As submitted to the Senate Agenda Committee by Mark Jones, Faculty Senator for Arts and Science, on 13 March 2012, for Question Period in the 27 March meeting of Senate. The same questions were sent to the Principal on 8 March by email and went unanswered. When submitted for Senate, they were refused entry on the agenda with the explanation that “The Principal intends to update the Senate on the progress he has made on this matter when he presents his Senate report on March 27” (Georgina Moore, email of 21 March). When the Principal reported to Senate on 27 March, it was only to inform Senate that he had unilaterally engaged Justice Iacobucci as counsel. He later explained that Justice Iacobucci “has been retained by the Board of Trustees, not the Senate” (email to Mark Jones and Jordan Morelli, 30 March 2012). The Principal has also refused (both in Senate on 27 March and by email on 30 March) to share with Senate the written opinion by Ms. Kelly that Justice Iacobucci has been engaged to assess.
Questions for the Principal concerning Legal Advice for Senate: First, given that the motion for Legal Advice for Senate, approved in our last meeting, provides “that the Senate obtain independent legal advice,” how should we proceed in appointing a legal firm that is mutually agreeable to the Administration and other parties in Senate?
Second, given that that motion provides that the legal firm appointed should have access to relevant opinions on this matter, including that of Diane Kelly, and given that Ms. Kelly’s opinion has not been seen except insofar as it is alluded to in the Senate documents, can the Principal say whether there is a separate written opinion on her part, and, if so, when it will be made publicly available?