Only 19.1 per cent of McMaster students voted in the 2020 McMaster Student Union’s Presidential election, the lowest voter turnout for an MSU Presidential election since 2009. In total, 4810 students cast their ballots. The 2020 Hamilton Street Railway referendum that took place concurrently saw 5,763 students cast their votes, equivalent to a voter turnout of 22.9 per cent.

On Jan. 30, the MSU Elections Department ratified and released the results of the MSU residential election and  HSR referendum.

President-elect Giancarlo Da-Ré won the 2020 MSU Presidential election with 2,504 votes, a 1,529 vote surplus over the second place candidate, Jackson Tarlin.

Tarlin, the election’s runner-up, garnered 975 votes.

666 students abstained, and Krystina Koc received the lowest number of votes at 665.

Da-Ré will officially take office on May 1, 2019.

Voter turnout this year was the lowest it has been in a while, following a steady decline since 2018. Engagement fell from 41.6 per cent in 2017 to 28.1 per cent in 2018. In the following year, this steep drop appeared to level off, with a 1.2 per cent drop between 2018 and 2019. However, this year, the steep decline returned yet again, with turnout dropping by 7.7 per cent.

In the past five years, the lower the voter turnout, the greater the proportion of votes that went to the candidate who won.

In the past five years, the lower the voter turnout, the greater the proportion of votes that went to the candidate who won.

The MSU elections department investigated the sharp decline in voter turnout that occurred between 2017 and 2018. They concluded that it was likely because a large number of students opted out of receiving emails from SimplyVoting, McMaster’s online voting system. Offering students the choice to opt out is in line with Canada’s anti-spam legislation.

According to chief returning officer Peter Belesiotis, the elections department also emails students independently, regardless of whether they opt out of receiving emails from SimplyVoting.

“This has ensured that we reach all students with the relevant information, even those who may have opted-out from SimplyVoting emails. These email efforts are in addition to the print media, social media, video production and SMS messaging used to inform students of the election,” stated Belesiotis in an email.

Despite these measures, voter turnout was even lower this year, falling 9 points below 2018 levels.

Voter apathy and lack of trust in the student union may have played a role in this decline. A Silhouette article from 2018 speculated that candidates’ campaign strategies play a large role in voter turnout, citing class talks, student engagement and debate performance  as potential factors in determining voter turnout.

Abstentions this year were also significantly higher than they have been in recent years. Between 2016 and 2018, abstentions remained below 7.3 per cent. Last year, they rose to 9.2 per cent, and this year they jumped to 13.8 per cent.

Voters abstain for a variety of reasons. Students may choose abstention as a vote of no confidence, because they feel that none of the candidates are qualified. Alternatively, an abstention could mean that the voter cannot decide between multiple candidates, or they feel that they do not have enough information to make an educated vote.

The majority of students voted to continue the existing bus pass agreement between McMaster University, the MSU and the Hamilton Street Railway. The option for a 12 month bus pass with expanded service on Route 51-University received 2338 votes after the first round of the MSU’s ranked election system.

The second most popular option, an 8-month bus pass from September to April with no expanded Route-51 service, received 1901 votes.

The option for no bus pass received only 494 votes and was eliminated after the first round of the ranked election system.

 

[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]

 

Photo by Matty Flader / Photo Reporter

Krystina Koc is a Level IV Commerce student at McMaster.

Koc’s platform consists of eight points of action distributed between her two core initiatives: advocacy and student life enhancement. 

 

Advocacy

Within the advocacy section, Koc focuses on safety, transparency, comfort and internal issues within the McMaster Students Union. Citing reports of break-ins in Westdale and Thorndale areas, Koc claims that student safety is a growing concern among students. Koc aims to improve student safety by increasing lighting in student neighbourhoods and facilitating safety measures with landlords. She also plans to create video modules detailing instructions that might help in potentially unsafe situations. 

Her second initiative calls for the improvement of transparency within the MSU  by writing bi-annual reports that would disclose the progress of MSU activities. 

The third platform point, titled “Be comfortable,” aims to re-open discussions on McMaster’s Department of Athletics and Recreation’s tank-top ban in the Pulse. Koc’s goal is to ensure that everyone can feel comfortable while using McMaster’s athletic facilities.

Koc’s fourth point aims to make the MSU’s internal processes, such as conflict management and review of MSU services, more efficient. 

“I plan to take the work that our current President, Josh Marando, has already begun and [continue] his efforts to improve [the MSU’s] internal workings,” she states in her platform. 

 

Student Life Enhancement

Koc’s fifth platform point revolves around MSU Clubs. She plans to review all McMaster clubs that are redundant or have been inactive for six months. She believes this would make room for unique clubs and allow students to choose clubs with more ease.

Koc is open to exploring non-MSU clubs having access to campus resources, such as room bookings, for fundraising purposes.

Koc also advocates for the use of student cards at Union Market and aims to reduce the time that the store takes to restock food items. Koc claims that Union Market shelves are often left empty as the shipments needed to refill them come in too late. 

Koc’s seventh point intends to improve access to mental health services on campus by developing strategies to enhance the Student Assistance Plan, a free online platform that offers psychological counselling to McMaster students. She also plans to increase support to Maccess, a peer support outlet for students with disabilities and disabled students. 

Koc’s final platform point aims to combat food insecurity on campus by raising awareness for existing services such as the Food Collective Centre. She cites a U.S. study conducted in 2019 that states that 41 per cent of fourth-year students are food insecure. 

 

More information about Koc’s platform can be found on her website krystinakoc2020.com.

Keep an eye out in next week's print issue for a feature on Hamilton's LRT project. For now, here are the updates:

[Video descripton: Andrew Mrozowski, A&C Editor at the Sil, walks around campus to discuss updates on Hamilton's LRT project.]

