Latest News

News

Infrastructure projects responsible for campus construction

by News Editor on

More in News:

In an attempt to stimulate the economy in the wake of the financial crisis and as part of an effort to improve Canada’s research infrastructure, the federal government granted McGill over $100 million in January 2008 to be used in infrastructure improvement. The money is currently fuelling an explosion of construction projects across campus. The McIntyre Medical Building, McDonald Engineering Building, and Otto Mass Chemistry Building are the three biggest projects. Each renovation will cost roughly $30 million, which must be spent before March 31, 2011 to meet the terms of the grants.

“We are trying to do all this work in these three buildings while keeping the buildings operational, so we’ve moved as many people as humanly possible out of the way to minimize the disruption on teaching and research activities,” said Associate Vice-Principal Jim Nicell (University Services). “But there is no question that it is disrupted.”

According to Nicell, McGill does not usually practice fast-paced construction, but in this case a deadline had to be met. The university generally does not invest over $500,000 per month on a project.

“Today, we are three-fold above that level,” he said. “The great thing about it is we are really trying to make sure we are doing everything in a really smart way. We are trying to make sure that whenever we fix something, we are putting it in a state that will last for the next 50 to 100 years, depending on the structure.”

Nicell explained that it was difficult to coordinate so many projects at the same time without disrupting each other and regular university activities. The federal government’s fund was added to additional funds to bring the total spent on infrastructure to $300 million.

Robert Stanley, McGill’s director of project management, explained that having to spend the money within two years constrained McGill enormously, especially since buildings still need to be occupied and the functionality of the university has to be maintained.

“It would be different if we could empty a building and then just move in, but we can’t. [Professors] still have their teaching that has to go on,” Nicell said. “And of course, with the Quebec and federal governments wanting to show progress on stimulus of the economy, we were stuck with these very firm deadlines.”

Out of the nine projects proposed to the federal government, four were approved. McGill’s strategy centred on individual buildings.

“The practicalities of the timeline forced us to look at certain projects as a priority, so we did [it on] a building-by-building basis,” Nicell said.

Although it is a federal initiative, the provincial government has contributed 50 per cent of the funds for the construction projects. Besides the three major construction projects, there are also a number of deferred maintenance projects going on at McGill. According to Stanley, these are “the renewal of systems and installations that are worn out, that were not dealt with in the past but need to be dealt with to consolidate the university’s infrastructure for the future.” These deferred maintenance projects include the restoration of the Arts Building facade, the roofing of the Redpath Museum, the reconstruction of the exterior terrace at the Stewart Biology Building, and some less visible projects, such as the Lyman Duff Building upgrade. All of these were funded by Quebec as part of the Capital Grant for the university from the Ministry of Education.

“We made a case three years ago and basically the government acknowledged that we had a major deferred maintenance project, and a lot of it is because of the nature of our buildings-they’re historic,” Nicell said. “They have already given us two installments of $25 million a year for deferred maintenance.”

Other projects include the Service Point, which is in its final stage, the $36 million brain imaging centre at the Montreal Neurological Institute, the pipe replacement along Dr. Penfield Avenue-which was funded by the city of Montreal-and the Molson Stadium expansion, which was funded by Quebec, the City of Montreal, and the Alouettes.

“Behind the scenes there are well over 800 projects at the university, ranging from a tiny $1,000 here and there up to multimillion-dollar projects,” Nicell said. “It’s a huge number that we are managing right now.” The current construction boom is the largest in decades, Stanley said.

“The university has never had such an intense itinerary of construction projects ongoing at the same time,” he said.

Diane Liegey, a U3 political science student, said she was happy with the finished projects at McGill.

“The last construction by the ex-Milton Gates is great, it looks much nicer now, there’s more space to sit down and eat so I am happy McGill is making all these changes,” said Leigey. “As long as it doesn’t affect my studies I really don’t mind. If they were cutting back on space for students to study or removing classroom space then I would be upset about it, but they have managed to keep disruptions to a minimum.”

