Last Friday, SSMU hosted the third in a series of strategic summit meetings, this time addressing equity and diversity at McGill. Each of the monthly strategic summits are designed to tackle a different problem that affects SSMU, McGill University, and its students.

Prior to the event, organizers had low expectations for turnout.

“The past two [summit] topics have been big draws … I wouldn’t be surprised if less people come to this one,” VP University Affairs Emily Yee Clare said before the summit.

However, over 30 students, faculty members, administrators, and representatives of relevant student services gathered and exchanged dialogue about key issues the McGill community faces with regards to managing and celebrating equity and diversity on campus.

SSMU Equity Outreach Coordinator Ryan Thom and Equity Commissioner Cassandra Zawilski facilitated Friday’s summit. Thom kicked off the discussion with a question: “What do [you] know to be true about diversity and equity?”

“Equity means, regardless of social or economic background, putting opportunity on a level playing field,” SSMU Senator Max Luke said.

While participants didn’t necessarily agree on all that was said, discussions fostered dialogue and a deeper understanding of the topic.

“This is what I hope today’s summit will be about—finding points of contention so that we can resolve and celebrate difference,” Thom said.

Participants were split into groups and asked to reflect on specific, pertinent issues that pose problems to the growth of equity and diversity at McGill. One group discussed the possibilities for more collective action in order to confront equity imbalances on campus.

“Gaps exist between concept and implementation,” Frédéric Fovet, director of the Office for Students with Disabilities, said.

“There has to be incentive for student groups and societies to work together [to understand differences],” Rafi Azari, Engineering Undergraduate Society Equity Commissioner, said.

In another group, participants expressed the desire to improve transparency and awareness in regard to SSMU’s Equity Policy. 

“A lot of work is being done in terms of policies, but students don’t know about it,” SSMU Environment Commissioner Cameron Butler said. “There’s a bit of a disconnect in terms of communicating that to students…and making sure students know which resources are available and how to access them.”

Such resources include the Social Equity and Diversity Education (SEDE) Office. SEDE aims to educate the McGill community issues of diversity and equity, and to foster relationships between the university and external minority communities.

However, participants also expressed frustration with the lack of channels to seek help. The SEDE Office is solely an educational body that focuses on raising awareness about issues of social equity and diversity; it does not handle specific cases. For students who wish to issue a complaint, the process is often long and confusing.

“The system isn’t user-friendly … it doesn’t encourage people to come forward,” Fovet said.

After administration and representatives left at 1:30 p.m., Thom steered discourse to equity and diversity in the context of SSMU and highlighted some issues within its structure.

“At SSMU, there are four equity officers … who are mandated to receive formal equity complaints,” Thom said. “There is also an equity committee … but sometimes things that go through the officers don’t necessarily go through the committee.”

The SSMU equity committee and officers are advisory bodies, not decision-making bodies. Any changes to the equity policy can be done only through SSMU council. However, as Thom made clear, SSMU council does not have equity training.

“Not all people involved in SSMU who have to deal with equity issues are trained or prepared to deal with such issues,” SSMU President Maggie Knight said, to the surprise of many students.

“That is very nonsensical,” U3 arts student Laura Dolan said. “[SSMU members] need to have that training.”

Participants also suggested creating a SSMU information package on equity.

“I think people see the word equity and aren’t exactly sure what it means,” Dolan said. “A basic package would be useful for the student body to reference.” 

Those leading the meeting had their own understanding of equity, which they tried to impart onto participants.

“Equity is a process … it means different things in different contexts,” Clare said.

Thom has tentative plans to create an organized strategy for faculty, administration, and students to send feedback and continue the discussion. Overall, he was happy with how the summit unfolded. 

“I was pleasantly surprised by [the] number of faculty and administration that showed up, and satisfied with the student presence,” Thom said.

“Notes from [Friday’s] summit will be typed up and posted on the SSMU website,” Clare said.

Last Thursday, the Hong Kong Canada Business Association, Junior Division (JHKCBA), Global China Connection McGill (GCC), the Asia Pacific Law Association of McGill (APLAM), and SSMU partnered with the Ministère dudéveloppement économique de l’innovation et de l’exportation (MDEIE) to host a speaker event titled “Quebec’s Venture into China.”