 

On Jan. 12, 2020, McMaster University’s Student Representative Assembly met for the first time in the new year to ratify 15 new clubs and to complete their initial review of non-MSU groups on campus. 

Incite Magazine was the final non-MSU group to present their organization’s activities and budget to the SRA. According to Associate Vice-President (Finance) Jess Anderson’s report on Jan. 8, the McMaster Student Union’s Finance Committee has completed their review of all non-MSU groups on campus. These non-MSU groups receive funding from McMaster students but do not fall under the purview of the MSU Club Department. 

According to the report, there are currently five non-MSU groups on campus: McMaster Marching Band, Engineering without Borders, McMaster Solar Car, Incite Magazine and the Ontario Public Interest Research Group McMaster. 

“While there were a few hiccups regarding communication throughout the reviewing processes, the committee was very pleased with McMaster Marching Band, [and] have provided recommendations to Engineers without Borders, McMaster Solar Car, and Incite Magazine,” states Anderson in the report. 

The Finance Committee has yet to come to a decision or provide recommendations for OPIRG McMaster. While a delegation from OPIRG attended the Dec. 8 SRA meeting, the group is still currently discussing salary and administration logistics with their union, Canadian Union of Public Employees 1281.

[pjc_slideshow slide_type="sra-jan-16-2020"]

During the meeting, 15 new clubs were ratified by the SRA after recommendation from Clubs Administrator Aditi Sharma. A list of newly ratified clubs and their mission statements was also provided on Jan. 7. These include cultural clubs such as the Indonesian McMaster Student Association and McMaster Bengali Student Union; social issues clubs such as Blackspace and Glamour Girls; and recreational clubs such as the McMaster Real Estate Society and McMaster Filmmaking Club.

Each semester, potential clubs submit their applications to the Clubs Administrator and Clubs Executive Council. Successful applicants are then interviewed by the Clubs Administrator. Potential clubs are evaluated for their uniqueness, ability to maintain significant student interest and ability to positively impact the McMaster community. Finally, recognition as an official MSU club requires ratification by the SRA.

Last semester, there were two instances that raised concerns about the process of vetting proposed clubs. On Jul. 21, SRA ratified the Dominion Society, triggering an intervention three days later by MSU President Josh Marando due to the club’s alleged connections to people and organizations with white supremacist ties. Similarly, the SRA passed a motion on Sept. 22 to de-ratify The McMaster Chinese Students and Scholars Association for violating section 5.1.3 of the Clubs Operating Policy by endangering student safety.

Discussion regarding club ratification lasted under four minutes. The question of the club recognition appeal process for unsuccessful applicants was also brought up at the meeting. 

“One of my constituents wanted to start a club with the purpose of, if I’m remembering correctly, creating a space where the ideas of various faculties (science, humanities, etc.) could be discussed and shared openly together [...] The clubs department did not approve the club for reasons the constituent did not agree with and the constituent claims not [to] have been informed of a formal appeals process in their rejection,” wrote one SRA member wishing to remain anonymous. 

According to the SRA member, the applicant was told that the proposed club fit a niche already occupied by the Controversial Texts Discussion Club, which aims to encourage discussion of academic texts and potentially controversial topics in Science, Philosophy and Religion. However, after reaching out to CON-TEXT several times and receiving no response, the applicant told the SRA member that they believe the club to no longer be active.

Section 4.13 of the MSU Clubs Operating Policy states that club applicants can first appeal to the Clubs Administrator. If still unsuccessful, applicants can make a second and final appeal to the CEC.

“In the email that [an unsuccessful club] got, they have an appeal period. They can send their appeal to the clubs administrator and CEC to be reviewed,” added MSU President Josh Marando at the meeting. 

Lasting just over 42 minutes, this was the shortest SRA meeting so far in the 2019-2020 school year. 

[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]

 

Photo By Cindy Cui / Photo Editor

It was my second year of university and I was finding it increasingly difficult to keep up with my studies because I was having traumatic flashbacks every day and night terrors every night. I was seeing a counsellor and a doctor to address my poor health. Despite this, my marks continued to slip.

Luckily, I was able to register with Student Accessibility Services when I realized I needed some extra help with school. This lifted a lot of weight from my shoulders, as I was able to access lecture notes through the SAS website and spread out my tests over a longer period of time. However, it wasn’t smooth sailing from there. 

One of my accommodations under SAS is for instructors to provide an alternative to missed classwork. Knowing this, when I was unable to write a midterm due to my disability, I emailed the instructor to let them know. 

In their reply to my email, I was told, “We do not offer an alternate date to write the midterm. If you are unable to write the midterm today, you will need to use a [McMaster Student Absence Form]. Using an MSAF will move the weight of the midterm to the final exam making the final worth a total of 94%.” 

Despite having SAS accommodations, I was rejected of the accommodations that were supposed to help level the playing ground when it came to succeeding in courses. I remember being upset and frustrated because I’ve always had the impression that educators should be focused on helping their students succeed. Because of my instructor’s response, this situation dragged out for over a month as my assistant dean had to talk to the instructor to advocate for me. Meanwhile, I was constantly studying for a midterm whose date was unknown to me. Since I was having difficulties rescheduling my midterm, I fell behind in class and ended up dropping the course.

According to the Ontario Human Rights Commission, educators must accommodate their disabled students. Furthermore, accommodations should be unique and individualized — meaning, “blanket” accommodations that are meant to cover all disabilities often don’t work because disabled students have different needs. Educators should be cognizant that an accommodation, which may seem helpful in their eyes, may not actually be helpful for a student. As a result, they could be putting undue stress on the student who needs the accommodation.

Saying that I can use an MSAF to redistribute the weight of my midterm is not an accommodation. I don’t know about you, but having a 96 per cent exam doesn’t exactly exemplify a good ‘accommodation’. In fact, I’d argue that most non-disabled students would find a 96 per cent exam overwhelming. Maybe someone else might be okay with this accommodation, but it just wasn’t going to work for me. And that’s okay.

