Strategic voting may seem like a tool to combat a flawed system, but in reality, it is just another symptom of our elections' flaws
As we approach the upcoming provincial election, the overwhelming likelihood of a Conservative majority is pushing many students to consider voting strategically.
While the sentiment behind strategic voting — to avert the victory of a least-preferred party by voting for whichever other candidate has the best chance of winning — makes sense in certain circumstances, strategic voting is a critically flawed strategy that students should reconsider.
While many progressive organizations, such as unions, parties and community organizations, throw their weight behind strategic voting each election, there is little historical evidence to suggest they gain anything from subordinating their values to vote against Conservatives rather than for their preferred candidates.
As Larry Savage, a Brock University professor who has studied strategic voting, suggested in a 2022 article, there are a number of flaws with the strategy that make it an almost useless approach.
The first flaw he outlines is the inconsistency of tactical voting recommendations. Organizations often struggle to agree on which candidate to endorse as the strategic vote. Because of a critical lack of riding-level polling for most elections, recommendations can often contradict one another.
He also suggests that strategic voting campaigns often struggle to adapt to mid-campaign shifts in polling, leading to outdated or incorrect recommendations.
One strategic voting website's mishandling of Hamilton Centre, an important riding for many McMaster students, provides a clear example of strategic voting's issues. In making recommendations on how to vote in Hamilton-Centre, Smartvoting.ca demonstrated a number of flaws inherent in strategic voting.
This election for Hamilton-Centre is unprecedented in the riding’s 18-year history. For every election since the riding was recreated in 2007, the NDP candidate has won. From 2007 to 2022, this candidate was Andrea Horwath, who became the Ontario NDP leader in 2009. After the last provincial election, Horwath resigned as party leader to run for Hamilton mayor and Sarah Jama was elected MPP under the NDP for Hamilton Centre.
Now, after being removed from the Ontario NDP, Jama is running as an independent against the NDP’s newly declared candidate, Robin Lennox. Both candidates have ties to the McMaster community.
With no apparent direct polling at the riding-level, SmartVoting.ca has made recommendations for Hamilton Centre’s election. Their recommended strategic vote, possibly due to a lack of direct polling at the riding level, has now changed at least twice — from NDP to Sarah Jama and now back to NDP — which gave Jama enough time to proclaim herself in one Instagram post as the “best chance to make sure we keep this riding safe from Ford.”
It is particularly telling that according to SmartVoting’s own projection, the Conservatives stand no chance of winning Hamilton-Centre. Yet, instead of suggesting people vote based on their beliefs, they made a recommendation anyway. This choice is not an indictment of SmartVoting itself, but an indictment of the systemic flaws of strategic voting as a whole.
As shocking as it is for me to find myself agreeing with Liberal leadership, former Ontario Liberal leader Steven Del Duca was right in the last election when he chose to run not as a “strategic choice” against Doug Ford, but on his party’s values and ideas. Strategic voting, similar in spirit to the often-proposed merger of Ontario Liberals and the Ontario NDP, is, as prominent Liberal Tim Murphy suggested about the proposed merger, a victory of shallow tactical politics over principles and values.
Strategic voting is symptomatic of a fundamentally flawed electoral system — a winner-takes-all approach that, for many, has turned voting on beliefs and principles into voting based on negative opinions of a right- or left-wing boogeyman. SmartVoting itself recognizes its purpose — but not the doom-and-gloom anti-Conservative rhetoric that fuels its use — as symptomatic of our first-past-the-post system and fails, like many other strategic voting services, to centre advocacy for electoral reform.
Strategic voting is symptomatic of a fundamentally flawed electoral system — a winner-takes-all approach that, for many, has turned voting on beliefs and principles into voting based on negative opinions of a right-or left-wing boogeyman.
Change-minded students should vote based on their genuine beliefs. We stand a far better chance of changing the results of the provincial election by actually voting for our values than by a few of us voting strategically.
And whoever your MPP ends up being, write to them to demand electoral reform.
Staring down the barrel of two conservative landslides, progressive students should aim to revive electoral reform to democratically empower themselves and others
On the eve of an Ontario election, set to take place on Feb. 27 and a looming federal election likely sometime this summer, conservatives at the provincial and federal level appear to be ascendant. But it shouldn't have to be like this. If students can get organized, it may not have to be.
