Latest News

McGill, News, Private

McGill community discusses anti-unionization efforts amidst $45 million CAD budget slash

by Rebecca Votier on

More in McGill:

Following the Quebec government’s decision to maintain a tuition hike for out-of-province students, alongside McGill’s faculty and staff unionization efforts, the university is implementing a $45 million CAD budget cut for the 2025-2026 fiscal year (FY2025-26). This measure coincides with the administration’s intensified anti-union stance: McGill has spent over $1 million CAD in the past five years alone fighting unions. 

Despite having its own in-house legal counsel, McGill has retained an external legal counsel for negotiations with faculty unions. Documents obtained by The Rover indicate that Borden Ladner Gervais (BLG), the external law firm McGill employs in discussions with unions, costs the university approximately $400,000 CAD annually.

In an interview with The Tribune, Barry Eidlin, associate professor in the Department of Sociology and second vice-president (VP) of the Association of McGill Professors of the Faculty of Arts (AMPFA), explained that McGill’s retention of BLG sends a strong signal to the faculty unions at the bargaining table.  

“This [legal] counsel suggests that they are taking a very hard-nosed approach,” Eidlin said. “The reason that they’re going to outside counsel is precisely because they want the special expertise in avoidance. Or at least, if not avoidance, mitigation.”  

McGill’s decision to hire BLG, who has previously been involved in other major labour disputes, has prompted criticism from some faculty representatives, including Jonathan Nehme, president of the Association of McGill University Support Employees (AMUSE). 

“That decision is well-reflective of the way McGill acts as an employer,” Nehme explained in an interview with The Tribune. “Their representatives are very hostile to unionization efforts and actively act against union members being made aware of the fact that their union exists. McGill hiring professional mercenary union busters fits with that.”  

In a written statement to The Tribune, McGill’s Media Relations Office (MRO) maintained that the university is open to negotiation. 

“The legal fees incurred by McGill for labour relation matters are related to various files,” the MRO wrote. “McGill welcomes discussions with all its association and union partners and appreciates the time they dedicate to negotiating. We firmly believe that the best agreements are reached at the bargaining table.” 

Retaining external legal counsel during a period of budgetary reductions has drawn scrutiny from some faculty representatives, who have questioned whether academic cuts are occurring alongside sustained legal expenditures. The McGill Association of University Teachers (MAUT) President Steve Jordan and President-Elect Reghan James Hill have filed an access to information and privacy (ATIP) request regarding the university’s expenditures.  

“In 2026, I would encourage the Vice-President (Administration and Finance) to disclose the amounts McGill University has paid to other law firms in connection with this matter,” wrote Jordan and James Hill in a joint statement to The Tribune. “The lack of transparency also raises legitimate questions about how much the university might spend each year on litigation aimed at preventing or impeding reasonable [ATIP] requests.”

Eidlin argued that these developments reflect what he describes as a broader corporatization of the university.  

“With the change and structure of the university toward this more corporate model, it became increasingly clear that you had this administrative layer that had developed into a separate form, separate from the faculty and the rest of the university,” said Eidlin.

Eidlin also highlighted that administrative roles have become professionalized career tracks rather than temporary service roles undertaken by faculty, likening the process to “the academic version of climbing the corporate ladder.” 

Nehme emphasized some of the university’s choices that push this corporate image.

“The way [the university has been] restructuring [its] budget, the way they treat labour disputes et cetera, to even the fact that they renamed the Principal to President is extremely characteristic of McGill choosing to move forward with running itself as a for-profit corporation instead of a public academic institution,” Nehme said.

In the Department of Sociology, Eidlin mentioned that the number of faculty members has declined by approximately 40 per cent over the past decade. Graduate student representatives describe similar pressures. Dallas Jokic, president of the Association of Graduate Students Employed at McGill (AGSEM), said that 21 per cent of teaching assistant (TA) positions in the Department of English were cut between Fall 2024 and Fall 2025. Eidlin suggested that the upper administration has split off from the rest of the university. 

“It is like this bifurcation where the segment of the university is not experiencing austerity,” he said.  

Jokic also pointed out that cuts to TA hours degrade the quality of education at McGill. 