The unfortunate thing is that even with SAS, I still faced many barriers in receiving adequate accommodations. However, many disabled students go through their undergraduate career without SAS because registering can be a long process. For example, SAS registration requires medical documentation from a doctor, meaning that a formal diagnosis is necessary even though many conditions can be difficult to diagnose or may be highly stigmatized, which may result in the lack of diagnosis. 

The unfortunate thing is that even with SAS, I still faced many barriers in receiving adequate accommodations. However, many disabled students go through their undergraduate career without SAS because registering can be a long process. For example, SAS registration requires medical documentation from a doctor, meaning that a formal diagnosis is necessary even though many conditions can be difficult to diagnose or may be highly stigmatized, which may result in the lack of diagnosis. 

Instead of focusing on formal diagnoses, instructors should concentrate on providing support to students who need it. Evidently, there can be many complications that prevent someone from receiving disability status at McMaster. As a result, disabled students can fall behind in their coursework just because they cannot provide an accommodation letter from SAS to their instructors.

Even when you do have SAS, advocating for your accommodations can be taxing. Meeting up with your professors to discuss accommodations can make you feel vulnerable. Emailing professors every time you’re absent from class and having to reschedule several midterms after a flare-up can be exhausting. 

Even after all of this, you may still face resistance regarding your accommodations. I have faced the risk of my SAS accommodations expiring even though my disability is permanent. As a result, I had to get medical documentation again to verify that my disability wasn’t going away anytime soon. I’m not the only person who has faced this problem — I’ve heard from many peers that they’ve faced a similar situation where their SAS status expired and they were unable to access accommodations when they needed them most.

The accommodation process is made more complicated by negative perceptions that students who ask for course accommodations are “cheating the system.” Of course, there’s always the possibility that there will be a student who asked for an accommodation they don’t actually need. But, more often than not, it’s because they really need it. A student’s SAS status shouldn’t be the only reason why an instructor should provide course accommodations. If students are reaching out to you about how they might need some extra help in class, consider giving them the support they need to succeed in your course.

Often times, accommodations can be easy to arrange. Providing a student with notes, lecture slides or an extension for an assignment doesn’t usually require extra effort on the instructor’s behalf. However, it’s important to note that even if the accommodation isn’t ‘“convenient’” to provide to a student, they still deserve to be adequately accommodated. To ensure that accommodations are properly handled, there should be a clearer follow-up process of accommodations within each faculty. Students should know who to go to when something isn’t properly handled, as well as be able to access support from their faculty during this process.

Because at the end of the day, educators should be concerned about a student’s success — not their disability status.

 

[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]

Photo C/O Sandy Shaw's Constituency Office 

Sandy Shaw, the Member of Provincial Parliament for Hamilton West-Ancaster-Dundas, has returned home from a stint at Queen’s Park. Before the winter break, the Conservatives drove Bill 124 through the House on Nov. 8, a move that has been widely criticized.

“It’s been a long week of fighting for hardworking people in the province of Ontario,” said Shaw.

As a member of the New Democratic Party and the representative for the riding in which McMaster sits, Shaw knows student issues are important for her constituents. According to Shaw, Bill 124 was just the latest in a series of Conservative attacks on students’ funding, freedom and future.

Bill 124, also known as the “Protecting a Sustainable Public Sector for Future Generations Act,” limits wage increases for public sector employees to one per cent per year, among other things. This does not keep up with inflation in the province, which fluctuates between 1.5 and 2.5 per cent yearly.

In a press release, Ontario Treasury Board President Peter Bethlenfalvy explained the rationale behind the Bill.

“The legislation would allow for reasonable wage increases, while protecting the province’s front-line services, restoring the province’s financial position and respecting taxpayer dollars,” he said.

However, the Bill has also been criticized for its effects on workers.

“Bill 124 . . . caps the wages of a million workers of families in the province of Ontario. At the same time, this government is giving themselves promotions and raises,” said Shaw.

“Bill 124 . . . caps the wages of a million workers of families in the province of Ontario. At the same time, this government is giving themselves promotions and raises,” said Shaw.

Despite the pushback from Shaw and the NDP, the Conservative government sought to pass the Bill.

Although Bill 124 was announced in early June, soon after, the provincial government entered an extended summer recess ending in late October. As a result, despite the intense controversy surrounding the Bill, the debate period lasted for less than two weeks. Shaw was concerned the Bill had been passed too quickly.

“I personally did not support this exceptionally long break. I mean, there’s a lot of work that we need to get done in the province. And this is a government that doesn’t take the time to study legislation, to get legislation right,” said Shaw.

Unions across Ontario have launched complaints against the Bill, including the Canadian Union of Public Employees and the Ontario Nurses Association.

According to Shaw, the Act will impact the most vulnerable workers in the province, many of whom are women and marginalized community members. The Act also has specific impacts for McMaster; it caps the wage increases of McMaster teaching and research assistants at one per cent, despite efforts by the Canadian Union of Public Employees 3906, the union representing McMaster teaching and research assistants, to increase wages.

“Students need to be recognized for what they are, which is contributors to the province, contributors to their communities, and that they are struggling under all kinds of burdens imposed by this government … it’s just cruel and heartless,” said Shaw.

“Students need to be recognized for what they are, which is contributors to the province, contributors to their communities, and that they are struggling under all kinds of burdens imposed by this government … it’s just cruel and heartless,” said Shaw.

The provincial government is defending the one per cent wage cap by citing the province’s need to balance its budget. Shaw disagrees.

“Essentially what they’re saying is [that] the deficit is the fault of frontline workers in the province of Ontario, [that] it’s their responsibility to fix the deficit ... And so the reason I think the break was so … wrong [is] because when we came back after five months, the government ran this legislation through the house in two weeks,” said Shaw.