Canada’s federal election was given a timeline when, on Jan. 6, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced that he will be resigning as liberal leader and requested that parliament be kept on leave until a new leader was chosen. This next leader will likely face an election soon after parliament resumes at the end of March, as NDP leader Jagmeet Singh has indicated his intention to vote with the other opposition parties for an election.
When asked what he regretted most by reporters at the announcement of his resignation, Justin Trudeau cited his abandonment of electoral reform during his first term as leader after the 2015 election.
It was after that election, when the Liberals won a majority in the federal parliament, that they convened a committee of all the parties in parliament to propose a path for electoral reform. When all four opposition parties, including the conservatives, came back with a proposal Justin Trudeau didn't like, the Liberals abandoned their promised reform entirely.
When all four opposition parties, including the conservatives, came back with a proposal Justin Trudeau didn't like, the Liberals abandoned their promised reform entirely.
Nine years later, this proposal for proportional representation — where parties would gain seats proportional to their share of the popular vote, not based on the number of ridings they win — looks like a pretty good deal.
Ontario’s upcoming snap-election looks to be a secure win for Doug Ford. Despite his record of a massive cut to OSAP, being under RCMP investigation for corruption and most recently making bike lanes all but impossible to build, no opposition party appears to be mounting a serious challenge in the polls.
Students, generally in the age group least likely to vote in Canada, could change the election by turning out en-masse. While students absolutely should vote in the upcoming election, McMaster students alone are not well positioned to make a difference in the progressive seats of Hamilton-Centre and West-Hamilton-Ancaster-Dundas.
Politically active students might have better luck starting or joining party-affiliated clubs on campus, which offer a chance to organize and make their voices on policies such as electoral reform heard. Some political parties even allow student organizations to vote on party affairs and policy.
Despite current polling data, all hope is not lost, as progressive students may have a strange ally in their quest to stop conservative majorities at the Provincial and National level: Donald Trump.
Donald Trump’s inauguration in January 2025 caused great political change north of the border. Provincially, it was Doug Ford’s supposed reasoning for calling an election. Federally, it spells a much different story. It is possible one of the main factors behind a recent decline in Conservative polling.
While this decline is not yet critical, as tensions with the United States of America continue to build and the liberal leadership race continues, the polls may continue to slide.
If Ontario is a long-shot, changing the Federal Election results seems like a possibility. But without a clear vision and without organizing, students can't hope to change either. Ontario’s election is our chance to get organized and serves as a warning of what lacking the infrastructure – only one party has a campus affiliate – for organizing means. But our vision should be clear, young people need electoral reform.
Ontario’s election is our chance to get organized and serves as a warning of what lacking the infrastructure – only one party has a campus affiliate – for organizing means.
Proportional representation, an electoral system that awards seats in parliament based on the amount of votes a whole party gets, could enable more parties to gain seats and work together in forming and running a government. It could also prevent the parliamentary majorities that swing Canadian politics drastically on sometimes less than 40 per cent of the vote.
Students are, as mentioned above, overwhelmingly part of the age demographic least likely to vote. Their reasoning, according to Elections Canada, is a feeling that governments don't really respond to their voices or votes.
Without student organizations and pressure, electoral reform might never regain the momentum it had in 2015. But if we as students get organized now and demand electoral reform, we could change how students feel about the impact of their vote and empower students to play a larger role in determining the future of the country.
Student democracy is a fundamental principle of the MSU, but as participation falters, what can we do to re-centre it in student life?
Election turnout is a yearly topic of discussion at the Silhouette and throughout the MSU, whether there excitement at high participation, or more frequently worry over student disinterest.
The 2024 McMaster Students Union presidential election saw a 56 per cent increase in voter turnout from 2023, something re-elected MSU President Jovan Popovic saw as a testament to the MSU’s increasing connection with students coming out of the pandemic. But while this increase in turnout is important, it misses the reality that the MSU has been in a crisis of democratic disengagement for years.
The introduction of electronic voting to MSU elections in 2010 saw student participation jump from nine per cent to 22 per cent in one year. Over the next 7 years, turnout continued on an upward trend, remaining for 5 years at over 40 per cent until its sudden 13 per cent drop in 2018. From then on, presidential elections have continued to see disappointingly low voter turnout and overall engagement in student politics, including the acclamation of a president in 2021 when only one candidate ran.
