of governors, is committed to being a trusted steward of public resources and the public can be assured that the university and the board take these responsibilities seriously,” Bilson wrote.
That is a grave concern for Leblanc, who said that without basic information about what a powerful board is discussing, “the logical inference is, ‘What are you trying to hide?’ ” Given how much public money it receives — about two per cent of all provincial expenditures this year — “there needs to be a commensurate level of accountability and transparency, and it’s just not there,” he added.
The Saskatchewan Party government appears to be comfortable with the U of S board’s current level of disclosure.
Advanced Education Minister Kevin Doherty said in a prepared statement that good governance is a priority and while universities are autonomous, “they need to be responsive and mindful of transparency and public trust.”
“While the legislation governing the province’s two universities does not require boards of governors to publish a public record of their proceedings, we rely on board members to be effective stewards of public resources and ensure those institutions are providing the Saskatchewan public with high-quality, accessible education,” Doherty said in the statement.
Ken Rasmussen, a Johnson Shoyama Graduate School of Public Policy professor specializing in ethics, said he is also troubled by the degree of secrecy surrounding the U of S board, which he said is “where all the important decisions are actually made.”
While many universities have problems with transparency, he said the U of S’s lack of disclosure is “surprising.”
“I think that because they have the discretion, they have chosen to avoid doing this altogether on the grounds that ‘there’s nothing here to see, move along,’ ” Rasmussen said.
“(But) they should. I think it’s unacceptable for any organization that gets that much money from government, and government, frankly, has relatively little control over them anyway.”
Leblanc said he is confident that new rules forcing universities to provide the same level of disclosure as listed companies and other public institutions is on the horizon. There are no disadvantages to disclosure, as there is generally an inverse relationship between transparency and scandal, he said.
“Universities are still clinging to this 19th century argument that ‘We’re different and we have to operate without disclosure.’ It’s a flawed argument. You’re missing a potential huge advantage by saying to your stakeholder groups, ‘Here’s how we’re governed and here’s how we justify the use of taxpayer dollars.’ ”
There needs to be a commensurate level of accountability and transparency, and it’s just not there.