Shaw views the province’s actions as an all-out attack on students. Bill 124 was preceded by budget cuts for schools at both the elementary and post-secondary levels, which include the now unlawful Student Choice Initiative and reduced funding for the Ontario Student Assistance Program.

“In what world does this make sense? In what world does it make sense that students that struggle just to pay this increasing tuition burden, that students [that] struggle with part time, precarious, low-wage, minimum wage jobs, if they can find them at all, now are losing jobs [where] they can earn money on campus,” said Shaw, referring to the SCI and other Conservative education policies that impact education.

Announced on Jan. 17, 2019, the SCI gave post-secondary students the opportunity to opt out of “non-essential” student fees, which included and thereby endangered on-campus organizations and student media. In response, the Canadian Federation of Students-Ontario and the York Federation of Students took the directive to court, labeling the SCI as unlawful and criticizing the unjust procedure that led to its passing.

The Divisional Court of Ontario ruled in favour of CFS-O and YFS on Nov. 21, 2019, stating that the bargaining process between autonomous universities and student unions did not fall within the jurisdiction of the provincial government.

But where do we go from here? Shaw says that we all have to play our part. While Shaw is on the house floor holding the government accountable, students can lend their voices too.

“Students have shown, historically, time and time again, that when they mobilize, that when they speak up, that’s powerful. And this is a government that does not want to hear powerful voices. They want to shut down debate. They want to shut down dialogue,” said Shaw.

While mobilization may be possible, McMaster students have diverse political views, as does the rest of the province. Despite differences, there is one thing that all students may have in common.

“Every student I’ve ever met is concerned also about the world in which they’re going to graduate into,” said Shaw.

For Shaw and the NDP, slashing student services isn’t a solution for balancing provincial budgets. As she returns to the legislature, Shaw pledges to fight for student interests, aiming to ensure that the world we graduate into is one where the needs of vulnerable workers are prioritized.

September 2019 marked the first of possibly many registration periods in which students could opt-out of student union fees deemed non-essential. This change, instituted by the Government of Ontario in January 2019, is part of the widely criticised Student Choice Initiative. In the past, McMaster’s student union fees for all clubs and services have been mandatory. Non-essential fees range from a few dollars, like the $1 fee for Mac Farmstands or $2 for Horizons, to $13.72 for CFMU 93.3FM or $17.50 for Campus Events. As early as  January, student groups have feared the worst and prepared for the inevitable cuts.

Nearly two months after the SCI was introduced, the impact on students and the MSU isn’t entirely clear. Despite other universities having already released comprehensive opt-out rates to their university’s student unions, McMaster’s registrar’s office still hasn’t released final numbers. According to Alex Johnston, the MSU’s vice-president (finance), an official breakdown won’t be released until registration is finalized. The final registration numbers have yet to be disclosed by the university. 

As a result of the Student Choice Initiative, many aspects of what the MSU offers to students will become financially optional between September. 12-20. The MSU encourages students to #ChooseStudentLife. Learn more about how your money is spent at: https://t.co/GdcabjjSMF. pic.twitter.com/EOvrhnB3bY

— McMaster Students Union (MSU) (@MSU_McMaster) September 10, 2019

What we do know is that students opted out of services at a rate of roughly 32 per cent of across non-essential fees. These fees include services such as campus events, Shinerama and Mac Farmstand. How this 32 per cent rate translates into absolute dollar losses for the MSU is unclear, and Johnston says it’s difficult to speculate. Throughout the opt-out period, Johnston states that the MSU prioritized transparency. For example, the MSU created a “Choose Student Life” page to encourage undergraduate students to learn about the MSU services and fee breakdown before opting out.

“We did communicate that this could lead to the potential for a pay-for-service model or a reduction of overall services or just reduction in service operations. So those are things we did communicate. Where we actually end up going right now, again I think it’s a little too soon to tell,” said Johnston.

Despite the MSU’s focus on transparency, some felt that the MSU could have done more. 

Ed, a part-time manager of a student service deemed non-essential that asked not to be identified, said that they were displeased with the MSU’s communication leading up to and throughout the SCI implementation.

“Communication has been fraught. Everytime I would bring it up I would receive a ‘we don’t know for sure yet’. And then no follow ups,” said Ed.

Daniel, another PTM who asked not to be identified, felt that work they had previously done to improve their service’s finances hadn’t been taken into consideration. They felt that the MSU should have encourage more discussion about SCI leading before the opt-out period. 

“I knew for the majority of my role finances are important … which is why I made a lot of changes … I don’t want to say they weren’t willing to have that conversation really early, but I kind of wish we had that conversation early,” said Daniel.

As for faculty societies, whose fees were also deemed non-essential, the SCI’s impact is unclear.

Madeleine Raad, the McMaster social sciences society president, said that the society is being careful about spending, although the alumni society has stepped up to fill their funding gaps. 

“From my understanding, the social sciences opt-out was not as high per say maybe other faculties I might have heard of. However our fee is one of the lower fees, our fee is $16,” said Raad.

Although it may be too soon to see the long term impact of the SCI, changes are already being made to non-essential services. 

To prepare for the possibility of high opt-out rates, all MSU services were asked by the executive board to make pre-emptive cuts to their operating budgets for the 2019-2020 school year

“[We] cut back on things most companies cut back on which is promotions … The last thing you want to cut back on are salaries and wages and actual staffing positions,” said Sandeep Bhandari, the campus radio station’s administrative director.  

In the Oct. 20, 2019 SRA meeting, Johnston gave a report on audited statements from the MSU’s 2018-2019 fiscal year. While optimistic, the numbers reflected deficits across the MSU. Johnson mentioned that the Underground, the Silhouette, and 1280 bar and grill all had large deficits and outlined plans for improving finances going forward. Johnston also said that the MSU is soliciting proposals from an external consultant to assist with financial changes the MSU will need to make going forward as the SCI becomes an annual affair. 

