To the editor:

It is puzzling at best, outrageous if true, that the February 2 meeting planned to discuss the building plans for the McGill University Hospital Centre was cancelled because, as the associate director, Nicholas Steinmetz, stated on CBC radio, the "public" was to be present.

Irrespective of one's opinions about the merits or demerits of a mega-hospital, of the demolishing or recycling of the current McGill hospital buildings, or of any of the other issues raised by the MUHC project, most would agree, I think, that Dr. Steinmetz's comment that public participation would "muddy the waters" is thoroughly inappropriate. In fact, is not democratic discussion a fundamental principle of an institute for higher learning as McGill claims to be?

The citizens whose presence Dr. Steinmetz vetoed by his unilateral withdrawal from this meeting are the potential users and the certain financial supporters, both directly and indirectly, of the McGill hospital system. To exclude them, or to refuse to attend a meeting at which they would be present, suggests a level of arrogance unworthy of a University spokesperson.

In the case of the MUHC, as in other situations of university/community interactions, closed-door planning and exclusive discussions are especially unacceptable, and public hearings to consider the pros and cons of various arguments and positions are to be encouraged, not silenced.

I hope that the cancelled meeting will be re-scheduled without delay and that the University will insist on an open-door policy, democratic participation and freedom of speech for it.

Abby Lippman, PhD
Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics

To the editor:

There is a lot of force-feeding around us. Why are the media laying so much emphasis on the IOC scandal? Perhaps Rupert Murdoch and Conrad Black have been paying Mr. Samaranch to resist their press campaign while they feed readers the illusion of a confrontation between the IOC and the press pretending to represent the "little guys."

The public is also being fed the story of Richard Pound as a hero. The Canadian Press is doing everything to portray him as the best successor to Samaranch because he is so good.

Yet Mr. Pound mentioned that he once was offered a $1 million bribe. The question is why did he wait so long to share such a revelation?

We are to assume he ignored it -- stout (indignant) man! Yet isn't it risky to mention that in the light of the present scandal? His lawyer's judgement must be off. The media's judgement is off too as it has chosen Mr. Pound for an internal corruption investigation instead of requesting an external body. Unfortunately, he has only proven to be a good chameleon in protecting himself and the IOC Politburo.

Why did he not want to ask for names and other details after getting a complaint from the Toronto committee eight years ago during what was supposed to be a legal follow-up procedure?

The real hero is an 80-year-old IOC member who, at the end of last year, decided not to keep any more dirty secrets to himself.

He deserves to have a monument as soon as possible; the ceremonial center for the opening of the Salt Lake City Winter Olympic Games would be an ideal location. This monument (with one hand raising the Olympic torch and another one holding a traditional teacher's scourge), founded by the IOC and SLC-WOG organizers, will fulfil all conflicting demands; for the prosecution of law breakers, the punishing of "blinded" earlier IOC top executives, for comforting losers of Olympic bids, for praising old age activity combined with high moral values, and for awakening the majority of brain-washed citizens who sit in front of globalized tubes or browse through colourful magazines and what neutralizes our innate objections to social injustice.

Slawomir Poplawski
Technician, Department of Mining and Metallurgical Engineering

p.s. I am disappointed by McGill University's decision to nominate Mr. Pound as the Chancellor just at the time of his Switzerland press conference. Focusing too much on promoting the good name of the University or country by media-created personalities is a very risky business, but it may happen everywhere in the world. Everybody loves celebrities.

Editor's note: Pound has stated that the IOC executive did ask the Toronto organizers for the names of IOC members who misbehaved in relation to that city's bid for the Olympics. According to Pound and fellow IOC executive member Marc Hodler (the fellow Mr. Poplawski would like to see immortalized in a monument), the Toronto organizers never offered specifics until just recently. Paul Henderson, head of the Toronto Olympics organizers, maintains that he was never asked for names.

As for the timing of McGill's announcement of Pound's new status as chancellor-designate, the University wasn't purposely aiming for it to coincide with the IOC controversy. The committee that selected Pound made its choice over a matter of months -- he was a leading candidate for the position before he even launched his recent IOC probe.

And, in fairness to the media, many journalists have questioned the wisdom of the IOC investigating itself in this matter.