Dear Editor,
I refer to a letter by Mr Al Creighton captioned “Like universities generally UG has never had a formal statutory evaluation system for its top officers” (07.10.04).
Mr. Al Creighton’s consistent disregard for the true picture at UG shows the level of intellectual bankruptcy at UG. Except for two Canada-based professors, Daljeet and Beharry, no one in or out of Guyana joins with me in exposing Mr. Creighton’s reckless treatment of incontrovertible facts at UG. In his letter he calls upon the editor of Stabroek News to be aware that I and student leader, Jason Benjamin do not have a reputation for accuracy. I now urge this very editor to call upon Mr. Creighton for an explanation to what follows below
1- Mr. Creighton wrote; “According to the official minutes of June 13, 2005, the matter (debate on Dr. Rose’s contract renewal by the Academic Board) ended in a strong consensus, with no recorded dissenters, in favour of support for Dr. Rose.” This is a denial of the truth. But we will come to that below. Guess who was the chairman of the meeting? Mr. Creighton himself. Guess who dictated the contents of the minutes? Mr. Creighton himself. These two facts Mr. Creighton left out. But there is more to come. Mr. Creighton has exposed himself on how he administered his office at UG when he was deputy Vice-Chancellor (DVC). Mr. Creighton cites the minutes as having no recorded dissenter. That is because Mr. Creighton wrote into the minutes what he wanted and not what actually took place. I spoke out loudly against Dr. Rose’s contract renewal. Any honest recorder had to put me down as a dissenter. Only two persons – one from history, and the other from civil engineering spoke in favour of Dr. Rose. Mr. Creighton obviously mistook me for someone else that is why he did not record a dissenter.
When those minutes were presented to the meeting of the Council in which Mr. Creighton was present, Dr. Mark Kirton and I objected to the misrepresentations in the minutes. The distortion of facts in those minutes got Council members very annoyed. For example, the minutes stated that the Academic Board agreed that Dr. Rose’s tenure was affected by Council’s non-cooperation with him. I was at the meeting from start to finish and nothing like that came up. But this is Mr. Creighton for you.
2- Mr. Creighton wrote that only eight members were present at the Council at its June 2005 meeting which did not renew Dr. Rose’s contract. Council consists of about twenty members but seldom gets more than nine persons at meetings. In my three years in the Council, I can’t recall that we ever had ten persons present. Yes there were eight members at that meeting but most of the time there are eight members in attendance. Dr. Rose’s contract was subsequently renewed by a Council meeting that consisted of eight members.
Three, when Mr. Creighton writes about the decisions of Academic Board, one must understand the nature of the Academic Board. It is an insult to the human spirit to see how the Academic Board operates. The Vice-Chancellor gets up, makes a decision. No one dare oppose him out of fear and bingo, that’s a decision of the Academic Board. And in fact it is. Mr. Creighton would like us to think that when he refers to a decision of the Academic Board, it was arrived at after discussion by twenty persons.
Four, Mr. Creighton wants to know why I do not oppose the reappointment of the Registrar, the Bursar and the Pro-Chancellor. Mr. Creighton has to read the statutes of the University before he writes because if he doesn’t he will embarrass himself. The Registrar and the Bursar are subordinate to the VC. Their decisions must be ratified by the VC. The person with the power to build or destroy the university is the VC. But why should I oppose those he mentioned when no complaints of wrong-doing are made against them. Junior Minister of Education, Dr. Desiree Fox accused Dr. Rose and Mr. Creighton (when he was Dr. Rose’s deputy) of dismissing her wrongfully. She didn’t accuse anyone else. Council reinstated her. The Director of the Berbice Campus has been crying for five years now to the Council of mistreatment by Dr. Rose and Mr. Creighton. Eventually Council agreed to take away their jurisdiction over the Director.
Five, Mr. Creighton fired computer technician, Mohan Ganchan because of five days of non-appearance. Mr. Ganchan submitted a medical record. The Union proved to Mr. Creighton that under the Termination of Employment and Severance Pay Act, the employer cannot dismiss once a medical report is submitted. Dr. Rose and Mr. Creighton carried on in the usual bullying way until the courts had to intervene. Council was disgusted and requested that Mr. Creighton be surcharged for the eight months salary that the University had to pay Mr. Ganchan. I don’t believe the money was ever deducted from Mr. Creighton’s pay.
Six, the internal auditor requested that two persons be investigated for alleged misconduct – Mr. Creighton’s office attendant and a computer technician over missing funds. Mr. Creighton only charged the computer technician. The Union took the master to court and won. This is just a sample of what Mr. Creighton has done to the University with support from Dr. Rose. So bad was Mr. Creighton’s mal-administration that Council chose not to give him a third year. The Council was ordered by the Office of the President to reappoint both Dr. Rose and Mr. Creighton. Readers should be aware that I lived through all these decisions of Council.
Seven, it is not true that universities do not evaluate their Vice-Chancellors. That is a downright non-truth. All over the world they do. Except at UG.
Nine, Mr. Creighton says that I work at Kaieteur News. I don’t. I am a columnist there. Mr. Creighton has served Stabroek News longer as their columnist. He implies some kind of conspiracy between the Kaieteur News and Jason Benjamin and me. But both of us are contacted regularly by journalists from the Stabroek News. The Stabroek News has done five stories on the Vice-Chancellor scandal. The Kaieteur has published only two. The Stabroek News has touched on the Vice-Chancellor scandal in two editorials. The Kaieteur News is yet to do one. Mr. Creighton has published more letters in the Kaieteur than the Stabroek. Last month a speech by Mr. Creighton formed the basis of an editorial in the KN. I leave readers to decide if there is a conspiracy.
Eight, it would seem that only Mr. Creighton has the right to speak on behalf of who he wants to. Student leader Jason Benjamin is not entitled to form alliances at UG. Only Mr. Creighton is entitled to do so. So Mr. Creighton pens several letters in support of Dr. Rose. But student leader, Benjamin is not allowed to have a relation with Frederick Kissoon of the UGWU. For Mr. Creighton’s information, the workers’ union UGWU, and the student union, UGSA have had a solidarity relationship that goes back twenty-five years. Mr. Creighton is not pleased with the activism of Mr. Benjamin because Mr. Benjamin is not afraid to speak out against the destruction of the University
Yours faithfully,
Frederick Kissoon
