IT'S A QUESTION OF TRUST

It's hard to muster much sympathy for Jean Veevers, the pot-growing
prof of UVic.

Veevers was busted in April 1997 with 122 marijuana plants and a 8.6
kilograms of dope in her house. But the sentence the $88,000-a-year
sociology professor got this month was the usual slap on the wrist
that excuses itself for punishment these days. (A one year conditional
sentence and a $15,000 fine?) That's not a deterrent; it's a business
licence.

So for some, there is a certain amount of satisfaction in learning
that UVic president David Strong has suspended Veevers and is
recommending her dismissal. They see it as Strong doing what the legal
system wouldn't.

However, it does raise the issue of firing someone for a crime
committed outside work. The Human Rights Code says an employer cannot
axe someone for an offence unrelated to the job. In Veevers' case, the
university argues there was a link, that the professor offered to pay
tuition of a prospective partner in his continuing as her dope-growing
partner.

The more obvious question has to do with whether Veevers crime is job-
related by its nature. Is it right for a convicted drug dealer to be
teaching students on the cusp of adulthood? Would it be make a
difference if she taught elementary school, high school, adult ed?
What if the conviction was for simple possession or bootlegging booze
or dealing heroin, or shoplifting, or spousal abuse?

It's a question of where you draw the line, and society has shown
itself to be anything but certain on the issue of marijuana - as
reflected by the half-hearted sentences meted out by the courts.

Still, we have long argued that people in positions of public trust -
politicians, police, teachers, priests - should be held to a higher
level of accountability. And that tips the scale against Veevers.

Checked-by: Rolf Ernst