The MDEIE, a branch of the Quebec provincial government, exists to promote economic well-being, specifically by encouraging development and innovation as a result of collaboration between players in diverse sectors. Cormier, a member of the MDEIE, was also the chief co-ordinator of a recent delegation of Quebec business representatives led by Quebec Premier Jean Charest. As part of that delegation, the government sent him to various economic centres of China, including Beijing, Shanghai, and Shenyang.

Cormier spoke about the mission and how the general challenges faced by China and Quebec are related. He first gave students a brief background of China’s unique issues as a developing nation, and then emphasized the role Quebec could play in forging a mutually beneficial economic partnership with the emerging superpower. He described Chinese, Quebec, and other international engineers working side-by-side at a Bombardier factory in Shenyang as a prime example of that sort of collaboration.

“We’re going to grow together and build together,” Cormier forecasted. “If a company devises a business plan that doesn’t include a China section, they are making a big mistake.”

The event gave McGill students the chance to learn more about Sino-Quebec economic relations and possible career-related opportunities. Linda El Halabi, president of GCC’s McGill chapter emphasized the importance of the event for students. 

“China’s importance for North American companies cannot be overstated,” she said. “In recognition of this reality, speaker events such as [this one] allow McGill students to better understand what steps the Quebec government has taken towards pursuing stronger economic and diplomatic ties with China, and to evaluate these steps.”

Students were engaged both during and after the presentation. Cormier also pointed out booming sectors significant to Sino-Quebec relations that would be of great potential for graduating students to work in, particularly the aerospace and green sectors. 

“Mr. Cormier’s presentation made many students who are interested in China aware of what opportunities are presented to them both in the public and private sectors,” El Halabi said. “GCC believes raising awareness about these growing opportunities through events like these is a good way to build students’ interest in China.”

The speaker event was followed by a networking session with members of McGill’s Desautels Faculty of Management and student groups that hosted the event. 

  On a visit to India in 2004, three sisters were struck by the inequality of the country’s education system and were inspired to do something about it. In a joint venture, Zareen Ali, U3 management, and her sisters Maria and Amena, a McGill alum and a current student at the University of Ottawa, respectively, started the Abhilasha Project, an organization to help underprivileged Indian children. This year, they were awarded the Forces Avenir award for Mutual Aid, Peace, and Justice for their work.

The Abhilasha Project aims to provide quality education to underprivileged children with a special focus on girls and children with disabilities. By striving for equal education, the project aims to foster more confidence and determination in the children so they can positively affect their communities.

The project has roots at McGill, Marianopolis College, and the University of Ottawa, where different chapters fundraise and mobilize support for the initiative. Since 2006, the project has donated over $40,000 to the Abhilasha School in India. In the summer of 2011, the money went towards building an annex for the school. The annex now accommodates 41 blind and 100 physically handicapped children, enabling them to receive both education and appropriate healthcare in safe surroundings at no cost to their families.

Zareen, project co-ordinator and artistic designer for the Abhilasha Project, said that the excitement of the award serves as motivation to further the project.

“This is a huge stepping-stone for us because we’ve finally gotten to that place that will allow us to expand our project,” she said. “It has motivated us to work twice as hard to achieve our goal.”

While the award serves as an encouraging force, the sisters continue to be motivated by the project itself.

“The most important thing that we’ve taken away from this experience is that we have a community that believes in us and is there to support us in our endeavours,” Zareen said. “Hopefully, two to three years from now we will be breaking ground on the construction for the new school.”

Professor Emine Sarigollu, BComm Program Director, spoke highly of the sisters’ social entrepreneurship.

“I’m delighted that one of our BComm students has won the Forces Avenir award,” Sarigollu said. “We take pride in [the] academic excellence of our students. But we are equally proud of their contribution to Quebec, Canada and the global community outside the classroom. A case in point is Zareen Ali’s project, which demonstrates her social consciousness, benevolent leadership, and entrepreneurial skills.”

The project was competing against various other student initiatives in the Forces Avenir university program. Since 1999, the Forces Avenir program has recognized the achievements of students who not only pursue their education, but dedicate time to external projects for good causes.

Over the last year, Bar des Arts (BdA), run by the Arts Undergraduate Society (AUS), has seen a series of changes in policy that have frustrated many students. 

Founded in 2007, BdA is a staple service of the AUS, open Thursdays from 4:00 to 9:00 p.m. The fall semester has seen a standardization of the bar’s atmosphere, notably with the introduction of cup regulations. These changes have come with a crackdown by the administration on alcohol-serving institutions at McGill. 