Even last year’s rebound hides ongoing struggles. 2024’s MSU General Assembly saw a 50 per cent decline in attendance since 2023, from ten to five members present, more than 750 people shy of quorum each time. This not only means that the General Assembly’s resolutions are non-binding, but that it also fails to effectively inform the Student Representative Assembly of student opinion.
The difference between presidential election turnout and participation in the other facets of student democracy illustrates students’ complex relationship with the MSU and its president. The well publicized presidential race, with platforms full of often detailed and/or ambitious promises, attracts participation perhaps because it seems to be the easiest and highest impact way to have your voice heard in the MSU.
The well publicized presidential race, with platforms full of typically detailed and/or ambitious promises, attracts participation perhaps because it seems to be the easiest and highest impact way to have your voice heard in the MSU.
The presidential election is democracy at work without the complex procedure of the SRA, the referendum process, or the General Assembly. These procedures exist for a reason but they have to be balanced with creating a democratic spirit among students.
There is one exception to the recent democratic decline of the MSU, and that is 2024’s bike share referendum, which saw what was for a referendum tremendous turnout. In a year when the only other referendum, the Food Accessibility Initiative, failed to gain enough votes to meet quorum, the bike share referendum passed with tremendous support.
The bike share campaign was a long and very public one, with student activists pushing the measure through at every step of the referendum process. The referendum’s supporters had over a year to promote their position on the referendum.
The MSU’s election rules limit campaigning to a set period prior to referenda, to ensure fairness. McMaster bike share was able to work around this because the process of gathering signatures — which the bike share needed as a student initiated referendum — did not violate the campaigning rules. Without this extra campaign period the bike share referendum might not have succeeded in getting the necessary 10 per cent voter turnout for a referendum to be valid.
The alternative however, was demonstrated in the failure of the Food Security Initiative, initiated by President Popovic. Campaigning was limited to a brief period prior to the referendum and without ample time to inform and excite students, not enough turned out.
While the strict campaign period makes sense for the election of student representatives, as it is important that those elections be competitive and that each candidate be given a fair chance, referenda are not competitions. Limiting elected representatives' allowed time to communicate with their constituents for or against a referendum is not an effective way to encourage student democracy.
Simply informing students of a referendum shortly before the voting period without much opportunity to inspire them to take action appears to be an ineffective way of increasing political participation. If our best examples of democratic culture rely on motivating students through positive messaging — whether that be the platforms of promising presidential candidates or the potential benefits of passing a referendum — it may be time to reconsider how we allow students to be informed about their student union's initiatives.
Students need more freedom to actively and effectively participate in their student government on their often limited schedule. Empowering students and our political representatives to promote their initiatives actively
The recent anti-immigrant demonstration in downtown Hamilton should be deeply disturbing to everyone; but what could an inclusive response look like in the face of xenophobic extremism?
Initial reactions to the far-right demonstration outside Jackson Square late last year on Nov. 9, 2024, where masked protestors held up a sign calling for "mass deportations now" were unified; hate has no home in Hamilton.
This message might ring hollow however, if instead of just words, we examine the actions of Canada as a whole. Far from out of place, in our current political climate, this anti-immigrant extremism seems right at home.
The current federal government is remarkably unpopular. Headed by a Prime Minister with dismal approval ratings, the federal Liberals have spent the last year attempting to claw back support they’ve lost to the Conservative’s 18-point poll lead.
While Prime Minister Trudeau has pivoted to address many of the Conservative’s main appeals, the housing crisis and inflation are much harder issues to address immediately. Reducing immigration numbers and preying on vulnerable people for approval is much faster.
Whether it be the dramatic rise in deportations, recent last-minute decreases to the number of new permanent residents, or the new cap on international students, the government has found a scapegoat in temporary residents.
The government is well aware of the risks these policies impose on temporary residents. Pushed into instability by a lack of documentation or the constant threat of losing it, temporary residents are at risk of exploitation. Many are having their wages stolen, being forced to work in unsafe conditions, or becoming victims of an epidemic of sexual harassment.
The bare minimum to ensure against these risks, as recognized both by migrant activists and Canadian experts, is permanent residency status.
Why then, in a political environment increasingly built on xenophobia from our two largest political parties, would anyone be shocked that protestors feel emboldened to call for mass deportations in downtown Hamilton? A more important question to ask however is, how can students change this reality?
Migrant issues are worker’s issues, as was succinctly pointed out in the Hamilton and District Labour Council’s response to the recent demonstration. Workers with citizenship have infinitely more in common with temporary residents working to survive than they do with Canadian citizens who get wealthy profiteering off of their exploitation.