 

Opinion

Inaction We Cannot Afford

by Johanu Botha on

More in Opinion:

In 2004, Guardian columnist George Monbiot wrote, “The only higher purpose we could possibly possess is to seek to relieve suffering: our own and that of other people and other animals.” The last six years have not diminished the truth of his statement. If anything, our hurtling towards mass extinction only makes it ever more relevant. We need to realize that higher purpose now.

The harmful effects human beings have had on the Earth’s climate, the other living things in it, and ultimately ourselves, are well-known. Statistics abound: read a local paper, or take almost any university course. The environmental crisis weasels its way-as it rightly should-into most of them. Scientists, writers, and anyone who lived in Montreal last summer widely agree that human beings have caused global warming.If we know this, and have known it for some time, then why are we still slipping towards that ugly precipice, the promised scenario in which coral reefs lose their colour and cities sink into the seas?

We have to come to a point where science, culture, and necessity combine to bring us to a tipping point where a social norm is eventually transformed into law. It happened with smoking, when the facts proving its peril became impossible to argue with. It became clear that people-innocent people-would get hurt with noxious fumes circulating around public places, and so lighting up inside changed from being distasteful and rude to actually being outlawed. An evidence brief published by Public Health Law Research last year described the massive public health benefits this change has caused.

Those who care about global warming need to use the same tactics that were used with smoking. Straightforward and reliable progress toward solving or easing environmental degradation will require serious legislation, not the half-assed kind where a government cuts carbon emissions but completely ignores the harmful effects of other pollutants. For effective laws that will help prevent our overheating of the Earth we will need legislation that will, to be blunt, screw us over in some way. No rosy bill will make it all better again. We cannot have both a fun, friendly earth for our kids’ kids as well as that fun, friendly trip to Europe. One law that is possibly needed would make it illegal to sell or buy the cheaper, more destructive lightbulbs. Cops could fine idling vehicles more than speeding ones. Perhaps serious recyclers should get tax breaks.

Canada’s major parties are both adamant that no compromise needs to be made between economic growth and environmental sustainability. Though investment in green energy might prove them right, I fear it’s too late to ignore the stark reality described by the NDP: “Canadians cannot afford to let economic and financial crises become reasons for inaction on global warming, greenhouse gas emissions and other environmental imperatives.”

“Cannot afford” is an apt choice of words, suggesting a danger beyond the merely financial. It is difficult for an individual to know what he or she alone can do. Refusing to vote for a party without a serious environmental strategy is a good place to start.

Opinion

The Vehicle of Free Speech

by Mohammed Ashour on

More in Opinion:

In 1987, a photograph by Andres Serrano earned $15,000 and the prestigious Award in Visual Arts from the Southeastern Center for Contemporary Arts. This photo also happened to set in motion a cascade of outcries, because it depicted Jesus Christ on a crucifix, submerged in a glass of the artist’s own urine.

Legal discourse on this issue revolved around what Serrano did rather than why he chose to do it – on the effect rather than the cause. Our emotions about the aptly named “Piss Christ” photo, and our beliefs about the author’s intent, were irrelevant to the fact that it was protected by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. But is it not sometimes more important for us to ask why instead of merely scratching the surface with the question of what?

Not necessarily, you might say. Serrano is not required to answer questions about intent. Why he selected a mode of expression that happened to desecrate Christianity’s holiest figure is superfluous to our discussion. The fact is that he can, he did, and that’s all that matters. But is it really?

It comes as no surprise that Florida pastor Terry Jones has been lambasted for his plans to burn copies of the Qur’an. Jones, the author of a manual for prospective ministers which dictates that students are “not allowed to visit family members or friends,” represents a tiny fraction of evangelical fanatics that most Christians find disgraceful. To illustrate their disgust and disapproval, for example, the Massachusetts Bible Society decided to give away two free copies of the Qur’an for every copy that Jones intended to burn.