In September, BdA, in conjunction with Gerts, implemented a new plan that grants free entry to the campus bar’s Thursday events after students get their hands stamped at BdA. BdA’s staff now dress all in black, and they serve beer behind a row of bottle openers attached by a few planks of wood, all in front of a redesigned BdA poster emblazoned with the bar’s new logo.

Other changes, including the bar’s new cup regulations, have inconvenienced some students. Under the new rules, students are encouraged to bring reusable plastic cups, or can buy disposable Boreal cups for $1.50, up from one dollar last year. The bar has always banned glass cups, but has only just begun enforcing the rule. Rachel Lanphear, BdA’s Publicity Manager, explained that the changes were made to ensure that the bar will be around for future students to enjoy.

“Everything that we have been doing, in terms of changes, had to happen because the administration is really cracking down on all alcoholic institutions on campus,” Lanphear said. 

“Last year, [the bar’s staff] did not crack down as hard, which is probably why people are reacting more this year,” she added. 

“Being a server, there are a lot of issues with the kind of cups that people bring in,” Jason Karmody, AUS’s VP Events, said.  

Some students come with disposable cups and are forced to throw these out only to purchase new cups from the bar. One student, Ben Kurzius, U3 arts, had his red beer cup taken at the door and had to buy one from BdA.

“It’s unfair that I have to buy a cup for a dollar fifty,” he said. “It’s another way to profit-monger.”

Though they caused some frustration, the bar’s managers are confident that the new policies have positive implications for the future.

“We are not making a profit, at all,” said Lanphear. “We are just trying to break even so that we can keep going.”

Last week, the SSMU executive held a series of Town Halls to address General Assembly (GA) reform. Under a dozen students attended the Town Halls, which were intended to solicit feedback from and engage students in a discussion on various suggested changes to the GA. Most of the attendees were students already intimately involved in SSMU, who took the chance to discuss solutions to some of the key structural issues with the deliberative body of SSMU. The discussion included a debate on voting methods and on the possibility of suspending or simplifying Robert’s Rules of Order.

GA reform centres around the issue of facilitating and increasing student participation. The issue at the heart of attempts to simplify the GA is the voting method. There is no one time in which students can all attend a GA, nor is there a forum large enough to hold all of SSMU’s members, should they all be interested in attending the GA.

“While quorum is important, what’s really important [to me] is democracy: one person, one vote,” Zach Newburgh, former SSMU President, said. (Newburgh currently sits on the Tribune Publication Society’s Board of Directors.) 

Other members of the executive are nervous about a shift online, which could increase participation but would preclude any sort of debate.

 “I think the reality about a lot of proposals about moving things online is basically saying ‘I don’t think the GAs work and I don’t think we should have them,'” Arts Representative Jamie Burnett said.

Another discussion regarding the suspension of Robert’s Rules came down to a debate over sacrificing procedure in the interest of accessibility. Participants acknowledged that students find the rules of debate confusing and alienating, and suggestions ranged from handing out printed guides before the General Assembly to adopting a modified version of Roberts Rules to introducing differently coloured placards for “Yes” or “No” votes, as well as “Question” or even “I’m confused.” However, for Newburgh, having a structure like Robert’s Rules is important because it works as a mechanism to facilitate more respectful and orderly debate, which protects minorities in potentially heated debates.

“The minority, being people who are undecided and actually want to hear the debate, get lost in translation essentially … it happens every time,” Education Representative Kady Paterson said. “But Robert’s Rules is, to a certain extent, a good safeguard against that.”

At the same time, debate often finds itself bogged down in procedural issues that many members of the audience don’t understand. The onus of facilitating debate is placed on the Speakers of Council, Nida Nizam and Michael Tong. Many Town Hall participants made an effort to mention that this year’s Speakers are particularly good at striking a balance.

“I think, with all things procedural, we’re looking at that tension of how do we facilitate a process moving forward quickly, while making sure it doesn’t become a messy disaster,” Knight said.

VP External Joël Pedneault explained that the GA is a relatively new forum and flaws in its structure are in part due to the fact that the rules governing the body have been introduced piecemeal, and the current executive demonstrated a desire to move forward with   the reform process constructively.