“If we continue the way we’re going, we’re going to deplete our operating funds in two years. So that’s obviously not sustainable so we need to make some changes going forward,” said Johnston.

Johnston also reported that the MSU’s executive board, comprised of full-time staff and SRA members, had also made decisions that impact part-time services. The Executive Board has decided to push back the hiring of PTMs for Macycle and Farmstand into 2020, although they are traditionally hired in the fall. Johnston said this decision was made to buy the MSU more time to figure out a financial plan going forward. While this is a temporary push-back, there are still worries that the PTMs will be expected to participate in the hiring process after their terms without pay or be cut out of the important process it entirely. 

“This is a discussion that happened in close session … but we did decide to delay the hiring for Farmstand and Macycle. Typically those part time managers are hired … but due to the fact that we don’t have final opt-in numbers yet we did decide to delay their hiring so we could re-evaluate then move onwards,” said Johnston.

The executive board also made the decision to pause all operations for the Creating Leadership Amongst Youth conference for the 2020 year. Typically CLAY happens in May, but this year will be the exception. 

“We did decide to put a hold on operations for CLAY 2020 just because we couldn’t delay the hiring and then have the part-time manager start later because the conference just couldn’t function,” said Johnston.

Johnston says these decisions are a part of the MSU’s efforts to develop a strategy to make the union more sustainable going forward. The long term impacts of the SCI are unclear, but the MSU is doing what it can to adapt, including expanding The Grind in an attempt to alleviate 1280’s running deficit and hiring a full complement of staff for the Underground so it can operate at full capacity.

A big concern for most non-essential service employees was job security. 

James Tennant, CFMU program director, and Bhandari stressed the importance of student radio, especially for student staff who can’t get these unique experiential learning opportunities elsewhere. 

“We do have a very small staff compared to some other services on campus. But it’s definitely a concern, and it’s the last thing we would want to do … Because they’re valuable to us and the experience they get in the positions is valuable to the students,” said Tennant.

Bhandari said, “It’s been said for many years it’s giving a voice to those who don’t otherwise have access to the airways. And that is the nature of campus community radio across the country.”

Daniel also reflected on the SCI. He expressed dismay that his efforts to improve his service’s financials weren’t headed leading up to the SCI implementation, despite clearly outlining ways the service could improve financially going forward in the wake of the SCI. 

Ed wished that there had been a bigger push over the months leading up to the opt-out period, not just during it. 

“SCI’s really bad but the MSU’s attitude of not talking about it makes everything worse,” said Ed.

Ed also had hoped for solidarity amongst all MSU services, not just advocacy from the ones impacted. He felt like nearly enough people weren’t talking about it. 

Indeed, when Sandy Shaw, MPP for Hamilton West-Ancaster-Dundas, visited campus in February 2019 to talk about the provincial policies impacting students, the MSU gave her a tour of the PCC, Maccess and WGEN—three services deemed essential and therefore not at risk of being impacted by the SCI.

Despite criticism of the SCI’s rollout and MSU advocacy efforts, many PTMs are are just worried for the future of their services. 

Daniel said, “Thats been the biggest impact of SCI: emotionally. The worry for the future of the service.”

Ed said, “If my service doesn’t run its going to affect the people who volunteer for me and it’s going to affect all those people who use my service regularly.”

“I’m sad because I don’t want my service to die,” said Ed.

With the SCI mandated for the next two years, with possibility for renewal, the long-term implications could be dire. Without a clear path forward, part-time student staff, volunteers and services users are left to worry for what is to come. MSU advocacy may have mitigated what could have been worse opt-out numbers, but future efforts will be essential to keep services afloat. 

 

[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]

 

Photos by Andrew Mrozowski / A&C Editor 

On Nov. 21, the Ontario Divisional Court struck down the Student Choice Initiative, a controversial directive introduced by the provincial government which required universities and colleges to allow students to opt-out of student fees deemed “non-essential.” Three judges unanimously ruled that the government did not have the legal authority to interfere with the autonomous and democratic decision-making process between universities and student unions. 

On Jan. 17, 2019, Ontario’s Ministry of Colleges and Universities publicly announced the SCI alongside a series of changes to post secondary funding, including cuts to the Ontario Student Assistance Program. When students were given the opportunity to opt-out in September 2019, services deemed non-essential such as food banks, student societies and campus media became vulnerable to funding cuts.   

On May 24, the Canadian Federation of Students-Ontario and the York Federation of Students launched a joint legal challenge against the provincial government’s SCI directive, claiming that the SCI was unlawful, proposed in bad faith and carried out in a way that was procedurally unfair. On the basis of the legality of the SCI, the Divisional Court of Ontario ruled in favour of CFS-O and YFS on Nov. 21.

The legal document explaining the judges’ decision cites previous Supreme Court rulings, which concluded that, while universities are regulated and funded by the government, “it by no means follows, however, that universities are organs of government … The fact is that each of the universities has its own governing body … The government thus has no legal power to control the universities even if it wished to do so.”  

"Student unions can confidently budget again ... For students to access the services of their student unions" - CFSO Rep https://t.co/c3XO2R6LOZ

— The Silhouette (@theSilhouette) November 22, 2019

The Ontario government attempted to defend themselves by arguing that the SCI was a “core policy decision” not subject to judicial review, and that they were exercising their prerogative power over spending decisions. However, the Court’s legal documents state that, “with the exception of narrowly defined powers in the MTCU [Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities] Act, policy-making and governance authority over a university is vested in its [university’s] Boards of Governors and Senates.”

 

THE DECISION

The Divisional Court found that by interfering with the agreement between student unions and universities, the SCI posed a threat to universities’ autonomy from the government.

Louis Century, an associate at Goldblatt Partners and lawyer for the CFS-O, sees the decision as proof of the importance of student unions.