So far, this is the “what” question: fanatical weirdo, International Burn-A-Quran-Day, worldwide condemnation. But did we ask why he wanted to do this, or what he actually hoped to achieve?

First, let’s ignore the significant reality that Jones’s actions have offended the majority of the world’s inhabitants, for that is just an emotional appeal. So here are the facts:

Jones was without any moral support: most Christians and many of his congregants turned against him. Jones had no spiritual evidence for his decision to burn the Qur’ans: scores of theologians and exegetes have pointed out the exact opposite. Jones could have had no political incentives for his inflammatory plans: President Obama made it clear that the “stunt that he is talking about pulling could greatly endanger our young men and women in uniform.”

Apparently, none of this bothered Pastor Jones. Only when he heard-falsely-that the Islamic Center planned for Lower Manhattan would be moved to a different location did he cancel. Then, not only did he swiftly suspend his planned contribution to global warming, he even volunteered to fly to New York and meet with Muslim leaders.

Missing a convincing motive, reason, or purpose for his mission, we are left with the view that Jones is nothing but a propaganda fetishist, childishly seeking attention. However, that is not the lesson here.

There is a fine line to be drawn between a dangerous idea and an idea that causes danger. We must protect everyone’s right to speak freely even if we disagree with their ideas, or if they air out our dirtiest laundry. We must allow for the possibility that they are motivated by the same fundamental impulse that drives us: improving the human experience. But we must also remind ourselves that there are others who use freedom of speech as a vehicle not to transport ideas, but to smuggle hatred and enmity. There are some who will sadistically deface what you hold most sacred for no other reason than to piss you off.

The metaphor extends further. Free speech licenses people like Pastor Jones to say almost anything they want. Fortunately, we also have license to operate the same vehicle. Let us be sure to steer it in the right direction.

Opinion

Equity and Social Justice on Campus

by on
  • Author

More in Opinion:

Emily Clare

Lynsey Grosfield

As the Students’ Society of McGill University’s Equity Commissioner, I will undertake multiple roles this year in order to fulfill my mandate as a resource person for students on their rights and responsibilities under SSMU’s equity policy. This document aims to “create a safe, discrimination-free environment.” My primary role will be to chair the Equity Board, a body composed of McGill undergraduate students and SSMU executives. We will work together to actively engage in student outreach and to stimulate dialogue and equity across campus. One of our main focuses will be establishing how Frosh and equity can coincide.

I will also serve as an equity officer, investigating complaints should they arise. Some of you may be aware of how the Equity Board was involved with a complaint against the campus club Choose Life last year. The Equity Board worked closely with the group to guarantee that their future actions fell in line with SSMU’s equity policy, while still allowing room for discussion on the topic.

In my three years at McGill, I have learned how diversity presents itself in both subtle and overt ways. While it is enriching to engage with people from varied backgrounds, it is important to acknowledge how these differences can disadvantage and privilege certain groups. Being a student at McGill isn’t only about academics; it is just as much about what we learn from the people with whom we socialize. This university is a unique microcosm of the world around us. SSMU has the ability to actively ensure that its members can espouse their own views and engage in dialogue without fear of discrimination or harassment.

There are extremely important resources already in place at McGill for students and staff members alike. Groups and services such as the Social Equity and Diversity Education Office and Quebec Public Interest Research Ggroup have a well-established history of engaging students and the greater Montreal community in dialogue about difference. I aim to establish healthy relationships with these groups and services. For the next couple of weeks, I will continue meeting with different clubs and services on campus to see how my predecessors have been involved with them, and to chart how we will establish an important working relationship.

Lynsey Grosfield, this year’s Social Justice Days Co-ordinator, will be working alongside me. She will be an integral part of our outreach to students. In addition to helping host events throughout the year, she is the primary organizer for McGill Social Justice Days, a week of events early in the winter semester. These events are committed to the discussion and deconstruction of equity issues and alternative political culture in an accessible setting. The tentative theme is social media and its role and influence in social justice.