Worker’s with citizenship have infinitely more in common with temporary residents working to survive than they do with Canadian citizens who get wealthy profiteering off of their exploitation.
Shut out from formal political power without a vote however, migrant activists are disempowered from engaging in the formal politics that Canadian citizens are granted a voice in.
These organizations, like the many affiliated with the Migrant Rights Network, or the Southern Ontario local Naujawan Support Network, do important, invaluable work organizing temporary workers to fight for their rights. These organizations do all of this despite their exclusion from formal politics in Canada.
More than half of current temporary residents in Canada are international students, or graduates here on postgraduate work permits. Students with citizenship have the unique ability to bridge two worlds inclusively and productively.
By helping to connect international students to organizations best capable of supporting them and developing ties with these organizations to advocate on behalf of their concerns at local, provincial and even national levels, students can build political relationships and work in solidarity for a more inclusive Canada.
Campus organizations of NDP students for instance, are granted voting delegates to NDP conventions, where that party, which at least claims to represent workers, votes on important policy matters and the future of the party.
With student’s adamant support, there could be at least one federal party that actively supports temporary resident’s needs in direct collaboration and dialogue with them. By establishing themselves as an interface between these important organizations and a powerful party, student’s may be able to affect change.
All is not hopeless. The Hamilton and District Labour Council’s response to the recent demonstrations illustrate the willingness of other organizations, with power both inside the NDP (local labour councils are also granted voting delegates) and within the local community to stand up for the rights of temporary residents. The recent rise in xenophobia is not inevitable nor undefeatable.
Migrant issues are labour issues. By working in concert with both migrant workers and the political infrastructure of Canadian labour, caring students make a difference. Our attention and advocacy can matter and we must amplify our voices to ensure it does.
Young Canadian’s feelings about climate change and the future are contradictory, alarming, and hopeful all at once
Ask anyone on campus and more likely than not, they’ll be concerned about climate change. And we have every reason to be concerned; living in yet another warmest year on record, one likely to reach 1.5 degrees of warming, things don’t appear to be getting much better.
Our federal politics seems dominated by a party (the Conservatives) running purely on negative politics, screaming for a carbon tax election and offering no viable alternative to addressing the overwhelming body of evidence that climate change is a serious, urgent crisis.
With every other party seemingly doomed to a parliamentary minority in opposition, what hope is there that a conservative majority will be serious about addressing climate change?
Internationally, the situation seems all the more dire.
From the Mediterranean to the US-Mexico border, migrants, increasingly displaced by climate related catastrophe, are facing heightened violence. Domestically, wealthy nations in Europe and North America are becoming increasingly hostile to these same migrants who manage to survive the dangerous journeys to new homes.
These same wealthy nations refused to strike a deal at the recent COP29 climate conference that the world’s poorest countries found satisfactory.
Instead, they only offered to pay a small portion of the necessary funding to address the disproportionate effects of climate change on developing countries. These are the same developing countries who by-and-large did not contribute to the greenhouse gas emissions that are causing the climate crisis, the emissions that were released in making the world’s wealthiest countries as wealthy as they are.
We, it seems, have every possible reason to be hopeless - and yet we overwhelmingly believe that together, we can address the climate crisis.
We, it seems, have every possible reason to be hopeless - and yet we overwhelmingly believe that together, we can address the climate crisis.
But young people’s feelings are not as simple as that overwhelming belief may suggest. But, as a start, our belief that action is possible is a good one.
Of the 71 per cent that believe change is possible, only half believe they can be part of it. In a seeming contradiction, almost half of all young people believe humanity is doomed.
What does it mean for students to be hopeful and hopeless at the same time? While you might take it as a sign of deep uncertainty, a more hopeful reading might suggest students recognize both the gravity of the problem and the necessity of a solution.
Young people’s belief that they will not be as well off as their parents, or that serious life-style changes are required to mitigate the worst impacts of climate change might suggest that they are pessimistic. But our belief that collective action is the path to solutions also suggests we are ready for a future of cooperation, not competition.
Our belief that collective action is the path to solutions also suggests we are ready for a future of cooperation, not competition.
Living in one of the wealthiest countries on Earth is a privilege. We are far closer to power than the world's poorest and most impacted by climate catastrophe. We cannot shed this global responsibility for selfishness.
