On Feb. 11, the Post-Graduate Students’ Society of McGill University (PGSS) held its second council meeting of the semester to vote on which questions to include in its upcoming May referendum.
Councillors spent a significant portion of the meeting discussing issues regarding access to food on campus for graduate students. With the Students’ Society of McGill University’s (SSMU) closing of Midnight Kitchen (MK), the restricted access to SSMU’s alternative Free Lunch Program, and SSMU’s impending restrictions upon graduate students using the SSMU food bank, some councillors expressed worry over the lack of affordable food options on campus for their peers.
Secretary-General Sheheryar Ahmed presented a motion on this topic to approve the MK fee discontinuation referendum question, which annulled the previous $2 CAD fee per student per term that had gone toward the daily lunch program since MK’s closure.
“The second step will be a referendum question, probably in the fall, to do with the reallocation of the already collected funds from the Fall 2025 semester,” Ahmed said. “[SSMU’s] own internal regulations, as passed in their Legislative Council, would not extend us the access to their service at the $2 [CAD] level. We’d have to pass another referendum question to increase our contribution to their program, to the $8 [CAD] level, for them to give us access.”
Councillors unanimously voted in favour of the motion to approve the MK fee discontinuation referendum question.
PGSS council also discussed the situation concerning SSMU’s food bank fee levy. After PGSS suspended the MK fee, SSMU President Dymetri Taylor presented a motion to restrict PGSS members from accessing the SSMU food pantry during SSMU’s Jan. 15 Legislative Council meeting. However, following concerns over food security on campus, the Legislative Council passed an amendment to the motion to allow PGSS members to retain access to the pantry for the remainder of the Winter 2026 semester, given that 20 per cent of the pantry’s self-reported users are PGSS members.
Ahmed noted that introducing a PGSS fee levy would not resolve governance issues between the two associations, as there are currently no plans to enter a Memorandum of Agreement (MoA) with SSMU over access to the food pantry.
“In the absence of [an MoA], there can be a lot of changes to the service without our consent,” Ahmed stated. “The various ways we have available to us when going into a partnership can include [an MoA]. It can also include seats on the board of directors of that entity [….] These are all very, very helpful safeguards, and in the absence of them, I personally don’t recommend adding this to the ballot.”
Ryan Olegario, a councillor representing McGill’s Chemistry Graduate Student Society (CGSS), expressed worry over the lack of alternatives available to graduate students.
“If this were to fall through, what are the other options that exist for food support of this nature on campus? Are there other options?” Olegario asked. “Because while I do agree that it may be dangerous to enter into an agreement like this without a proper memorandum, I think, for the time being, it also may be important to ensure that this fraction of students still be able to get this kind of food support.”
The PGSS council ultimately voted against including the SSMU food bank fee levy question in the referendum. With nine votes against, eight abstaining, and eight in favour of the motion, McGill’s graduate students will lose access to the food pantry at the end of the semester.
Moment of the meeting:
The council meeting ended after a second motion to extend the meeting by 30 minutes failed. As such, the motions to dissolve committees’ referendum questions were amended to become an omnibus vote motion.
Soundbite:
“I am not against this fee, but I wish the executives could have been more clarifying on their intentions for the fee levy [….] This is just a comment for the future for executives, or in general, to be very clear and transparent about these things. It is unfortunate to have this interaction between executive and councillor.”–Ambre Lambert, CGSS councillor, after an exchange between Ahmed and Olegario over the membership fee increase referendum question to allocate funds to the creation of a new executive role.
