In his letter to UBC Reports of Sept. 5, 1996, Dr. Campbell Clark argues that UBC's Policy on Discrimination and Harassment fails "to abide by the commonly held precepts of justice in the Canadian judicial systems." I disagree.
Dr. Clark says that UBC's policy does not recognize respondents as innocent until proven guilty, and furthermore, that the policy is not concerned with matters of proof. Dr. Clark is wrong on both counts.
UBC's policy conforms both to Canadian human rights statutes, in particular the British Columbia Human Rights Act, and to normative practices in Canadian law. The policy ensures the rights of respondents to natural justice; that is, the rights to be heard, and then, to be judged innocent or guilty by unbiased parties. Specifically, the policy directs a three-person panel to recommend "whether on the balance of probabilities, and with the onus of proof being on the complainant, there has been a violation of the policy" (paragraph 32). The balance of probabilities is the common standard of proof in non-criminal cases.
Dr. Clark also complains that the policy does not recognize "mutual consent between two adults as the underlying premise for normal sexual relationships." Again, he is wrong. UBC's policy is not concerned with sexual relationships between consenting adults where there is no conflict of interest. Rather, the policy addresses sexual relationships in which one party exercises professional power over the other. UBC's Policy on Conflict of Interest requires individuals who engage in intimate relationships with those in subordinate positions to disclose such relationships to their administrative heads to ensure that those in subordinate positions may be supervised fairly and evaluated accurately.
Sharon E. Kahn, PhD
Associate vice-president, Equity
This is to inform the UBC driving community of ongoing enhancements to traffic flow and convenience in the heart of campus.
As many drivers know, two years ago Campus Planning & Development (C-P&D) put a stop to cars illegally speeding along East Mall. They made it legal. Then, it put in crosswalks so that pedestrians would feel perfectly safe, and also installed thousands of dollars worth of tiny nubbles and brightly-painted speed bumps along the road.
Fortunately, however, the nubbles-and-bumps actually heighten driving enjoyment. At 50 km/h they create a pleasant tingly sensation on the back of one's thighs. Alternatively, as many drivers already do, you can enjoy swerving back and forth so as to miss the bumps altogether. Incidentally, I use 50 km/h merely as a nice round figure. On East Mall no speed limit at all is enforced.
As for other areas of central campus, C-P&D has installed yellow plastic posts to create the impression that cars and trucks can't just roar around at will in "pedestrian zones." Look more closely, however, and you will notice that none of these "barriers" is ever complete. So like the nubbles-and-bumps, the posts are mainly there for comic effect.
Also, if you wish to drive from East Mall to Student Union Boulevard, don't miss the new short-cut provided for your convenience. Behind Main Library, veer sharply east across the "pedestrian zone" that leads past the north end of the SUB. UBC has installed a nice ramp over the curb so that you don't hurt your tires. The only problem you'll run into is all those cars and trucks allowed to park anywhere they like along the SUB's north and west sides. Although you will encounter hundreds of pedestrians along this route, that's no problem if you have mastered the swerving manoeuvre I described earlier.
Anyway, now that university planners have shown in so many practical ways that "it's yours," it's up to drivers to nurture UBC's traffic culture as creatively as possible. This is a place where research is valued, so feel free to experiment. And finally, please share your research results with CP&D.
Dennis Danielson
Professor, Dept. of English