University is a great learning experience, and, ideally, McGill should be a place that cultivates a mentality of understanding and respect throughout our time here.

Emily Clare is SSMU’s Equity Commissioner, and can be contacted at [email protected]. Lynsey Grosfield is SSMU’s Social Justice Days Co-ordinator, and can be contacted at [email protected].

Editorial, Opinion

Raising Quebec tuition: the least bad option

by on
  • Author

More in Editorial:

Last week, McGill Principal Heather Munroe-Blum travelled to Quebec City to report to the provincial government on the ups and downs the university has faced in the past three years. In her speech, Munroe-Blum repeated many of the standard talking points: she touted the university’s research, emphasized McGill’s international stature, and cheered the university’s intellectual contributions to Quebec.

But most importantly, Munroe-Blum once again lobbied Quebec to allow McGill to increase the amount of undergraduate tuition it can charge. That’s a position the Tribune ultimately supports.

Aside from specific grants from the federal government (such as Canada Research Chairs) and private philanthropy, McGill is funded by two main sources: tuition revenue and money from Quebec City. Unlike private universities in the United States, our university’s endowment provides only a tiny proportion of its operating budget.

Quebec’s monetary contributions to universities, however, have been declining for years, leaving McGill and other schools in the province underfunded and deeply in debt. McGill’s lack of money has kept classes large, created a paucity of student jobs on campus, and resulted in a huge backlog of maintenance projects, despite recent stimulus contributions from the federal and provincial governments.

No one, of course, wants to pay more tuition. But with Quebec City unwilling to increase its financial commitment to the province’s universities, the Tribune doesn’t see another practical option for addressing McGill’s financial problems.

Fortunately, Quebec students are better able than those of other provinces to absorb a modest increase in tuition fees, because they pay much less than students in most of Canada. The typical undergraduate in Quebec, according to Statistics Canada, paid just $2,316 in tuition last year. In comparison, undergraduates in Ontario, British Columbia, and Nova Scotia pay more than $7,500 per year.

Moreover, only Quebec charges in-province students a significantly lower tuition rate than it charges those from the rest of the country. A Quebecer at Queen’s University pays the same price as a student from Ontario, whereas an Ontarian at McGill pays more than double what Quebecers pay. Canadians at McGill from outside Quebec-who make up more than a quarter of the undergraduate student body-paid about $7,100 in tuition and ancillary fees last year. Their fellow students from Quebec paid about $3,500.

Faced with these numbers, the Tribune is endorsing a modest increase in tuition fees for Quebec students attending McGill. Because Quebecers pay more in taxes than the average Canadian, tuition should not necessarily rise to the amount students pay in other provinces. The government has a duty to shoulder a greater share of the education burden than, say, Nova Scotia does for its students. McGill may also want to consider increasing tuition for international students, for many of whom, especially Americans, the university is still a relative bargain.

The Tribune insists that a significant portion of the revenue generated by any tuition increases must be set aside for those McGill students for whom the rise in fees would be genuinely unaffordable. Furthermore, such aid should be provided on an equitable basis, taking care not to let students whose families earn middling wages fall through the cracks. The university should also dedicate a substantial portion of the additional income to expanding student employment on campus, enabling students to offset the cost of books and increasing general living expenses.

Though we recognize it is not the most popular position on campus, the Tribune believes that modest increases combined with better financial aid is the most practical solution to the university’s difficult fiscal situation.

News

Cannabis shown to reduce pain

by By Nick Frid on

More in News:

A study conducted by researchers at the McGill University Health Centre has determined that cannabis can be an effective method of pain relief for patients suffering from neuropathic pain. The study, recently published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal, has added to the heated debate over the use of cannabis as a medical treatment.

