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.
Amid Canada's housing crisis, the cap on international students will fail to address it and only comes at the cost of their education and futures
News flash: Canada is suffering from a housing crisis! What a surprise.
The lack of housing, and affordable housing at that, has been a chronic issue affecting off-campus students. In recent years, renting costs have dramatically increased..
Partly in response to the lack of affordable housing, the Canadian government implemented a two-year cap on the number of international students to be admitted into the country. They also implemented rules limiting these students from receiving work permits and buying homes in Canada.
Partly in response to the lack of affordable housing, the Canadian government implemented a two-year cap on the number of international students to be admitted into the country
According to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, the temporary cap would help to regulate the number of students in the country and reduce demand on the housing market.
Specifically, it limits the enrollment of international students to approximately 360,000 individuals, a 35% decrease from last year's statistics.
Each province or territory is receiving a cap that is proportional to their population. Each province and territory will receive a specified cap based on its population size and provinces are able to decide how they want to allocate their cap across their universities.
For example, Ontario is estimated to have a cap of 236,373 international students for this academic year, while Alberta will have a cap of 71,149 international students. Although these may seem like drastic differences, the amount of international students Ontario plans to admit is down 133,404 from last year while Alberta could experience an increase of 36,243 international students.
The international student cap will not solve the housing crisis because they are by no means the cause. More significantly, the cap will perpetuate unfair blame targeted towards these students, unrightfully holding them partly responsible for the state of the Canadian economy.
The idea that international students are a big contributor to the housing crisis is incorrect. Considering the deep and interconnected economic issues that have produced the current housing crisis, it should not be expected that cap will have any meaningful positive effect on the issue.
Unaffordable housing and rent costs, increasing inflation, the cost of building materials and difficulties within the labour market are some of the major contributors to the housing crisis. The slight contribution to our population that international students make is not the problem we face.
Considering the deep and interconnected economic issues that have produced the current housing crisis, it should not be expected that cap will have any meaningful positive effect on the issue . . . The slight contribution to our population that international students make is not the problem we face.
The government can take much more meaningful and needed action to combat the housing crisis, as well as the other crises we are facing that all contribute to the overall cost of living crisis.
Expanding initiatives and grants to build affordable social housing and implementing vacancy taxes on landlords who own vacant properties are just two examples of action the government could take to address the housing crisis at its roots. Creating programs that ensure grocery prices stay low and incentivizing businesses to pay a living wage are all steps that could be taken to address the current cost of living crisis.
Expanding initiatives and grants to build affordable social housing and implementing vacancy taxes on landlords who own vacant properties are just two examples of action the government could take to address the housing crisis at its roots.
By enacting the cap on international students, the government wrongly reinforces the idea that international students are the problem. Sadly, this could contribute to fostering contempt for and prejudice towards international students. Many citizens may feel resentment towards these students and create a negative environment for them to live in.
Although Justin Trudeau has stated that international students aren't the problem numerous times, the implementation of the cap contradicts this.
The cap can also prevent family members from being with each other. For example, a current international student may have a sibling who wants to attend university with them. However, because of the restriction, it may now be impossible for that international student to attend university with their sibling abroad. This can contribute to increase the isolation international students feel from being away from family.
Although the government has proposed many benefits to the cap on international students, it not only falsely blames international students for the housing crisis, it will also fail to provide any meaningful relief to the crisis. As such, the move by the federal government is a two-fold blunder that does not effectively serve its own citizens and reinforces a xenophobic narrative. Domestic and international students and Canadian citizens as a whole deserve much better from the government.
Local vintage and secondhand shop Hawk & Sparrow offers unique, sustainable and affordable clothing for everyone
Hawk & Sparrow is a vintage, secondhand boutique, located downtown at 126 James St. N. Other than vintage items, they also sell secondhand designer and a mix of everything to accommodate everyone’s styles.
“I don't just do vintage, I also do secondhand designer and then . . . a mix of things. So you can expect a 1950s sweater with a ritzy top and then a Louis Vuitton bag. There's a wide range of brands,” said Sarah Moyal, the founder of Hawk & Sparrow.
Before launching Hawk & Sparrow in 2011, Moyal had a strong fashion background. She worked for Dsquared2 in Milan at their headquarters and did styling in Toronto.
She always wanted to open a clothing store. Originally, she had wanted to open a new clothing store, but she realized that buying inventory would be too expensive for her, so she switched over to second-hand. It worked for her, and it made her more interested in secondhand clothing.
“It's just so much more interesting to have one of everything. And every one of them is so unique,” said Moyal.
Moyal has experimented with making Hawk & Sparrow accessible through online platforms such as Etsy, but she now focuses most of her energy on the store itself, as she has found that it has been getting busier.
