University of Calgary investigation into Enbridge controversy clears Elizabeth Cannon

A report commissioned by the University of Calgary concludes there were no breaches of university policies or procedures in the institution's relationship with pipeline company Enbridge.

The University of Calgary launched theindependent review of itsCentre for Corporate Sustainability after a CBC News investigation raised questionsabout the centre's relationship with its one-time namesake sponsor, Enbridge.

"Nobody from the university was found to have done anything inappropriate in the context of our policies and procedures, or in the context of academic freedom," said Gord Ritchie, vice-chair of the university's board of governors, in an interview.

Last month, university president Elizabeth Cannon resigned fromher roleasindependent director of theEnbridge Income Fund.Last year, her compensationfor that board positionamounted to $130,500.

• How the University of Calgary's Enbridge relationship became controversial
• U of C student 'embarrassed' by Enbridge controversy asks for president's resignation

The reviewwas conducted by Retired Justice Terrence McMahon.

McMahon's investigationincludedconflict of interest concerns regarding Cannon and Enbridge.

McMahonstates: "I conclude unequivocally that Dr. Cannon's involvement in matters arising from the operation of the Enbridge Centre was proper, responsibleand required of her as president to protect the reputation of the University of Calgary as an institution that honours its commitment to donors."

Cannon welcomed the report, stating she was "pleased that there was no evidence to support the suggestion that Enbridge sought or was granted any inappropriate influence on the academic practices of the university."

Cannon has admitted there's been "learnings" from the experience with theEnbridgeCentre. McMahon's report does not provide any recommendations, nor does it suggest whether there should be improved policies and procedures on campus.

The students union and faculty association at the university have both criticized the scope of the review as not broadenough.

For example, the organizations wanted an examination ofboard oversight of corporate gifts, and also a review of processes and decisions to ensure that all other corporate naming and sponsorships have properly addressed issues of conflict and perceived conflict. The findings should also be sent to thethe Office of the Ethics Commissioner for further review, saidthe groups.

"I wish some of those questions would have been asked,"Students' Union presidentLeviNilsontold CBC News. "This was narrow in scope, but I think within that scope, it was pretty comprehensive."

Neither Cannon or McMahon were made available for an interview.

CBC probe

The CBC investigation included complaints from professors andemails obtained from a freedom of information request. The investigation suggesteda pattern of corporate influence by Enbridge,a university bending over backward to accommodate the apparent public relations ambitions of a corporate patronand the dismissed concerns about academic independence by professors.

From the outset of the creation of the new academic centre on campus,Enbridgewas actively involved, according to the email trail.

Beyond naming rights, the emails showEnbridge sought to influenceboard memberships, staffing and the type of students that would be considered for awards.

• University of Calgary needs to take hard look at corporate sponsorships, critics say
• U of C staff suspected Michigan partnership was for Enbridge PR

The company brought inits own communications firm to publicize the centre's launchand desired "customized opportunities" for Enbridge executives and clients to meet with researchers at the U of C.

In addition,Enbridgeexpected the U of C would forma partnership with a university in Michigan in what some have suggested wasan attempt to help recuperate its battered corporate reputation in the state after a brokenpipeline spilled millions of litres of oil into the Kalamazoo River.

Faculty members, such as business professor HarrieVredenburg, described Enbridge's influence at the university as a classic case of "he who pays the piper calls the tunes" in an email complaint to the dean of the HaskayneSchool of Businesson Aug. 26, 2011.

"Enbridge is doing too much tune calling, in my view, to the point that the centre's usefulness to [Haskayne school] academics is being sacrificed to Enbridge's PR objectives," Vredenburg wrote.

"Most damningly it smacks of us being apologists for the fossil fuel industry rather than independent scholars and teachers doing work in broadly defined areas."

Enbridge's role

Enbridgedenied the partnership was about publicity, but instead suggestedthe partnership between the two universities would offer a shared learning experience about the company's spill in Michigan.

In McMahon's report, he writes "the Enbridgeboard had to be able to justify committing to the payment of $2.25 million. That justification was to be found in repair to a damaged public image in Michigan and to reinforcement of its considerable stature in Calgary."

Enbridge was pleased with the results of the university's review.

"The report reinforces our originally stated position that there was no evidence to support the suggestion that we sought, or were granted, any inappropriate influence on the academic practices of the university," said spokesman Graham White in an emailed statement.

The Canadian Association of University Teachersis conducting its own investigation to examine alleged violations of academicfreedom and conflict of interest at the university.