“Cuts tend to make professors turn away from qualitative learning and assessments and towards those which are easier to grade,” Jokic said. “That means less personalized feedback on essays and more multiple-choice tests.”  

Faculty representatives also pointed to a widening pay gap between academic staff and senior administration. A report by the Association of McGill Professors of Science (AMPS) found that expenditures on director and manager salaries from operating funds increased by 118 per cent over the past decade, adjusted for inflation. Contrastingly, the salary mass for full-time academic staff rose by six per cent. 

“Professors’ salaries are not keeping pace with inflation, even when professors’ performance evaluations are formally rated as exceptional,” noted Jordan and James Hill. “These concerns have led MAUT, for the first time in its history, to formally reject the administration’s proposed (2026) salary policy.”

Eidlin and Jokic both emphasized that the growing administrative share of operating funds signals a shift from collegial governance toward more centralized, managerial modes. In a written statement to The Tribune, MAUT revealed that it is currently conducting a survey which suggests that concerns about centralization are widespread among academic staff.

“A recurring theme among academic staff was concern about what our members describe as increasing centralization or decision-making and, in some cases, shifts toward managerial or corporate modes of governance.”

These concerns have coincided with unionization efforts across McGill’s faculties. The Association of McGill Professors of Law (AMPL) received union certification in late 2022. AMPFA and the Association of McGill Professors of Education (AMPE) followed. In 2024, AMPL voted to strike in August, going into the start of the fall semester. Days before the vote, McGill Provost Christopher Manfredi and VP Administration & Finance Fabrice Labeau sent emails to AMPL members addressing the potential strike. Later that year, the Tribunal administratif du travail found that McGill had violated the Quebec Labour Code by interfering in the unionization process. Global News reported that the university defended its actions by insisting that it had followed all procedures. 

The disparity between fiscal restraint and administrative growth has intensified scrutiny over how authority and resources are distributed within the university. For representatives of faculty unions, unionization is a mechanism to formalize bargaining power. For the administration, it remains part of routine labour relations within a complex financial environment. Eidlin highlighted this as the most complex part of labour matters. 

“One of the things that I’ve spent a lot of my time as a labour researcher, getting my head around, is the degree to which employers attach an extremely high value to retaining control of the workplace,” Eidlin concluded. “It is a very high price that they are willing to pay. I think that’s also part of the dynamic that we’re seeing here, is what premium management places on retaining control of the workplace.”

Commentary, Opinion

Sudine Riley’s case shows how systemic anti-Black racism shapes Canada’s justice system

by Moyọ Alabi on

More in Commentary:

Ontario’s Special Investigations Unit (SIU) has declined to invoke its mandate in response to allegations that Sudine Riley, a Black criminal defence lawyer, was violently assaulted by Durham Regional Police officers inside the Oshawa courthouse. According to statements released through her counsel, Riley was questioned about her presence in an interview room after completing her court appearances, had her head slammed into a desk, and was dragged to courthouse cells. Riley has since been charged with violating the Trespass to Property Act, and the matter has been referred to York Regional Police for criminal investigation. 

While courts have historically been framed as neutral spaces conducive to procedural justice, the institutional response to Sudine Riley’s alleged assault demonstrates how anti-Blackness remains embedded within the Canadian legal authority. By employing restrictive thresholds to determine eligibility for investigation and rendering Black professionalism conditionally legitimate, oversight systems reproduce the very racial hierarchies they purport to regulate. 

Under Ontario’s Special Investigations Unit Act, the SIU maintains jurisdiction only in cases involving ‘serious injury,’ death, sexual assault, or the discharge of a firearm. According to the agency’s own criteria, ‘serious injury’ refers to harm likely to interfere with health or comfort that is neither transient nor trifling in nature, typically involving hospitalization or fractures. Oversight is contingent on these categorical thresholds.

However, data on policing in Ontario demonstrates that racialized harm often operates through discretionary force and suspicion that does not always culminate in catastrophic injury. The Ontario Human Rights Commission (OHRC) found that although Black residents comprised 8.8 per cent of Toronto’s population, they accounted for 28.8 per cent of arrests involving a single charge and 38.9 per cent of arrests involving ten or more charges. In police-involved shootings nationwide, officers kill Black people at disproportionate rates: Black people account for 8.7 per cent of those killed despite constituting only 4.3 per cent of Canada’s population. Because oversight is triggered by bureaucratically-designated and highly specific thresholds, many forms of racially biased policing fall outside the reach of jurisdiction for formal investigation, further determining which—and whose—injuries qualify for recognition, compromising mechanisms meant to ensure accountability and institutional reform. 