“I think it’s time that we stopped to circulate [the] notion that the General Assembly is just this place where intimidation is rampant … it’ll become a self-fulfilling prophecy if people paint the GA as this place that people act disrespectfully to each other; I think it’s time to circulate the notion that this is the place for respectful direct democracy to happen on campus if you’re an undergraduate,” he said.

Reforms will be passed in council as part of broader changes in SSMU’s bylaws. Students can contribute to the discussion by filling out SSMU’s survey—accessible via Facebook—speaking to their faculty councilors, and attending further town halls (dates to be determined).

In the early hours of Friday morning, SSMU’s Legislative Council voted on two motions with huge implications for the future of the society. In a confidential session, the council voted in favour of signing a new Memorandum of Agreement (MoA) with the McGill administration, and voted against accepting the administration’s current lease proposal for the Shatner Building.

The MoA, which outlines the legal relationship between SSMU and the university, is up for renewal this year. The document contains a controversial section on the use of the McGill name by student groups. The result of last week’s vote to accept the document will effectively force up to 130 student associations who use ‘McGill’ in their name to rename and re-brand themselves.

McGill has sought to make changes to the names of student groups on campus since the 1990s. Their chief concerns with the explicit use of the McGill name by student groups, such as the McGill First Aid Service, are related to liability and reputation. The administration argues that it is often difficult for outsiders to tell whether a group is run by students or the university’s administration.

Morton Mendelson, Deputy Provost of Student Life and Learning, expressed the administration’s viewpoint in an email to the Tribune.

“The administration is … responsible for ensuring that the McGill name continues to enjoy the same prestige that it currently does,” he wrote. “The primary beneficiaries of this are McGill students and alumni, because it is the ‘brand’ of McGill’s credentials, including degrees and transcripts, that we are protecting.”

There was strong student opposition to the MoA vote at council. Groups held signs reading ‘We are all McGill’—a tongue-in-cheek reference to Principal Heather Munroe-Blum’s email to faculty and students on Oct. 18. Many attendees voiced their concerns.

“We are McGill’s brand, and they want to try to protect it. This rationale makes sense if we’re in a corporation, but we’re in a university,” Josh Redel, president of the Engineering Undergraduate Society, said. “As soon as we lose this, we lose many of the things we fight for.”

“I feel kind of hoodwinked by my university, trying to take away the name McGill from tons of students who, like me, have done tons of effort to make this campus a better place in the name of McGill,” echoed Allan Cyrill, a former executive of the EUS.

In spite of overwhelming student opposition, councillors knew that the name use agreement they had reached was probably the best that they would be able to negotiate.  While this year’s MoA means the loss of the McGill name for many clubs, the current agreement represents an improvement in many ways over both the 2006 MoA and the administration’s initial offers. In the 2006 agreement, new clubs could not use ‘McGill’ in their names at all, and instead had to use ‘SSMU.’ Though many existing groups will have to rename themselves this year, they will have a number of name change options which include using the phrase ‘McGill Students.’ SSMU also fought to have the right to grandfather some names of historical importance and names which clearly imply that a group is student-run, like the McGill Debating Union. The administration will  provide $25,000 to help groups with the cost of having to undergo a name change, as some groups may have to change their official gear.

Maggie Knight, President of SSMU, and Emily Yee Clare, VP University Affairs of SSMU discussed the vote with the Tribune. As SSMU’s principal negotiators with the administration since June, they felt they had a personal stake in the motion and abstained from the vote, but discussed the major points the council saw in favour of voting for the MoA.

“It was sad,” Clare said of the atmosphere in the room following the vote, “especially because I think we’re all human. The sad thing is I think we agreed with … everything the gallery members said … but we still had to look at the implications of not signing it and looking at what fundamentally would be in the best interest for students.”

“I think we had to face the fact that it wouldn’t have been possible to renegotiate the MoA, specifically to do with the McGill name, without a substantial change in tactics or ideology on the part of the university,” Knight said. “We spent many long hours in negotiations … expressing to them every argument we’ve heard from our constituents and every argument we could think of trying to communicate just how important many groups feel like their names are.”

Importantly, the administration did not want to renew SSMU’s lease of the Shatner Building or of the SSMU Daycare (which is a separate entity from SSMU) until SSMU signed the MoA. The previous lease expired May 31, 2011, and SSMU is currently operating in Shatner without a legal agreement. The desire to secure a lease for Shatner was an important motivator for councillors to accept the MoA. By law, universities are only required to provide student societies with a room and a phone.

