What's in a name?
illustration by Alex Martin
U of O hosts controversial commercialization discussion
A NAME MIGHT just be a name for some; for others, though, naming things such as campus buildings can be a much bigger issue when private corporations are involved.
On Oct. 9, a discussion panel in the Agora of the Unicentre examined the controversial issue of donor recognition on campus when naming spaces and buildings.
The Student Federation of the University of Ottawa (SFUO) and the Graduate Students’ Association (GSAÉD), in conjunction with the University of Ottawa administration, facilitated the discussion panel to look into donor recognition and how the subject should be approached. The panel touched upon the difference between philanthropic donations and commercial funding, and discussed possible protocols to regulate the naming rights of university spaces and buildings.
“Right now there is a hole in [the U of O] policy; there are no guidelines on how or when to accept private donations and how to compensate [donors],” explained SFUO President Seamus Wolfe.
“The role of the university needs to be one that is separate from private need, and that cannot happen with companies interfering in academia,” he continued. “The drive to have private funding runs counter to a public post-secondary education.”
The panel consisted of four Canadian panellists. Robert Johnson, a professional officer working under research and advocacy at the Canadian Association of University Teachers spoke first. His focus was “the broad context of private donations and safeguarding the integrity of the university.” It is his opinion that no naming of spaces and buildings should be approved if sponsorships interfere with the U of O’s academic reputation and without being open to the scrutiny of the public.
PhD political science student Eric Martin was the second panellist invited by GSAÉD, alongside Johnson. He believed that it was insignificant whether a donation was made sincerely or spurned from self-interest. If money is missing, it will either have to come from students or from private corporations.
The U of O administration invited Dominique Arel, a political science professor at the U of O, as well as Glen Tugman a vice-president from Scotiabank. Arel also believed that it was important for the U of O to keep their autonomy; however, he recognized that most universities depend on private donations in light of the difficulties of finding public funding. Tugman took a different approach and discussed the philanthropic viewpoint of donor recognition and the creation of scholarships using Scotiabank as an example. According to Tugman, in 2004 and 2005 Scotiabank donated $750,000 to both international students and those studying with disabilities, without asking for compensation. His point was that there are some companies and organizations that wish to give money without expecting recognition.
“Some companies wish to promote leadership in the community, and who better to do that than a big corporation willing to give away money to good causes,” said Tugman.
Fourth-year Telfer School of Management student Edyta Kosior felt strongly that although the panel discussion was interesting, it did not solve the issues of donor recognition at the U of O.
“Private funding is such a necessity nowadays, and they kept mentioning the increase in public or governmental funding—but [the panel] didn’t explain how to make that happen,” said Kosior.
Gaétan-Philippe Beaulière, external commissioner for GSAÉD, noted that “the panel was held as a [means] of laying the [groundwork] for upcoming [discussions] around a policy on naming, and in that sense, it was undoubtedly a success.”
U of O President Allan Rock mentioned that a committee will be created to address the issue. It will be in charge of coming up with guidelines on how to deal with recognition and encouraging transparency through student and community involvement.
According to Rock, a donation needs to be extremely generous for the amount of time a name is kept on a building.
In an email to the Fulcrum, Beaulière reinforced his thoughts on donor recognition.
“One thing was clear at the end of the panel discussion: it is high time the University of Ottawa adopts a policy that will render the naming process transparent, truly collegial, as well as representative of the values of its community.”