Lead by Dr. Mark Ware, associate professor of anaesthesiology and family medicine and the director of clinical research at the MUHC’s Alan Edwards Pain Management Unit, the study researched the effects of supplying varying amounts of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC)-the active ingredient in cannabis-in 25 milligrams of inhaled cannabis to 23 patients. The trials showed that when patients received the most potent of the samples-9.4 per cent THC-they reported the most significant reduction in pain as well as an enhanced ability to fall asleep and sleep more soundly.

Through research and appropriate application, scientists are hoping to alter the public’s perception of the use of cannabis for medical purposes. The goal is to better understand the positive effects of the substance in patients, and how to access these benefits.

“The challenge is to find ways to harness that system for therapeutic value,” Ware said. “This is a very scientific and medical approach. A lot of people won’t consider use [of cannabis] because of its association with recreational use.”

While researchers strive to understand more about the use of cannabis in the world of medicine, some patients aren’t waiting for the research to tell them about its pain-relieving effects.

“We have published surveys that say 10-15 per cent of patients coming to this clinic are already using it,” Ware said.

Gabriella Gobbi, an associate professor in the department of psychiatry and a researcher at the MUHC, released a study in 2009 about the long-term effects of marijuana on adolescents. The study concluded that long-term marijuana use could lead to a decrease in serotonin transmission and an increase in norepinephrine transmission, the latter of which could lead to mood disorders and greater susceptibility to stress.

However, Gobbi supports the use of cannabis for medical purposes as well as the research of cannabinoid-derived medicine that will allow doctors to make new discoveries in medicine.

“Cannabis is a medicine with pharmaceutical properties and side effects,” Gobbi said. “Cannabis should be used as a medicine, [and] not for recreational use.”

Blair T. Longley, registered leader of the Marijuana Party of Canada, was happy to know doctors have begun to make strides in the field of medicinal cannabis, but said he was not surprised by the results of the study.

“It’s sledgehammer science, proving things that have been known for thousands of years,” Longley said. “You don’t really need to prove this to anybody who has firsthand experience with treating pain or insomnia with marijuana.”

While the potential of cannabis as a medical treatment sounds promising, researchers said it should not be thought of as a new miracle drug.

“It’s certainly not a drug that is going to work for everybody,” Ware said. “It’s not a class of compounds that will be effective with every condition. It’s not a magic drug. It’s going to have its uses with certain patients with certain conditions. The challenge is to figure out which ones those are and to provide evidence.”

Board’s constitution, which require that the administration consult students and the Board before making major changes.

Among several changes, one of the biggest adjustments for the proposed Athletics Advisory Board would involve the budget approval system.

“[The former board] had a huge say over the budget,” Abaki said. “The budget couldn’t go to the Board of Governors before it was approved by the Athletics Board. In the new structure, since it’s an advisory board, the athletics director can pretty much do whatever he likes.”

Abaki said that this change is especially worrisome because students fund athletics entirely through ancillary funds.

“Students fund athletics services entirely, and for students not to have a say in where the money goes … it’s just not right,” he said. “Since students fund these services, they should have been consulted-so it violates, of course, the Charter of Students’ Rights.”

Abaki also expressed concern over the possible lack of accountability for the athletics director if the Athletics Board does not have as much power as it did in previous years.

Drew Love, McGill’s executive director of athletics and recreation, said he sees the situation differently.

“It doesn’t change my accountability at all because I continue to report through the Deputy Provost,” Love said. “All of the annual operating budgets that I prepare are presented through his office and on to the Board of Governors as part of a roll up of all budgets. I think in the end, the same student voice will be heard and a balanced representation is there on the new board.”

Abaki sees this move by the administration as a continuation of what he described as the “administration versus governance argument.” Abaki explained that the administration believes it should be separate from governance so that it would be free to make budgetary decisions without consulting the student representatives.

“The Deputy Provost basically told us that consultation on budgetary issues is not the direction in which the administration is moving,” Abaki said. “By and large they do not want to consult students when it involves money.”

On the other hand, Love explained that McGill has been spending time reviewing the terms of reference for various committees to ensure that they were relevant and well drafted. Love said there were concerns that the original terms of reference of the Athletics Board had no real reporting or accountability structure.

