University of Alberta President Bill Flanagan has doubled down on his claims that equity, diversity, and inclusion goals conflict with building community and belonging, and should be replaced. Photo courtesy University of Alberta.

Since my January 8 commentary on the EDI (un)developments at the University of Alberta, more information has been revealed about why the decision was made to replace “equity, diversity, and inclusion” initiatives with a “new framework” called “access, community, and belonging” (ACB). It is clearer than ever that the impetus for this move was political and ultimately aimed at placating the province’s far-right politicians. President Bill Flanagan has doubled down on his claims that EDI goals conflict with building community and belonging, and should be replaced because “some people” believe that they are unfair or discriminatory (hence, in Flanagan’s language, “divisive”). As Flanagan put it in his January 2 op-ed in the Edmonton Journal: “Some perceive [in EDI] an ideological bias at odds with merit.” And the president has made it amply clear that he is not about to disabuse “some people” of this belief. A renewed assault on EDI goals has been ongoing for more than a year, coordinated by the now-familiar coalition of right-wing think tanks, parties, and media. Postmedia has led the charge.

A January 14 editorial in the student newspaper, The Gateway, revealed some key missing pieces of the context of the President’s “ACB” announcement. First, the author, Leah Hennig, brought to readers’ attention evidence of strong student and faculty support for EDI that contradicts the president’s claim that the ditching of EDI was “grounded in the voices of our community.” At the November 18 meeting of the General Faculties Council (the highest academic decision-making body in the university), the presidents of the Graduate Students Association and the undergraduate students union tabled a motion to reaffirm the GFC’s commitment to equity, diversity, and inclusion. This motion was passed, as Hennig reports, with support from both students and faculty. At the same meeting, the vice-provost for EDI (a position that was created only in November 2022), led a discussion of the report, at this point still entitled the Integrated EDI Action Plan. Second, Hennig was told by the Association of Academic Staff that it was not consulted or notified about the move away from EDI.

Following its approval by the GFC, the EDI plan was presented to the Board of Governors at its December 13 meeting. Hennig reports that one governor, UCP-appointed Janice MacKinnon, objected to language in the report referring to Canada as “a settler colonist society,” arguing that this was only “one view of Canadian history.” MacKinnon declared that she would not support the plan as it was worded. Subsequently, the board adopted a motion to change the language that offended MacKinnon. What exactly was changed is still unknown, as the minutes of the December 13 meeting have not been approved or published. On the face of it, this appears to be another instance of the board overriding the will of the GFC in matters concerning academic affairs........

© Canadian Dimension