WATCH LIVE NOW: Premier @jkenney expected to address reports of staffers, politicians travelling abroad:
A: Of course they're allowed
A: I think it was a significant error in judgement. Not reasonable to sanction those who followed health measures
A: Kenney says he knows of doctors who have said they were happy to get their first dose.
A: Yes, his chief of staff was in the U.K., came back on Boxing Day, in 14-days of isolation. Other staff and senior officials also traveled
A: "She should have stayed her efor obvious reasons." Says she left Dec. 19, he learned on Dec. 29, contacted her and expressed concern and disappointment"
A: Didn't know about anyone traveling until this week. Says Caucus Whip "strongly urged" UCP MLAs not to travel. Doesn't have list of who traveled.
More from Travel
You May Also Like
"I lied about my basic beliefs in order to keep a prestigious job. Now that it will be zero-cost to me, I have a few things to say."
We know that elite institutions like the one Flier was in (partial) charge of rely on irrelevant status markers like private school education, whiteness, legacy, and ability to charm an old white guy at an interview.
Harvard's discriminatory policies are becoming increasingly well known, across the political spectrum (see, e.g., the recent lawsuit on discrimination against East Asian applications.)
It's refreshing to hear a senior administrator admits to personally opposing policies that attempt to remedy these basic flaws. These are flaws that harm his institution's ability to do cutting-edge research and to serve the public.
Harvard is being eclipsed by institutions that have different ideas about how to run a 21st Century institution. Stanford, for one; the UC system; the "public Ivys".
As a dean of a major academic institution, I could not have said this. But I will now. Requiring such statements in applications for appointments and promotions is an affront to academic freedom, and diminishes the true value of diversity, equity of inclusion by trivializing it. https://t.co/NfcI5VLODi
— Jeffrey Flier (@jflier) November 10, 2018
We know that elite institutions like the one Flier was in (partial) charge of rely on irrelevant status markers like private school education, whiteness, legacy, and ability to charm an old white guy at an interview.
Harvard's discriminatory policies are becoming increasingly well known, across the political spectrum (see, e.g., the recent lawsuit on discrimination against East Asian applications.)
It's refreshing to hear a senior administrator admits to personally opposing policies that attempt to remedy these basic flaws. These are flaws that harm his institution's ability to do cutting-edge research and to serve the public.
Harvard is being eclipsed by institutions that have different ideas about how to run a 21st Century institution. Stanford, for one; the UC system; the "public Ivys".