Whether you choose to get involved at the University level, with groups like the newly renamed McMaster Climate Justice, at the local level with organizations like Green Venture, or at the provincial level, where our conservative government is far more vulnerable, students becoming active is critical for the future.
Getting involved is not just the responsible thing to do, it's a responsibility we all share, not just for ourselves, but for all of humanity, particularly those who lack the privileges we have that allow us to effect change. Students are ready to combat the climate crisis, now all that's left is to prove we can be the ones to do it.
Student housing has been in crisis for years and new laws in Hamilton might offer an opportunity to bring back an old solution, could student co-operatives make a comeback?
Hamilton’s student housing market is a mess. Every year students struggle in a race to acquire limited off campus housing, often making sacrifices in cost or distance.
Student housing has also been subjected to increasing blame for Canada’s broader housing crisis, which has pushed the current liberal government into capping foreign student numbers in a weak attempt to address endemic problems.
Hamilton’s housing situation is particularly desperate, with both buying and renting remaining unaffordable for most. Despite being one of Hamilton’s top municipal issues, progress has been slow outside of the downtown core.
Recent changes to zoning regulations have made space for more gentle density development, allowing duplex, triplex and fourplex buildings in single unit zoned areas. These zoning changes offer a new path for student housing in the Ainslie Wood and Westdale areas where student housing is most concentrated. This could potentially mean a more diverse set of housing options and an expanded pool of available housing, all critical things to addressing the student housing crisis - but will it?
As high profile projects in Hamilton’s downtown core, backed by major developers, have been delayed due to increased capital costs, it shouldn’t be surprising that the small-landlord-dominated student housing market would be resistant or incapable of engaging in neighborhood-changing development. But what international investors may see as an emerging market opportunity, is not something students can afford to be kept out of the decision making process on.
The characterization of Canada’s student housing market as underdeveloped has some basis in the lived reality of students; a lack of purpose-built housing options is detrimental to both supply and choice. But current proposed solutions, such as the one offered by the Real Estate News Exchange, are not ideal for students. We don’t need more corporate owners building huge, unaccountable student dormitory towers.
There is however one radical alternative. Student co-operative housing has a long history in Canada. Canada’s oldest co-operative housing project is actually Toronto’s Campus Cooperative Residence, opened in 1934.
Student co-operative housing has a long history in Canada, Canada’s oldest co-operative housing project is actually Toronto’s Campus Cooperative Residence, opened in 1934.
In the latter half of the 20th century, rental co-op's emerged in force to support low and middle income communities in securing affordable, secure housing. The model sought to provide low-cost housing by eliminating a profit motive. Residents also take part in co-operative governance, electing a board to oversee the co-op's affairs and maintenance.
Student co-ops use the co-operative housing model to manage costs and community affairs in their buildings. This democratic process keeps profit making out of student housing and allows for students to create an affordable community-based alternative to extractive student housing. This democratic mechanism could be used to balance student housing needs and sustainable development objectives in the student neighborhoods surrounding McMaster.
The only issue with this utopian vision of democratic student residences should be obvious however - money. Whether it be the capital to build initial projects, or expand upon a hopefully successful model, a bunch of idealist students whose university careers might only last a few years are not ideal for securing loans.
For interested student activists there are examples of successful student co-ops to learn from across Canada. However, moving fast to capitalize on the opportunity offered by Hamilton’s new zoning regulations will take organizational capabilities and infrastructure that would be hard to build from the ground up quickly enough.
If the McMaster Students Union wants to make a serious impact in students' lives, using its organizational capabilities and status to facilitate the creation of co-operative student housing could make a permanent impact on McMaster student’s lives. The MSU could put itself at the forefront of a new movement with a bold, creative solution to student’s problems, but it will take daring leadership and effort to succeed.
The MSU could put itself at the forefront of a new movement with a bold, creative solution to student’s problems, but it will take daring leadership and effort to succeed.
Recent interest from the federal government in using co-operative housing means there are opportunities — and possible funding — to tap into.
As access to abortion stands threatened in the wake of a Trump victory, low support and limited sexual education among young people should be our dominating concerns
Tuesday’s US election was fought over many issues, and access to abortion was at the top of many of our minds. Donald Trump's record of bragging about his role in overturning Roe v Wade, made him a difficult pill to swallow for abortion motivated voters. Vice-president Harris attempted to use this to create contrast between her candidacy — one promising to support reproductive rights — and the former president's.