Research on systemic anti-Black racism in Canada demonstrates that professional status does not insulate Black individuals from suspicion. The OHRC’s inquiry into the Toronto Police Service concluded that race remains a significant predictor of police use of force even after accounting for age, gender, neighbourhood, and situational factors. In Quebec, a 2024 Quebec Superior Court ruling found that racial profiling is a systemic issue within the Service de police de la Ville de Montréal (SPVM) and held the City of Montreal liable in a $171 million CAD class-action lawsuit concerning discriminatory police stops. The decision affirmed that institutional practices, not merely individual ‘misconduct,’ produced discriminatory effects on Black and other racialized communities. 

Evidently, suspicion is institutional and not incidental. It manifests through discretionary stops, challenges to authority, and demands for verification that are disproportionately exercised against Black people. Black legal professionals are frequently mistaken for defendants or court clerks, asked to justify their presence in courthouses, or required to produce identification in ways their white counterparts are not. This dynamic, presumed illegitimacy of presence, persistently associates Blackness with deviance and criminality irrespective of role or status.

Canada, as a national entity, often touts its exceptionalism: The assumption that systemic racism and racialized police violence is an American problem, and that its justice system operates through neutral procedure. However, when its oversight mechanisms define harm so narrowly and its institutions view Black legitimacy as conditional, Canada cannot continue to assert its inherent ‘neutrality.’ If serious injury is the threshold for recognition, and suspicion remains discretionary, then the problem is undoubtedly structural. Accountability requires a framework that recognizes anti-Black harm before it escalates. Until then, Canadian exceptionalism obscures the fact that, in practice, neutrality remains a claim rather than a condition. 

Sudine Riley was not a bystander. She was a criminal defence lawyer doing her job inside a courthouse. Yet, this proximity did not insulate her from the racialized scrutiny and discretionary force documented across Canadian policing. Meaningful reform requires expanding accountability frameworks beyond individual incidents and confronting the systemic conditions that allow racial bias to persist.

Arts & Entertainment, Books, Culture

A rat who betrayed a cat, a benevolent dragon, and a pig who stopped for a snack

by Bianca Sugunasiri on

More in Arts & Entertainment:

Folk tales and legends are forms of art that permeate our lives and pass on wisdom across generations. Few embody this as vividly as the Chinese zodiac, which continues to influence centuries after its origins. The shengxiao, or Chinese zodiac, are the 12 animals that represent each year in the Chinese lunar calendar, or yin-yang li—also known as “heaven-earth.” Each animal has a distinct personality with character traits, lucky signs, and compatibility. On Chinese New Year, which typically begins between Jan. 21 and Feb. 20 on the Gregorian calendar, the cycle changes to the next animal in the zodiac. This year, the celebration begins on Feb. 17 and ends March 3, marking 2026 as the year of the fire horse. Chinese astrology places one of the five elements in rotation with the zodiac in a 60-year cycle. The elements—wood, fire, earth, metal, and water—interact with the animals to create a unique projection for each year.

It is believed that the zodiac emerged from a legendary race between all the animals; however, sources disagree on its historical origin. Some trace it back to the Warring States period (475-221 BCE), others to the Qin dynasty (221-207 BCE), and some to the Han dynasty (206 BCE-220 CE). Over time, the Chinese zodiac evolved into a shifting piece of culture, guiding how people interpret the future and providing insight into the personality and fortune of each upcoming year.

The Story of the Chinese Zodiac

Centuries ago, the Jade Emperor, the most revered of the Daoist deities, wished to help his people measure time by giving them a proper calendar: The zodiac. Hoping to name each year after a different animal, he asked them all to partake in a swimming race where the first twelve to cross the river to his palace would be named the zodiac. Legend has it that the story begins with the rat betraying the cat and the kinship they once shared. 