“I would hope that student unions would read this decision as an affirmation of the central role that they play on campuses. That was a core part of the Court’s decision, is recognizing that . . .  they’re actually core to what happens on campuses at universities, so much so that the government overriding their affairs is overriding the autonomy of the university generally,” he said.

“I would hope that student unions would read this decision as an affirmation of the central role that they play on campuses. That was a core part of the Court’s decision, is recognizing that . . .  they’re actually core to what happens on campuses at universities, so much so that the government overriding their affairs is overriding the autonomy of the university generally,” said Louis Century, an associate at Goldblatt Partners and lawyer for the CFS-O. 

The YFS and CFS-O also argued that the government had implemented the SCI in bad faith, on the basis of a politically-motivated attack on student unions. While the Court heard this evidence, it did not end up being a factor in determining the legality of the SCI.

In a fundraising email sent to the Conservative party in February, Premier Doug Ford wrote, “Students were forced into unions and forced to pay for those unions. I think we all know what kind of crazy Marxist nonsense student unions get up to. So, we fixed that. Student union fees are now opt-in.”

Kayla Weiler, the National Executive Representative of the Canadian Federation of Students-Ontario, believes that the SCI was about silencing the organizations critical of the Ford government that advocate on behalf of students.

“This was never about choice. It was always about the Ford government trying to silence the exact bodies that hold them accountable and challenge them to do better,” Weiler stated during a press conference on Nov. 22.

“This was never about choice. It was always about the Ford government trying to silence the exact bodies that hold them accountable and challenge them to do better,” Weiler stated during a press conference on Nov. 22.

Since its introduction, the SCI has been widely criticized. Student union representatives have argued that, while the purpose of the SCI was to allow students to decide where their money would go, student unions already have democratic procedures in place that allow students to decide which services to fund. At McMaster, for example, undergraduate students have the opportunity to vote on fees during annual general meetings, referenda and other processes.

Weiler believes that the implementation of the SCI was to question the validity of student unions as valid democracies and valid organizations. 

“It’s about time for the government to recognize us as autonomous organizations. . .What we want is to be recognized as autonomous organizations that fight for student rights, and we don’t want to have government interference into our budgets or the work that we do and we don’t want the Premier to comment on the fact that we are crazy Marxists. What we want is legislation that protects us and not hurt us,” said Weiler. 

“It’s important for these conversations to be held in a particular campus because Doug Ford is not a student in 2019. The Minister of Colleges and Universities is not a student in 2019 at Algoma University or the University of Windsor or George Brown College, so why are they making decisions for the students on these campuses?” 

 

WHAT HAPPENS NOW?

Unless the decision is successfully appealed, the fee structure for student unions will return to normal.

“Any legal requirements that existed before this case was brought are now restored,” said Century. 

The MSU, however, will not implement the results of the Court’s decision until the appeal period closes.

“Until we have the appeal period, and until we have that final decision, we do need to operate in the most financially stable way, which is assuming that those agreements are still in place,” said MSU president Josh Marando.

“Until we have the appeal period, and until we have that final decision, we do need to operate in the most financially stable way, which is assuming that those agreements are still in place,” said MSU president Josh Marando.

If the decision is upheld in Court, the results of the SCI will still be felt at universities and colleges across the province. Some Ontario student unions had to cut entire jobs and services this year as a result of SCI.

MSU general manager John McGowan pointed out that McMaster was lucky to be able to rely on reserve funds this year. However, student services have still felt the impact. With their budgets uncertain, services have had to hold off on hiring and long-term planning. 

Furthermore, the MSU dedicated resources towards implementing the SCI and educating students about the process.

“There has been quite a bit of time and energy put into creating the fees, educating students on what those fees look like, as well as making sure that we're compliant with the framework and the new tuition and ancillary fee framework,” said Marando.

If the SCI decision is upheld in court, it will mean that an unlawful directive caused harm to campus services and student unions. Chris Glover, the MPP for Spadina–Fort York and the Ontario New Democratic Party’s postsecondary critic, noted that many campus services are currently struggling financially as a result of the SCI. Glover called on Ford to reimburse student services for the losses they incurred under SCI.

“I really think that the government should step up …  Their actions were unlawful and now students are suffering, campus services are suffering, and the government should make up for this shortfall, Doug Ford should make up for this shortfall,” said Glover during a press conference. 

If the student fee structure that existed before the SCI is restored, it is unclear how services and clubs whose funds have been negatively impacted may be compensated, if at all. Both CFS-O and YFS representatives emphasized that, at the very least, the Court’s decision should be a lesson as to the importance of engaging with and protecting the democratic processes at all universities and colleges. 

 

[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]

 

Photo C/O Catherine Goce

On Sept. 22, the Student Representative Assembly voted to de-ratify the McMaster Chinese Students and Scholars Association due to concerns that the club’s actions had endangered members of the community. An investigation by the Silhouette has found that there had been several instances of miscommunication in the months leading up to the de-ratification.

During the summer, the Student Representative Assembly were under the impression that MAC CSSA would be under probation during the 2019-2020 academic year. However, this was not the case. Miscommunication between members of the SRA and some MSU staff members led to MAC CSSA being ratified as an MSU club on July 21 without first being placed on probation. On Sept. 22, MAC CSSA was de-ratified due to reasons unrelated to this miscommunication.

Every summer, the Clubs Administrator provides the SRA with a list of groups to recommend for MSU club status, highlighting any groups that require additional monitoring. On June 18, Clubs Administrator Aditi Sharma released a memo that recommended 327 student groups for MSU club status. The memo drew attention to two McMaster clubs: MAC CSSA and LifeLine.

“Two returning clubs (CSSA & Lifeline) are marked with a double asterisk (**) which indicates certain issues that came up during the year and supplemental details for those issues,” Sharma states in the memo. 