Moyal aims to make her store accessible and safe for everyone.
“I would say it's accessible to everyone and any direction of style that someone wants to go. If they want to play it a bit safe, we have that. If you want to go wild, we also have that,” said Moyal.
I would say it's accessible to everyone and any direction of style that someone wants to go and if they want to play it a bit safe, we have that. If you want to go wild, we also have that.
Sarah Moyal, Founder, Hawk & Sparrow
Most of the items are $5 to $25, and there are $5 mystery bags all year round. Moyal is also open to negotiations. She hopes that her customers will continue to find their favourite pieces at Hawk & Sparrow.
“I hope that people will kind of find their unique style here, that they'll discover something about themselves, that they'll not feel a pressure to dress a certain way or follow a certain trend, that they'll just feel free to dress how they want, how they feel,” explained Moyal.
I hope that people will kind of find their unique style here, that they'll discover something about themselves, that they'll not feel a pressure to dress a certain way or follow a certain trend, that they'll just feel free to dress how they want, how they feel.
Sarah Moyal, Founder, Hawk & Sparrow
Over the years, she has experimented with different directions –– such as only vintage (an item from another era, usually from the 1930s-70s), vintage artisan (very old and rare pieces from the 1800s-early 1900s that are typically made by hand) and only designer –– for the shop. The current iteration of her shop has had the best reception from the Hamilton community, and she intends to keep it this way for the time being.
Ainsley Thurgood/Photo Assistant
Hamilton’s rental licensing pilot provides more uncertainty as students demand safer housing
The path to achieving safe housing for McMaster University’s students has been one studded with hazards such as predatory landlords, broken fire alarm systems and an overall lack of safety. Nearly every student I know has had their fair share of run-ins with landlords asking for too much and giving too little. Popular platforms for student discussion, such as r/McMaster on Reddit and Spotted at Mac on Facebook, are routinely flooded with warnings to beware of Landlord X, Y, Z . . . and the list goes on.
Has quantifiable progress been made thus far? Yes and no.
McMaster students and the McMaster Students Union have been pushing for increased regulation of landlords for years. On Aug. 10, 2021, it seemed as if student voices had finally been heard. The big news? The Hamilton Planning Committee voted in favour of a two-year rental licensing pilot for Wards 1, 8 and parts of Ward 14 in the city. These wards cover the immediate area around Mohawk College and McMaster University.
Essentially, this means that landlords will now be responsible for paying a $215 licensing fee (in addition to a $77 administration fee) and must submit to both internal and external inspections by the city of Hamilton. Right now, the process in dealing with a housing issue is complaint-based and the tenant carries the burden of filing a dispute.
The current system presents its own set of barriers that tip the scales further towards the whims of landlords that don’t always have our best interests in mind. Quite honestly, even if I did face an issue with my landlord, would I be willing to take time away from academic responsibilities, face the threat of eviction and then wait months on end for a maybe-solution? Not at all.
Quite honestly, even if I did face an issue with my landlord, would I be willing to take time away from academic responsibilities, face the threat of eviction and then wait months on end for a maybe-solution? Not at all.
We all know that finding a house in the first place often takes away time from classes, especially when you’re coordinating the schedules of six or more roommates. If you add up the time spent browsing housing posts, negotiating with landlords and booking viewings, the hunt for subpar housing often takes upwards of 50 hours.
Given all this information, does the licensing pilot provide us with a solution? Supposedly, living conditions will improve. Perhaps, affordability will rise. That being said, the consensus of McMaster students living off-campus is that some aspect of regulation is needed. MSU Vice President Education, Siobhan Teel, teamed up with ACORN Hamilton and the Mohawk Student Association to shed light on the need for this pilot project to go through.
However, it can’t be ignored that increasing fees on landlords (whatever glorious purpose it may serve) can have a detrimental effect on students. If landlords really are as predatory and greedy as we all believe, why wouldn’t they raise rent prices to compensate for their increased costs? Is rental licensing the solution we’re looking for, given that rents already seem to be rising on Facebook pages such as McMaster Student Housing Postboard?
Sure, the licensing pilot definitely has the potential to do some real good. It could lead to cleaner and safer homes, and do away with the antiquated, reactive system of tenant complaints through the Landlord and Tenant Board. Yet it almost seems like we’re playing a game of choosing between one bad outcome and another.
While any progress is appreciated, McMaster students deserve a holistic, all-encompassing solution that solves the issue of both unsafe and unfairly priced housing. Until then, off to the bidding wars we go. The prize: a closet of a room with pests, no fire safety and all the wonderful things McMaster housing has to offer.