Although contested, one version of the tale recounts how the two animals, the closest of companions, were horrified by the setting of the race, as neither could swim particularly well. They decided to ask the ox if he would kindly offer them a ride on his back. The rat, blinded by ambition, wished to be first in the calendar and mused that the ox would swim faster without the cat on his back. So, he pushed his friend into the swirling waters. Thus, there is no cat in the zodiac calendar. Some even claim this to be the origin of the two species’ longstanding animosity. 

However, many agree on the rest of the tale. Each of the remaining animals ventured on their own journey to reach the Emperor. After the rat finished first, the ox lumbered after him, honour still intact. The tiger came third, easily braving the river. The resourceful rabbit hopped across by way of stones, but reached an impasse and was unable to go any further until a log blew his way. To his surprise, the log carried him to the Emperor’s palace over the distance remaining. The dragon arrived fifth, much to the Emperor’s bewilderment—the dragon revealed that he had stopped to provide rain to a drought-ridden town, and then had blown the log across for the stranded rabbit. The horse and the snake ran neck and neck, but the snake spooked the horse and underhandedly secured sixth place. The rooster, monkey, and goat came next, having built a makeshift raft which pleased the Emperor. As a result, he deemed the goat eighth, the monkey ninth, and the rooster tenth. The languorous dog came eleventh, after he had whittled away his time luxuriating in the river’s cool water. Finally, the pig came last, having paused for breakfast, lunch, dinner, and a nap. 

Each year, the order of the animals reminds us to be mindful of our thoughts, the way we treat others, and the way we carry ourselves throughout the year. This centuries-old tale is ever-influential today.  

Science & Technology

McGill Biodesign pushes the boundaries of competitive bioengineering and peer collaboration

by Luca Paone on

More in Science & Technology:

McGill BioDesign is one of McGill University’s premier bioengineering design teams. Based on engineering design practices, the team tackles an array of projects in medtech and sustainability, affording students the opportunity to collaborate in research laboratories across campus and compete internationally. For many, McGill BioDesign provides a unique learning environment outside of traditional coursework.

In an interview with The Tribune, project lead and U3 Faculty of Science student Siqi Mi—who joined McGill BioDesign as a research member and currently serves as Team Lead for the SensUs project—praised the team’s open-minded ethos and push to pursue individual interests.

“For me, BioDesign is a place [where] you can implement your thoughts,” Mi said. “When you feel like there’s a problem outside […] you can just come in and bring it up, and people will do the research and implement it into a protocol.”

Each year, McGill BioDesign runs approximately five projects, with teams of roughly 15 to 25 members. Projects begin with an ideation phase, followed by a literature review and protocol designs. Teams often start by replicating methods described in previous research before modifying them to meet specific project goals. 

“We definitely follow the path of what the previous paper has done […], and oftentimes we will add our new stuff in it to improve for certain goals,” Mi explained.

A distinctive feature of BioDesign lies in its internal structure. Similar to the scientific industry, projects at BioDesign are divided into research and translational potential groups. The research group handles experiment ideation, laboratory testing, and result optimization for competition. The translational potential group focuses on the projects’ real-world applications, consulting with industry professionals and collaborating with the research team on commercial aspects. The two groups meet weekly to update one another on progress and constraints.

In addition to developing practical skills, BioDesign allows its members to see how research unfolds outside a classroom setting. 

“Oftentimes, research fails. You go into lab, and whatever you make doesn’t work,” said Alan Fu, BioDesign’s Co-President and a U3 student in the Faculty of Engineering, in an interview with The Tribune. “But you slowly iterate, you slowly improve, and finally achieving something that gets some nice results is quite satisfactory.”

BioDesign also emphasizes global exposure. Each year, the team sends projects to international competitions, including the SensUs competition in the Netherlands and the BioDesign Challenge in New York City. SensUs is a biosensor competition that provides teams with a specific challenge; one recent prompt involved developing a monitoring system for levodopa, a medication used as a dopamine replacement in Parkinson’s patients. In addition to international events, BioDesign participates in local competitions such as the TechIdea Pitch Competition, where the team recently placed third.

On campus, BioDesign hosts the Biocase competition, inviting undergraduate teams to design solutions to bioengineering-related dilemmas over the course of a weekend. According to organizers, hosting Biocase serves as a way for BioDesign to give back to the student competition community.