“The changes that were designed were there to insure that students continued to have a balanced, represented position on the Board, but that the terms were written up as they correctly should be: as an advisory board, and not [to] have the appearance of a stand alone corporate entity, which it never had, but some people may have perceived it to be,” Love said.

“In summary, we find it troubling that students were consulted only as an afterthought and were not involved in the process of drafting the new structures,” added Abaki in his memo to Mendelson. “These are the same students who have been incredibly kind in understanding the underfunded nature of the university, and who have, over the years, contributed millions to build, maintain, and refurbish our athletics facilities as well as support our athletics teams.”

McGill, News

McGill name no longer to be used by certain clubs

by By Kyla Mandel on

More in McGill:

Holly Stewart

Student-run clubs at the university with the word “McGill” in their names have faced increasing difficulties this academic year after fears of liability issues arose within the administration.

When the McGill name is used in a club title, the administration has argued, it implies that the university-and not the students who run the club-are providing the service.

In order to preempt any future liability issues, the administration has asked that student clubs change their names so that it is clear that their services are provided by the students and not the university.

In a meeting between Deputy Provost (Student Life & Learning) Morton Mendelson and the McGill First Aid Service (MFAS), Mendelson asserted that this new policy was non-negotiable.

“The university really has to control the use of its name, [our] main issue is to ensure the integrity of the name and the logo,” said Mendelson.

According to Student’s Society Vice-President Clubs and Services Anushay Khan, however, student clubs are all under SSMU’s umbrella. If a liability issue arose, she said, SSMU, not the university, would be held accountable.

The concern over the use of the McGill name in club titles has been a recurring issue on campus for years. In the past, a selection process was used in order to determine which clubs were allowed to use the McGill name.

“One of the things that has happened over the years is that there are a number of groups that have used the McGill name in such a way that can create confusion in the public about whether or not it is a student group offering a service, or the university,” said Mendelson.

According to SSMU President Zach Newburgh, however, the criteria by which the administration judges whether or not a club can use the McGill name has not been made public.

“This is one of the many things that hurts the relationship [and] creates tension between the administration and the students of the university,” Newburgh said.

“Often the administration makes a distinction between the university and [the] students,” Khan added. “But aren’t the students part of the university? Don’t they actually make up the university? Because without students there would be no university.”

Khan believes that the sense of community that students should feel towards their university is being taken away with this new policy.

“I understand [McGill’s] concern,” she said. “[But] if you are going to use ‘student’ and ‘liability’ in the same sentence, I think that’s a problem.”

Mendelson said that the problem will not arise in certain cases like the McGill Debating Club, since “everyone knows that it is students from the university.” But it could create confusion in other clubs if it is not clear that it is student-run.

“There’s a certain amount of clarity we are asking for,” he added.

Khan claimed that some of the services provided by clubs have been beneficial for the university community.

“The reason why SSMU services are so important is because we are filling a gap that student services at McGill do not provide, like a sexual assault center, first aid, Walksafe, and DriveSafe,” said Khan.

This point is well illustrated by MFAS, which the administration recently instructed to change its name. When there is a problem on campus, Khan said, MFAS responds immediately, sometimes faster than McGill Security.

“MFAS is the largest provider of English-language first aid courses in Montreal,” said MFAS director Nicole Edwards. If MFAS does not cooperate with this new policy, however, they may not be able to expand their services.

“It is really frustrating because we have been trying to go campus-wide, and this is the one thing that’s preventing us,” she said. “If it would make our lives easier I would change our name and move forward, but [this situation is] bigger than us.”

At the moment, SSMU is in the process of renegotiating their memorandum of agreement with McGill. Until that is finished, student clubs are at a standstill.

“If we did have to change our name, it would cost a lot of money to change our uniforms and our equipment,” said Edwards. “We have a contract with the Red Cross [that] we would have to change because we teach courses for them.”