The supplemental details that Sharma was referring to, titled “Clubs Ratification Supplemental Info #2 - CSSA and Lifeline”, provides some background on the clubs. It highlights concerns that members of MAC CSSA had endangered an activist who spoke on campus about human rights issues for Uighur Muslims in China on Feb. 11. The document gives no indication that MAC CSSA was to be put on probation. 

Putting a club on probation allows the MSU to monitor the group’s activities and evaluate the need for further disciplinary action. According to the MSU Clubs Operating Policy, if clubs are found guilty of certain offenses, they may be placed on a period of probation. During this period, the club is required to report all future events and meetings to the Clubs Administrator. If the club is found to violate the rules again, it is subject to disciplinary action.

During the June 23 SRA meeting, a motion was put forward to ratify new and returning MSU clubs as recommended by the Clubs Administrator for the 2019-2020 academic year. An amendment to this motion was put forward to ratify all clubs with the exception of MAC CSSA, McMaster Chinese News Network, McMaster Chinese Graduate Students Society and McMaster Chinese Professional Association. A motion to postpone this discussion to the July 21 SRA meeting was passed 19-1, citing the need for more information.

On July 21, the SRA voted 17-1 to ratify all new and returning MSU clubs as recommended by the Clubs Administrator for the 2019-2020 academic year. MAC CSSA was ratified without any probationary period, since the Clubs Administrator had not recommended that they be placed on probation. 

Email correspondence in preparation for an SRA meeting almost two weeks later indicated that there was an assumption that MAC CSSA had been placed on probation. In reality, however, nowhere do the meeting minutes state that MAC CSSA had been placed on probation.

On Aug. 12, Administrative Services Coordinator Victoria Scott sent an email to an SRA member in which she mistakenly stated that MAC CSSA was on probation.

“. . .I can tell you now that the Chinese Students and Scholars Association’s ratification was contingent on providing outstanding information, plus they are on probation for six months,” said Scott in her email. 

“One more clarification! They are on probation, but there wasn’t a time set,” Scott clarified through a second email that she sent the same day. 

Both clarifications were incorrect. 

“In my August 12 email to [an SRA member], I incorrectly referenced a memo from the Clubs Department that was circulated in June to the SRA,” said Scott, when asked by the Silhouette on Nov. 5 where she obtained the information on CSSA’s probation.

Neither MAC CSSA’s probation nor the length of time for a probationary period are mentioned in the Clubs Department’s June memo

On Aug. 14, an SRA member, who asked to remain anonymous, sent an email to MSU President Josh Marando to clarify MAC CSSA’s privileges including their access to MSU resources and the club’s ability to attend ClubsFest. 

“Towards the end of our meeting [on Aug. 13], I believe [one SRA member] had asked about the BoD [Board of Directors] about the current situation with [MAC] CSSA, to which they replied that as of now, the CSSA does not have access to MSU resources . . .” said the SRA member in the email.

“I know the end of the SRA meeting got quite confusing, I was confused as well so I apologize for that. [MAC] CSSA is currently under probation this year, which means they must keep clubs admin informed of all events they hold, are watched more closely, and will face serious consequences in the instance of another infraction,” replied Marando over email.

It is unclear whether both the SRA member and Marando are referring to an informal meeting, or whether records of this meeting are missing from the August 13 SRA meeting minutes, as this was an emergency meeting called to revoke the Dominion’s Society club status.

Almost three weeks later, on Sept. 3, the same SRA member sent a follow-up email regarding MAC CSSA’s supposed probation, which both Scott and Marando had confirmed earlier via email. 

“I wanted to ask — why exactly was the CSSA put on probation? I’m not sure if I missed it, but I don’t think it was ever clear about the reason behind this [decision],” asked the SRA member. “In addition, I don’t believe that there is actually any explicit record of the CSSA being disciplined.”

“I believe the terms this year are that all events go through the Clubs Administrator as well as conditions surrounding ratification should they breach policy this year. That said, I don’t fully know,” replied Marando, offering to check and meet with the Clubs Department after ClubsFest. 

After at least one month of miscommunication, on Sept. 13, Marando clarified that the Clubs Department had recommended LifeLine to be ratified contingent on a probationary period, but had not recommended this for MAC CSSA.

“I am still following up with the minutes of the meeting as they haven’t been released yet, so I would interpret it as LifeLine’s probation still stands, but the CSSA one should be put forward again [...] Again, I’m still confirming to be 100%, but I would say it’s probably best to go ahead and put forward the CSSA probation motion again at the September 22 [SRA] meeting,” clarified Marando in his email on Sept. 13.

In an SRA Facebook group message following the Sept. 22 SRA meeting, Marando acknowledged the miscommunication surrounding MAC CSSA’s probation and apologized for the confusion.

“Regarding the confusion and mistakes made regarding the CSSA not being informed at the meeting and the initial probation. Overall, both are big oversites [sic], but please understand that they were not intentional by any means and we have put plans to ensure they do not happen again,” said Marando in the Facebook chat. 

When asked about this miscommunication at the Nov. 3 SRA meeting, Marando stated that he believed everyone on the SRA was under the impression that the Club Department’s  recommendation of probation applied to MAC CSSA, as well as LifeLine.

“It was really a procedural error,” said Marando. 

This was the first time that he publicly acknowledged the issue of miscommunication pertaining to the CSSA’s supposed probation.  

“Trying to rectify moving forward in terms of making sure that motions are more specific when it comes to ratifying clubs also, we are doing a full review of the clubs application process through our Internal Governance committee,” said Marando. 

In the President’s Report, Marando states that club policy review is ongoing. 

“Overall, I am hoping to have a bulk of the policy writing time in December, with conversations happening during November. We are looking at how funding works, improvements to [re-ratifications], how and who ratifies clubs, the Club Executive Council, and what qualifies a recognized club,” stated Marando in the report. 