Beyond research and competition, members consistently praise the club’s sense of community. Students come from a range of academic backgrounds, which allows projects to benefit from different perspectives. Fu noted that the club fosters close friendships through shared lab work and team social events. 

“I joined BioDesign in my first year, and that was when I met some of my closest friends from university,” Fu recalled.

Over the past four years, BioDesign has grown from approximately 40 members and around two projects to more than 100 members across five projects. Certain initiatives continue for longer than an academic year, and one team is currently in the peer-review process for publication through Cambridge University Press.

For students interested in applied science and design, BioDesign offers a clear pathway into hands-on research. 

“Getting involved in a design team is a really amazing way to get actual hands-on experience on what industry or research might actually look like,” Fu said. 

Interested students should note that recruitment for research roles typically occurs in the fall, while executive positions open later in the academic year.

McGill, News, SSMU, The Tribune Explains

The Tribune Explains: SSMU Special Plebiscite on constitutional reform

by Eren Atac on

More in McGill:

From Feb. 16 to Feb. 19, students voted in a Special Plebiscite concerning proposed amendments to the Constitution of the Students’ Society of McGill University (SSMU). The vote was intended to gather feedback from students ahead of a Special Referendum later this semester, when the constitutional changes may be adopted. 

According to certified results processed by Simply Voting, 1,482 students cast ballots, representing 6.2 per cent of 23,957 eligible voters.

The Tribune explains what the plebiscite asked, what the results were, and what happens next.

How is a plebiscite different from a referendum?

A plebiscite gathers student opinion but does not itself amend governing documents. In contrast, a referendum is binding and can formally change the Constitution if it meets quorum. The results of the Special Plebiscite may influence what appears on the Special Referendum ballot later this semester, but they do not mandate any specific revisions be made to the proposal.

Why was this plebiscite held?

While the vote itself will not amend the constitution, SSMU held the vote to consult the student body on potential changes before bringing them forward to the referendum. 

The results of the plebiscite will help inform proposed amendments to the SSMU Constitution before a separate vote later this term. Students were able to consult a separate document outlining the full proposed amendments before voting.

Because changes to the constitution affect how SSMU governs itself, this preliminary vote served as an opportunity for students to voice their opinions on the current SSMU governance system before binding changes are made.

What was on the ballot?

The plebiscite included three questions related to governance and constitutional reform. First, it asked which of the Board of Directors (BoD), Legislative Council (LC), or Executive Committee should serve as SSMU’s highest governing authority. This question concerned SSMU’s inner hierarchy and which body should hold the most decision-making power within the organization.

A majority of participating voters selected the LC, which received 586 votes, or 51.1 per cent of ballots cast on the question. The BoD received 440 votes (38.4 per cent), while the Executive Committee received 121 votes (10.5 per cent). There were 335 abstentions on this question, representing 22.6 per cent of participants.

The next question on the ballot asked voters to rank their preferred quorum threshold for a student strike from the following options: 50 per cent, 40 per cent, 30 per cent, 20 per cent, or 15 per cent of the student body. Quorum determines the minimum level of student participation required for a strike vote to be valid. Thus, changing this threshold would significantly affect how student strikes are ratified. 

Based on the ranked ballot points system, the 20 per cent quorum option received the highest number of points (4,114), followed closely by the 30 per cent option (4,050). 

The 15 per cent option received 3,786 points, the 40 per cent option received 3,529 points, and the 50 per cent option received 2,998 points. There were 172 abstentions on this question, representing 11.6 per cent of voters.

The final question on the ballot was a call for open feedback on constitutional reform, allowing students to directly voice their opinions on changes to SSMU’s legislature.

What happens next?

The results of the plebiscite will be considered as constitutional reform proposals move forward. Students will have the opportunity to vote again when the amendments are presented in a Special Referendum.

Although turnout was relatively low at 6.2 per cent, the plebiscite offers a view of student opinion on key governance questions. The upcoming Special Referendum will ultimately determine whether these preferences influence constitutional change.

Research Briefs, Science & Technology

Available but not accessible: Clinicians highlight gaps in mental health service delivery

by Michelle Yankovsky on

More in Research Briefs:

Conversations surrounding mental health (MH) have increased dramatically in recent years, with many institutions promoting wellness and expanding volumes of resources. However, the presence of services alone does not guarantee accessibility, particularly for immigrants, refugees, and socioculturally diverse communities, who often face barriers due to language, financial constraints, and increasing wait times. Many domains across Canada claim to value equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI); why are certain communities continuously excluded?