MFAS and TVMcGill are among the clubs affected by the new policy change. Newburgh believes clubs that are “often in the public eye” will be most affected by the change.

“Together with the students that are going to be impacted by this, we can stand together and tell the administration, ‘No, this is not acceptable'” said Newburgh. “The students are what make this school what it is.”

Student Life

Smoke That Tumbleweed

by Alison Bailey on

More in Student Life:

University is a time for experimentation, and drugs can be the gateway to new sensations and experiences. Such experimentation, however, comes with both physical and social risks. This is the first in a series of articles on the facts and myths of certain recreational drugs. The Tribune is in no way advocating or dissuading you from trying any of these substances, but merely looking to help you make informed decisions.

According to the United Nations, marijuana is “the most widely used illicit substance in the world.” Although pot is illegal, it is the most easily accessible illegal drug in Montreal.

 

Background

Cannabis, the plant from which marijuana stems, has a long history of ritual and religious practices due to the state of relaxation it induces. It is thought to have been used as an intoxicant for the first time 5000 years ago in present-day Romania for ritual purposes. It has also been an integral part of Hinduism in India and Nepal for thousands of years.

 

Immediate Effects

The physical effects of marijuana on the human body include: reddening of the eyes, decreased intraocular pressure, dryness of the mouth, warm or cold sensations, increased heart rate, muscle relaxation, and lowered blood pressure. The cognitive effects include—but are not limited to—impairments in short-term memory, coordination, and concentration. Beware: not all trips are fun. You may fear you’re being chased by a plastic bag through the streets of Dublin.

 

Long-term effects

While the long-term effects of marijuana are not fully understood, the prolonged use of marijuana can cause damage to the immune system, lungs, and airways, and may result in various cancers. The potency of these effects depends on how the drug is taken: vaporization will cause less detriment to the respiratory system than smoking a joint.

 

Safety

Depending on how you absorb it, the time it takes for marijuana to have an effect on your body will vary. When first experimenting, it may take a large dose for the full effects to be felt. However, this could lead to unpleasant and uncontrollable bodily effects that only go away with time. Mixing the drug with other substances such as Vicodin can cause nausea or more intense short-term effects, and is thus not recommended.

 

Legal Issues

The recreational use of marijuana in Canada is illegal, but it is reasonably socially acceptable and can be easily purchased cheaply throughout the country. A number of other Western countries have similar bans, but do not tolerate use of the drug whatsoever. Some South Asian countries such as Malaysia have been known to even give the death penalty as punishment.

Opinion

Province should explore other possibilities first

by Mookie Kideckel on

More in Opinion:

As an Ontario student, I have no special love for the preferential rates Quebec gives its students. But if Quebec gives its students a bargain, my resentment is as much towards Ontario for not doing the same for me. In that light, I cannot support a tuition hike. Raising Quebec rates—even to parity with the rest of the country—is a big move, and one that seems far too easy of a solution for a problem tied to issues far beyond university education.

The problem is certainly grave. McGill’s budget deficit is real, and the school’s efforts to ease it without tuition increases have led to larger class sizes, deferred maintenance procedures, and salary freezes for staff. Tuition does not provide enough money, and somewhere between federal and provincial government transfers the shortfall is not being made up. This dissent fully grasps the gravity of McGill’s financial situation. It believes, though, that tuition rates are only one variable affecting it, and not necessarily the most important to address.

Part of this comes from skepticism of anything too politically expedient. It is true that Quebec governments have tended to support tuition freezes. But governments around North America have struggled with low tuition over the past couple decades, and now filling funding gaps with higher user fees appears to be an attractive option even in Quebec. Those fees will mainly affect the younger, poorer demographic that has little political power and notoriously low levels of participation. It seems unlikely that Jean Charest and company fear dissatisfied undergraduates as much as, say, corporate powers that would vigorously fight a tax increase. This does not in itself mean that raising tuition is wrong. It does, however, make it seem unlikely that the politicians in favour of tuition increases have seriously considered more difficult alternatives.