Time will tell the impact any changes made to club policies will have on future communication within the MSU.  

Photo C/O Kyle West

On Nov. 3, the Student Representative Assembly rejected the McMaster Chinese Student and Scholars Association’s appeal to have their club re-ratified.

The SRA passed a motion on Sept. 22 to de-ratify MAC CSSA for violating section 5.1.3 of the Clubs Operating Policy by endangering student safety. This decision was partly based on evidence documents and a student testimony provided at the meeting. The evidence claims that MAC CSSA had surveilled and harassed the speaker of a Feb. 11 event, which discussed the treatment of Uyghur Muslims in Western China. 

Most of the meeting was spent on a presentation from the CSSA’s legal council, Samantha Wu, and a question and answer period. Wu, on behalf of MAC CSSA, requested that the SRA reconsider its decision to de-ratify the club.  

“The CSSA is a McMaster University club with thousands of members. It has benefited numerous newly arrived international students in the McMaster community for 35 years. The club organizes events celebrating Chinese holidays, food and performances as part of McMaster’s diverse community,” said Wu in her presentation.

During the Sept. 22 meeting where the SRA de-ratified MAC CSSA, the SRA presented what they believed to be evidence in support of MAC CSSA’s connection with the Chinese government. This evidence came from a 2018 report from the United States-China Economic and Security Review Commission. The U.S. report stated that CSSAs across the U.S. have governmental ties with Chinese embassies and consulates, noting that similar operations could be taking place in US-allied countries.

While SRA’s final motion to de-ratify MAC CSSA did not point to governmental ties as a factor in the SRA’s decision, Wu discussed concerns raised about MAC CSSA in the SRA evidence report. 

Wu refuted allegations that MAC CSSA had reported on behalf of the Chinese Communist Party, stating that communication occurred between MAC CSSA and the Chinese consulate to raise awareness of consulate services. 

“[The CSSA] has not informed on, and will not inform on any McMaster students or events critical to the Chinese government … the CSSA is an independent McMaster club and is unaffiliated with other CSSAs or the Chinese government,” said Wu at the SRA meeting. 

In response to questions that the SRA sent to MAC CSSA on Oct. 8, MAC CSSA sent the MSU speaker a document of their answers on Oct. 27. In this document, MAC CSSA denied that Chinese authorities played a role in the club’s membership, elections, meetings and other activities. 

MAC CSSA stated that Chinese consulate officials have attended informal MAC CSSA events.

“Recently, for example, MAC CSSA club organized an informal event that occurred on September 2, 2019. During this event, two Chinese consulate officials visited the McMaster campus to meet briefly with new international Chinese students attending McMaster to discuss adjusting to living in Canada,” wrote MAC CSSA in response to the SRA’s questions.

Wu claimed that the decision to de-ratify MAC CSSA was based on procedural unfairness, as the SRA failed to follow the procedures outlined in the MSU Clubs Operating Policy.

She also argued that the decision to de-ratify MAC CSSA violated the MSU Clubs Operating Policy, referencing sections 5.3.1 and 5.3.2 in the Clubs Operating Policy. The policy states that the Clubs Administrator may sanction an MSU club, and in the event of a more serious infraction the CEC may decide on a more severe punishment. According to Wu, this procedure never took place.

However, “Clubs Operating Policy section 5.3.2 is in reference to disbandment, not deratification, though it should be noted that the disbandment is subject to SRA final approval as SRA is the only body that can ratify the decision to disband the club,” according to a document titled “CSSA Statement,” dated Nov. 3.

At the Nov. 3 SRA meeting, MSU President Josh Marando clarified that all clubs are contingent on SRA ratification when asked by The Silhouette if the decision to de-ratify MAC CSSA followed the Club Operating Policy.

Marando also added there is no policy that states an appeal process for de-ratification is mandatory. 

“The SRA decided to grant an appeal process in this case to ensure that the CSSA has the opportunity to present their side of the story,” said Marando. 

Despite the time spent considering MAC CSSA’s alleged connection to the Chinese government, this was not a part of the final motion to de-ratify the club. The final de-ratification motion was based on the concern that actions taken by MAC CSSA members had endangered members of the McMaster community.

On Feb. 13, MAC CSSA was among the signatories of a letter that accused the event of publicizing national hatred. The letter stated that signatories had contacted the Chinese consulate in Toronto about the Feb. 11 event discussing the treatment of Uyghur Muslims in Western China.

The SRA deemed the act of contacting the consulate to be dangerous. Citing a report from Human Rights watch, members raised concerns that students’ safety could have been jeopardized if the Chinese consulate found out that they attended the event.

When asked about whether they played a role in releasing the Feb. 13 statement and contacting the Chinese Consulate, MAC CSSA claimed that a McMaster alum, who was not currently a member of MAC CSSA, had contacted the consulate on Feb. 11. In addition, they claim that the same alum prepared and obtained consent from the then-president of MAC CSSA to place the club’s name on the Feb. 13 statement.

Even though they deny having contacted the consulate, MAC CSSA admits that they signed the letter.

“MAC CSSA agreed to place its name on the Statement out of concern for the safety of McMaster students and in order to exercise MAC CSSA members’ freedom of expression rights. By signing the Statement, there was no intention by MAC CSSA to censor or intimidate anyone in the McMaster community,” MAC CSSA wrote in their answers to SRA questions.

During the Nov. 3 SRA meeting, the SRA denied MAC CSSA’s appeal to reconsider the club’s de-ratification.

“The main sentiment coming out is that regardless of intent, we are talking about the actual action and that we are upholding the decision that we’ve made because students have come forward and said they feel unsafe,” stated VP (Education) Shemar Hackett.

Subscribe to our Mailing List

© 2024 The Silhouette. All Rights Reserved. McMaster University's Student Newspaper.
magnifiercrossmenu