This election was not just an American fascination, Canadians were also paying attention. As this attention continues to spill across the border, what might a feminist response look like? What could we do with this opportunity?
In the wake of Roe’s overturning, Canadian women shared America’s concern over reproductive rights. 62 per cent of women in one survey said they were concerned about the status of reproductive rights in Canada.
The month Roe was overturned saw the highest ever searches for “is abortion legal in Canada” over Google's 10 years of tracking data. The question has sustained interest since then, picking up by a high of nine per cent since Kamala Harris became the Democratic candidate.
What should feminists do with this heightened attention, even if Canada’s conservative party's official policy is to not support any regulation on abortion?
The answer might lie with respect to McMaster students, our friends, coworkers and peers; those in the age demographic in Canada, 18-34, least likely to support a woman’s right to choose. Contrary to what many young people might think, we are according to one poll 13 per cent less likely to support abortion than Canadians aged 55 and above.
Contrary to what many young people might think, we are according to one poll 13 per cent less likely to support abortion than Canadians aged 55 and above.
Why is support for abortion dwindling amongst younger voters? One possible explanation could be a lack of comprehensive abortion knowledge. According to one Ipsos poll, only 56 percent of Canadian women age 16-50 feel they know enough about their options for safely terminating a pregnancy.
More likely, I believe, is the resurgence of the pro-life movement. As this movement has increasingly appealed to emotions for its own patriarchal agenda, it has complicated abortion discourse with debates over fetal-personhood, or abortion’s possible effects on those receiving them.
In the US, anti-abortion victories spearheaded by the republican party have turned abortion into a partisan issue. But this partisanship risks the core of the feminist movement.
By fighting for abortion rights without connecting it explicitly to a broader fight against the patriarchal agenda that fuels anti-abortion politics, the feminist movement risks it’s radical core for sloganeering intended not to be off putting to non-feminists. To quote Vice-president Harris, “One does not have to abandon their faith or deeply held beliefs to simply agree the government should not be telling her what to do with her body."
The dire situation America now faces following Trump's election victory is not yet the case in Canada and student activists should be part of ensuring this remains the case.
How then should student activists, facing a belligerent patriarchal movement, decreasing support among young people for abortion and limited knowledge on sexual health, help to build a robust feminist movement? The answer may in fact rest with past generations of student activists, the same students who are now in the older generation supporting abortion at much higher rates.
In 1968, the McGill Students’ Society published the Birth Control Handbook, breaking Canadian law by disseminating crucial information to students about reproductive health, contraception and abortion.
This was not a politically neutral how-to on safe sex. The handbook’s editorial commentary explicitly drew the connection between contraception and women’s liberation. It also drew the important distinction between safe sex and safe relationships arguing that contraception was ineffective without a real negotiation of healthy sexual relationships.
By drawing these connections explicitly, the feminist activists behind the handbook ensured that abortion, safe sex and contraception remained the feminist political issues that they are. This mirrored and helped enforce the broader feminist movement at the time, whose activism helped to create the permissive abortion environment Canadian's enjoy today. To protect and expand this key step in women's liberation, the feminist movement has to remain strong, be willing to be controversial and be explicit and resolute in the goal of ending patriarchy.
Unwanted pregnancy risks not only student’s educations and careers, it also risks their ability to choose to have children if and when they want.
Unwanted pregnancy risks not only student’s educations and careers, it also risks their ability to choose to have children if and when they want. Against a patriarchal vision of everyone but cisgender-men as vessels for childbirth, feminists must posit and work to create a better future of not just bodily but political autonomy too. For feminist student activists, the past is behind us. Now is our turn to advocate for a future free from patriarchy.
After winning his second term as president of the McMaster Students Union in January 2024, President Jovan Popovic made the decision to fast track one of his campaign promises to a referendum.
The promise: to deliver a free meal program featuring soup and bread to students based on the successful Loaded Ladle program offered at Dalhousie University. The referendum failed to reach quorum, with only 9.4 per cent of the student population casting a ballot one way or the other.
As a transfer student from Dalhousie who witnessed first hand how the Loaded Ladle impacted hundreds of students each day, I see this as a tragedy.
But it may not stay that way for long.
As of September, the Student Representative Assembly approved a motion to rerun the referendum. It seems Popovic might have learned more this time than last about what made Dalhousie’s experiment so successful.