Alternatives to tuition increases are abundant. Money could be raised through reshuffling government spending, raising income or corporate taxes, increasing federal education contributions, inviting more corporate money for infrastructure projects, or even more creative ways of which it is difficult for a non-expert to conceive. I do not mean to say that I endorse any or all of these options. But options are there, and therefore the problem is not lacking the means to fund education, it is failing to prioritize it. High school and health care were also once thought to be too expensive to fund. Societies who now prize these as indispensable public goods would be aghast at suggestions to stop providing them.

What price to place on education, and whether or not it is a right, are issues that tend to offer more questions than answers. I intend to keep asking them. But without a thorough exploration by the government of all possible solutions, and an explanation of why tuition increases are still absolutely necessary, when it comes to a higher price for education I’m not sold.

News

AUS Frosh spends more than it earns

by By Tori Crawford on

More in News:

Arts Frosh spent more money than it brought in this year, dipping into the red after the number of freshmen who signed up failed to meet the Arts Undergraduate Society’s expectations.

The AUS has not yet released any estimates for how much it lost on Frosh this year. AUS Vice-President Finance Majd Al Khaldi is set to release an exact figure at AUS Council on September 23.

“The numbers are swinging wildly, but any estimate is premature,” Al Khaldi said.

The shortfall was not caused by excessive spending, said AUS President Dave Marshall, but rather a lower than expected freshman turnout. This year’s registration cap was raised from 1,450 students to 1,800, but only 1,482 students actually registered and paid fees.

“We spent less on Frosh than we had actually projected, so in many ways there were no excess expenses—we were very good at keeping those under wraps,” Marshall said. “The most significant source of that deficit was the registration revenue not meeting projections.”

The decision to raise the cap was made by AUS VP Events Nampande Londe and Arts Frosh co-ordinators in June when they received information from McGill regarding the number of first-year students who had enrolled. Londe, who was responsible for organizing Frosh, said the new restrictions on who could register for Frosh were likely the largest cause of this shortfall.

“The biggest thing was that we restricted the registration so severely,” she said. “In past years it’s been implied that it’s only for first-years in the Faculty of Arts, but this year we made a very strict move. No one was allowed to register if they weren’t a first-year in the Faculty of Arts, and that had a lot to do with it.”

Despite the shortfall, Londe insisted that she will not resign her position. Marshall acknowledged, however, that Londe is ultimately responsible to AUS Council. If councillors brought forward a motion to impeach her at their meeting next week, Londe could be forcibly removed.

Registration was only opened to other students on the final day of on-campus registration, when AUS executives realized that they were far short of their expected numbers. According to Marshall and Londe, the situation was further complicated by the fact that online registration nearly tripled from last year, which made AUS predict that on-campus registrations would increase as well.

Since registration fees are the primary source of revenue for Frosh, the shortfall was financed through AUS fees in general, into which all Arts undergraduates pay. Services provided by the AUS, such as the operation of the AUS Lounge and the Arts Student Employment Fund, will not suffer because of this loss, Marshall said.

“I think it’s important to note that traditionally it’s an unsaid thing that Frosh turns a profit,” he added. “I think it’s very important that we on AUS, and everyone, remember that we aren’t in the business of returning dividends to shareholders. At the same time, it would be inappropriate for us to go consistently over budget.”

The AUS Council and executives are currently brainstorming ways to increase accountability for future events, Al Khaldi said, including the possibility of mandating the VP finance to stay in Montreal over the summer, as well as stricter budget regulations for future events.

“Another thing I’m probably going to motion for is that beginning in October, all events will have to have a budget drafted and pre-approved by us, the exec,” Khaldi said. “That will help us basically foresee any potenial extra expenses that may change in the budget and also allow for a more institutionalized system.”

1 … 1,292 1,293 1,294 1,295 1,296 … 1,363

Read the latest issue

Read the latest issue