Subseries 5 - Conflicts of Interest

0.8 m of textual records

In April 1991, the President, Rob Prichard, asked me to be a one-person presidential commission to examine the subject of conflicts of interest in the University (file 3). The request was made in a private discussion at that year’s Awards Dinner. It was followed up by discussions with the president, David Cook, Peter Munsche, and others. Throughout the course of the project, I had numerous discussions and considerable correspondence with the president (files 5 to 8). Michael Finlayson, then the vice-president in charge of personnel, had carriage of the development of the necessary specific Governing Council policies (files 9 and 53 to 59).

There were a number of incidents that had brought the subject into prominence, particularly in the Faculty of Medicine (file 2). I wasn’t to examine those particular matters, although they would form the background to my study. The issue hadn’t been carefully examined in the University of Toronto since John Crispo had brought in his report on the subject in the 1970s. Other universities, particularly those with medical schools were also examining their policies. One incident at Harvard Medical School had attracted a lot of attention when an ophthalmologist claimed positive results from a drug produced by a company in which he had a large financial interest (file 17). There was also growing concern about conflicts of interest in the engineering field as university/industry co-operation expanded.

In September 1991, I inserted a notice in the Bulletin and the student newspapers asking for submissions on a range of issues that I had identified over the summer (file 4). My research assistant, Pam Snively, had collected information for me in June and July while I was away in Asia (file 21). I worked closely with a number of organisations within the University, such as the Ombudsman, the Faculty Association, and the Staff Associations (files 13 to 15). The two faculties that were particularly interested in the subject were medicine and engineering (files 16 to 18). I met with representatives of both faculties. I also met with Principals, Deans, Directors and Chairs (PDD&C), the Research Board, and the Audit Committee (files 11, 12 and 19). Naturally, I collected material from other organisations and other universities (files 24 to 28).

There were a number of drafts of the report (files 29 to 36). The draft of November 13, 1991 was sent to a large number of persons for comment (file 37). I have included many of the replies I received (files 38 to 50). Just before Christmas 1991, I submitted the report to the president (file 31). In mid January 1992, it was published in the Bulletin (file 36).

In early 1992, Michael Finlayson and David Cook started the arduous task of trying to get specific policies through the Faculty Association and the University. I was involved in all stages of this work--from 1992 to 1995-- meeting with persons from Simcoe Hall, attending meetings with the Faculty Association, and commenting on various drafts (files 53 to 59). The policy for faculty members was eventually enacted as university policy in June 1994 (file 57). The agreement of the Faculty Association was prodded by Harry Arthurs’ report on the problems at Concordia. His report came out in the Globe the very morning that the Faculty Association was deciding whether they would approve the draft (file 57). Other policies for administrative staff and librarians came later.

Open