As of September, the Student Representative Assembly approved a motion to rerun the referendum.
The Loaded Ladle began life as an unsanctioned food service organization on Dalhousie’s campus serving soup from an ironing board. Despite problems with campus police, the organization gained popularity among students and garnered support that eventually saw them granted a kitchen space in the student union building, as a carve-out from the union's exclusive contract with corporate food provider Aramark.
Its origins — and continued existence — as an explicitly political, anti-capitalist student activist group meant that the Loaded Ladle needed to garner community support from its beginnings.
While I supported Popovic’s proposal, I think that this difference helps explain why his referendum failed to gain enough votes to either pass or fail. What was at Dalhousie a student-run initiative, would be under Popovic a single presidential candidate’s, albeit well planned and thought out, campaign promise.
The proposal itself reflects these differences too. At Dalhousie, the Loaded Ladle is an independent non-profit, run largely by volunteers, now with some paid positions at $23.50 per hour. The proposed program at McMaster would be run out of the TwelvEighty Kitchen and would be staffed and operated by existing MSU employees.
This difference is understandable. The President alone would have a hard time building an activist organization during a one-year-term and his current proposal would deliver results to students soon and for a modest fee.
But I think it's these differences that explain why the referendum failed to meet quorum. Without a group of student activists raising awareness, most students wouldn't have bothered checking the email from elections services.
Luckily, Popovic himself seems aware of this fact.
In his request to the SRA to suspend the rules on referendums that would have prevented the referendum from being re-run until next year, Popovic acknowledges that his referendum failed exactly where the Bike Share referendum succeeded.
“[T]hey were only aware of one . . . a student-led campaign team was openly informing students of the [Bike Share] referendum," read Popovic's official motion to the SRA.
This time around, Popovic says he has a “group of students” ready to raise awareness about the referendum to the student body. This, along with Popovic’s other reasons for rerunning the referendum — a commitment to his campaign promise and to the democratic process — demonstrate his interest in the kind of student-led politics that helped the Loaded Ladle and the Bike Share referendum to succeed.
This, along with Popovic’s other reasons for rerunning the referendum — a commitment to his campaign promise and to the democratic process — demonstrate his interest in the kind of student-led politics that helped the Loaded Ladle and the Bike Share referendum to succeed.
Whether he follows through on his commitment and sees the soup and bread program through or not, Popovic is clearly attempting to move forward with these valuable lessons in mind. His new plan is a clear path to success. With this revised plan, I think Popovic has everything he needs to succeed.
Just 10 days ago, the world health organization declared the coronavirus a pandemic. According to data collected by Johns Hopkins university, at the time of reporting there are over 300,000 confirmed cases around the world.
What we’re facing is unprecedented and chaotic. Things are moving so quickly that it is impossible to know what the next days, weeks and months will look like. And while in some ways we’re all in the same boat, we also have to recognize that the impacts of the pandemic are not the same for everyone.
Those of us who are young and otherwise healthy may, without knowing it, infect higher-risk people.
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, eight out of 10 deaths reported in the U.S. have been in adults 65 years old and older. Those who are immunocompromised, as well as people with underlying medical conditions like heart disease, diabetes and lung disease, are also at greater risk of adverse outcomes should they contract the virus.
Furthermore, Canada has only 1.95 hospital beds per 1,000 people. If a certain number of people get sick at the same time, hospitals will not have enough beds or ventilators to be able to care for everyone. Practicing physical distancing, washing your hands, avoiding touching your face and disinfecting surfaces are some ways to slow the spread of the virus so that hospitals are able to respond.
Now is a time to stay isolated, but not insulated. While we are distancing ourselves physically, it is important now more than ever to form and strengthen community support networks and look out for the people most at risk. We must navigate this pandemic as individuals, but also as individuals who are a part of a larger community.
Check in with your friends and family, especially those who are at higher risk. The Disability Justice Network of Ontario and the Hamilton Student Mobilization Network have started the CareMongering-HamOnt: Hamilton Community Response to COVID19 Facebook group to connect people in the community to share resources and organize support in response to the COVID-19 outbreak. The goal of the volunteer-run group is to redistribute resources and ensure that vulnerable members of the community have access to food, shelter and healthcare — look out for an article on this to come out shortly.
As vital as it is for communities to support one another, we also need support from institutions and government.
