In the"McGill Reporter’s" last (no.9) "Slice of life" we heard some newly nominated deans together with higher university officials talk about their opinions and reflections concerning the Alma Mater leadership. Mr. D.McCabe’s "Lessons in Leadership" (w.w.w.mcgill.ca/media/reporter/09/leadership/) represents an ideal reportage with two levels, the first giving the authorities’ views and some personal details, the second giving us a basis from which we can reconstruct the rulers’ leadership profile. The author’s approach encouraged openness and elicited the leaders’ views on their responsibilities, hard work and skills in understanding others or predicting future developments.

Thus the top administration answered two "taboo" questions: "Why doesn’t our university have a democratic election?" and "Why are our leaders paid up to 5-6 more than professors?" These questions have long been wandering around not only under university’s roofs decrepit but also between many sneaky privatization projects and controversial Pepsi vs. Coke contracts.

A very straightforward answer to those questions is provided by Mr. R.Rosenzweig, a natural guru of our "American thinking" top leaders, who says: "…to see requirements for these jobs as being the talents that superior lawyers had – rule-making, negotiating, politicking."

Here we can see the Canadian example of the Third World way of Americanization, where everything extreme in the States is uncritically copied. It looks as though our noisy people on the margin of the educational establishment like all the privileges (the boards of trustees nomination and their salaries), while treating the tax-paid university as if it already were a private operation. It seems they’re forgotten about the numerous state universities which not only provide excellent education, but are also more affordable. Only through a perspective of their existence we should look at only a few extremely good private universities and notice a low-level majority on the private universities market.

So, if in our financially troubled reality, somebody from our peculiar financial and political spheres wants to steal our best universities with shallow arguments, we must quickly find a healthier strategy for improving our academic education. First, Canadian universities should be ranked according to education and research quality. Next, some universities from the top should receive full support from provincial/federal budgets so that they can keep tuition down. Only after this process should other universities be allowed to privatize in American or indeed any other ways. We must avoid the classic situation from former Communist countries, which were also plagued with networked influential people who were called apparatchiks and who are now turning into globalized businessmen. Those people were also fond of privatization. Unfortunately they targeted only the best performing companies at first, which should have been left alone as profitable for society as whole.

We should not be afraid of the privatization of some Canadian universities, as long as we start with those with the worst educational performance. That should be challenging for visionary investors and "rule-making, negotiating, politicking superior lawyers…" who were only chosen for the top university jobs. Probably some of our leaders should be exported to those schools!

Our McGill, which has dropped in ranking for the last couple of years, should demand healthy competition among other universities. This sort of rivalry is also needed inside our own structures, which are petrified and plagued by parasites. We must hurry to be the first provincial or federal university with full financial support. ……..This idea has a big chance of developing a creative battle of wills among provinces to have at least one or two of the best universities, which will promote wisdom over the politics. What about asking our authorities in the Ministries of Education about this proposal? – Let they see that behind a few McGill’s administrators there are also about 20 0000 people who can have very different views and objectives.

Slawomir Poplawski

P.S. Our top hero, the Principal, has missed another chance to sell his previous achievements and developing his own authority. Telling us about life as a deputy minister of education in the Ontario province can also mean failure as a politician who was not able to predict the near future and survive in the small world of politics. Instead we should be informed about our leader’s educational projects and plans realized at the top of his political power, which were visionary and left a certain impact on others. Also seeing quoted statements of his successful twin brother does not boost authority of our chief coach for attracting the best students and academics to McGill. Instead we see a picture of a flexible bureaucrat with a small businessman’s horizon who does not understand that the policy of even only discussing the issue of rewarding the almighty bankers (Cleghorn matter) with the university degrees reflects a total misunderstanding of the traditional Alma Mater values.

Also inviting another former deputy minister, serving the biggest Canadian no-taxpayer (Mr’s.Smuggler/Whisky/no-tax/Music/Hollywood Bronfman), together with a questionable star (including his secretive $2.5 billion contract with the ABC TV) in the IOC scandal for McGill’s top positions does not represent transparency in promoting our principles – only making closer ties in the family of globalized businessmen.