Council voted not to accept the lease as currently proposed. McGill offered to sign a 15-year lease and also wants to implement a new fee structure. Ultimately, the council found that current estimates of the long-term financial consequences would strain the society, according to Knight and Clare. Based on their calculations, signing the lease as it currently stands would have forced SSMU to increase student fees in the long term. SSMU would have been responsible for paying an increasing portion of the building’s utilities each year, which representatives of the society say would be unsustainable.

The administration wanted to sign all three documents, but Knight and Clare hope McGill will renegotiate the terms of the lease now that they have the council’s mandate to sign the MoA.

—Additional reporting by Carolina Millán Ronchetti

 

The fall referendum period continues this week, with questions that put the ongoing existence of QPIRG McGill and CKUT in jeopardy. This semester’s referendum questions are on whether the groups should continue to receive student funds and if said fees should cease to be opt-outable via Minerva and instead be refundable directly through each organization. The referendum period opened last Friday with steady campaigning by QPIRG and CKUT’s respective ‘Yes’ committees and was marked by the absence of campaigns by opposing ‘No’ committees.

Rebecca Tacoma, CEO of Elections McGill, noted that several students had expressed interest in forming a ‘No’ committee but that none had followed the steps to create one.

“I was kind of surprised—I was expecting ‘No’ committees,” Tacoma said. “We’re all aware of the opt-out campaigns, especially [against] QPIRG, that went on during the fall. It seemed there are some people who are willing to take the effort on getting the word out that they don’t agree, so I was surprised that there [aren’t] any.”

Opposing students may have decided to avoid campaigning as a strategic move, noted Alexandre Meterissian, board member of Conservative McGill, CEO of the Prince Arthur Herald, and participant of past opt-out campaigns.

“A lot of [Conservative McGill] members believe that if we fight this referendum, we will push QPIRG and CKUT to get their numbers out and they will be able to hit the quorum level that they need,” Meterissian said. “Ultimately if we vote, the ‘yes’ will probably win … so we think that strategically it would be much more intelligent if we just did not campaign.”

In a recent email, Tacoma addressed instances of illegal campaigning from students who support a ‘No’ answer to the referendum questions. Meterissian said he was surprised to hear of such campaigning and reiterated that members of Conservative McGill are abstaining from campaigning. Tacoma explained that the illegal campaigning consisted of a few Facebook groups that have now been closed.

“We wanted to make students aware that Elections McGill was not able to ensure that any of the information there is correct, or we aren’t able to ensure that they were campaigning in a fair spirit,” she said.

The groups posing the questions have mixed reactions towards the lack of official ‘No’ committees. Adam Wheeler and Camillia Elachqar, co-chairs of the QPIRG ‘Yes’ committee noted their disappointment with the illegal campaigning, but Niko Block, co-chair of the CKUT ‘Yes’ committee, emphasized the lack of official opposition as validation for CKUT.

“Ultimately, I think the fact that there is no ‘No’ committee is kind of demonstrative of the fact that students by and large recognize that even if they don’t listen to CKUT every day, it does offer an incredibly important service to the McGill and Montreal community,” Block said.

Last Thursday, at SSMU Council, many gallery members voiced their support for QPIRG and CKUT, and after much debate on the referenda’s intended changes to the opt-out system, SSMU voted to endorse QPIRG and CKUT.

Wheeler and Elachqar expressed their satisfaction at the SSMU endorsement and with student support at council.

“We’re so excited. We’re glad that students value [our] work and want to see it continue in the future,” Wheeler said. “That, to me, is more of a sign that we’re doing things right.”

The quorum for the fall referendum is 15 per cent of the students represented by SSMU, or 3,200 students. If quorum is not reached, both organizations may have to pose the question again in the winter referendum. Wheeler and Elachqar said they were confident quorum would be reached, but Block noted quorum was his “main concern.”

Tacoma encouraged all students to vote in the elections.

“It’s your school and you should have your say. It’s your student groups and your student fees, so I think it’s important to take the one minute that it takes to vote,” she said. “If [quorum] doesn’t reach 15 per cent, it doesn’t matter if the majority of people voted yes or no, it doesn’t count.”

 

Students can vote at https://ovs.ssmu.mcgill.ca/  Results will be announced on Thursday, Nov. 10 at 6:30 p.m. in Gerts.