McMaster has made the right decision by cancelling classes. The university now needs to commit to supporting students, staff and faculty who are bearing the brunt of the transition. As classes move fully online, how will students with limited wifi and computer access at home be able to complete their courses? What about students who had been employed at the university or elsewhere and are now facing layoffs and financial insecurity?
How will students be supported as they move out of residence on less than a week’s notice? While international and out-of-province students may be granted special permission to stay in residence, the university has not guaranteed that students who are unable to return home for other reasons, such as unsafe living conditions, will be granted extended residence accommodations.
The Emergency Bursary Fund sponsored by the McMaster Students Union is still available for students in financial emergencies. However, there have been no mention of plans to expand this fund, despite the increased need. The McMaster administration should follow the University of Toronto in creating an emergency fund for students affected by COVID-19, or commit funds to supporting the MSU’s Emergency Bursary Fund.
In addition to students, McMaster needs to ensure that hospitality, food service and custodial staff are supported.
Custodial workers are cleaning the buildings that everyone is being told to vacate, fighting germs that may endanger their own health. Hospitality services staff are at risk every time they interact with people. While they are at risk when they come to work, they are also at risk of layoffs, as the university shuts down operations and closes facilities.
In an open letter released on March 16 entitled, “Time to take care of each other and our communities,” university president David Farrar wrote, “we are [. . .] caring and thoughtful and it is the time to show our determination to take care of each other and our communities.”
Campus staff are just as much a part of the McMaster community as any student, faculty member, or university administrator, and the university administration needs to ensure that they are supported and their needs are prioritized during this difficult time.
We all have a role to play in looking out for the most vulnerable in our communities. While we need to be physically distant, it is more important now than ever to build community, practice solidarity and be there for one another — from at least two metres apart.
[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
By Wei Wu, Contributor
On Oct. 30, pro-life demonstrators stood by L.R. Wilson Hall carrying signs with images of aborted fetuses. It is not clear whether the demonstrators were students at McMaster, or whether they had connections to any existing clubs.
According to Michael Coutu, a student at McMaster, the demonstrators exposed passersby to their signs and distributed pamphlets, which contained graphic images of aborted fetuses. Coutu is concerned about whether the demonstrators received clearance to be on campus.
“Although they were not particularly loud or disruptive, I still found the images and rhetoric being spread very concerning and ill-advised,” said Coutu.
Students have raised their concerns online regarding the contrast between the Oct. 30 situation to the May 11 protest during May at Mac, in which student activists were ticketed for trespassing during a peaceful protest that criticized McMaster regarding a range of issues. One of the issues was sexual abuse within student organizations such as the Maroons.
Initially, the May at Mac demonstrators did not provide identification when asked to do so by security and were asked to leave. However, some of these individuals returned and continued their demonstration later on, which resulted in them being ticketed for trespassing.
Mac Daily News released an update after May 11, stating that university security had been working with limited information at the time. According to this update, security had approached the May at Mac protestors because of complaints from community members about the protestors’ pamphlets, which included “unsubstantiated allegations” made against a named McMaster student. Still, the update referred to the method of ticketing as “regrettable and unfortunate”. The university stated they would take steps to rescind tickets and clear them from the students’ records.
The juxtaposition between how the university approached the protests of May 11 and Oct. 30 — initially issuing trespassing tickets and charges for one group but not the other — raises questions regarding the limits of protesting on campus and the types of images that are allowed to be publicized on campus.
In a statement on freedom of expression, McMaster University clearly states that it supports the freedom of expression of all its members, as well as freedom of association and peaceful assembly for all of its members. The university affirms that members of the McMaster community have the right to exchange ideas, challenge received wisdom, engage in respectful debate, discuss controversial issues and engage in peaceful protest.
So long as students do not infringe on the rights and freedoms of others, students are free to host and participate in demonstrations at McMaster. Members of the McMaster community are not required to obtain permission from the university administration in order to protest or demonstrate on campus.
Although the demonstration on Oct. 30 touched upon a highly sensitive topic that some individuals may have found deeply disturbing, university policy protects the right to share their beliefs and engage in public discourse at McMaster.
“Other images, even though we might not agree with them, we might not find them agreeable, would be allowed and permitted. That’s part of the freedoms of expression the university campus has,” said Gord Arbeau, McMaster’s Director of Communications, adding that he did not know about the pro-life demonstration.
McMaster maintains that it supports freedom of expression and peaceful protests on campus.
[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