This question led Tasmia Hai, associate researcher at the Douglas Research Centre and principal investigator of the Cognition, Attention & Achievement Research (CAAR) lab, to examine clinicians’ perspectives on MH service delivery. Hai’s recent study, published in BMC Health Services Research, interviewed 19 MH clinicians to gain their perspectives on the barriers to access of diverse populations. Her desire to pursue this research stems from both personal experience and an intention to better capture the current MH service landscape.

“Since 2020, there’s been a lot of push for EDI initiatives, and I wanted to get a sense from clinicians specifically working with individuals from diverse sociocultural backgrounds,” Hai said in an interview with The Tribune. “I myself am a first-generation immigrant to Canada, so I really wanted to see what the current circumstances were and which barriers [clinicians] were identifying.”

Other studies typically focus on patients’ experiences when navigating MH systems; Hai aimed to address this research gap by shifting the focus toward MH providers.

“As a clinician myself, I wanted to get a sense of what their experiences are when it comes to the challenges they are finding at work, because at the end of the day, clinicians are the frontline staff [providing the services].”

Clinicians identified logistical challenges—long wait times, high costs, and limited access to multilingual services—as common barriers to MH care.

“MH services are not generally free, so you would have to have access to external insurances [to cover costs]. However, the organizations providing services for reduced costs often have limitations, such as only allowing 10 sessions, which clinicians expressed [might not be sufficient for adequate care],” Hai explained. “Sometimes a family could only come to the clinic in the evening, but the clinician has to work their general nine to five, and so they don’t have the flexibility to move their schedule around because it’s not [permitted].”

The MH providers also identified social obstacles—stigma, mistrust, and cultural mismatch—that perpetuate barriers for diverse populations when accessing MH services.

“Many [clinicians] mentioned system-level changes to support individuals from diverse backgrounds,” Hai said. “It often felt tokenistic, like ‘Here is an EDI training that you can do,’ whereas if staff were more able to take time from their day to get those trainings and integrate them throughout their daily work, [social barriers could be better addressed].”

Hai highlighted that most of the clinicians in the study were from diverse backgrounds themselves, which may have contributed to their view of EDI as central to their work.

“There’s something about having that lived experience that I think often does not get captured in traditional Western medicine’s [curriculum],” Hai said.


Hai also emphasized the importance of early student involvement in their education so that, as future clinicians, they can develop the skills to foster equitable environments for diverse patients.

“With McGill being such a diverse institution with so many individuals from across the world, I think we should encourage students to think about some of the impacts of MH barriers to advocate for themselves and others in their future,” Hai said.

Hai emphasized the importance of addressing MH concerns proactively, noting that preventative measures are crucial to maintaining well-being.

“Things like high stress can lead to high blood pressure, which can lead to other cardiovascular diseases or diabetes,” Hai said. “We often don’t think about MH being associated with these things, but if we don’t address these challenges early on, it can cause [poor outcomes].”

Overall, Hai’s findings show that improving MH service access is not solely about expanding services but about transforming the systems that govern them through structural reform. While institutions may promote EDI on the surface, translating those missions into meaningful change for our diverse population remains a work in progress.

McGill, News

AUS voting opens as candidates debate student governance and VP duties

by Asher Kui on

More in McGill:

The McGill Arts Undergraduate Society (AUS) elections for the 2026-2027 Executive Committee opened its voting period on Feb. 19 at 9:00 a.m. On Feb. 17, the AUS hosted a debate for candidates, allowing McGill students to pose questions to those running. Chief Elections Officer Cyprien Figuière began the event with a land acknowledgement, followed by Chief Elections Officer Lauren Irving who explained the debate rules.

Presidential candidate Keith Baybayon delivered his opening statement first, where he emphasized his priority of encouraging student democracy.

“[From] the low governance participation to now, where we have over 20 candidates standing before me [….]  I’m not starting from scratch because so much work has been done the past few years, and I’m here to continue building upon it,” Baybayon said. “Ensuring that the internal structures we have are strong enough to withstand any crises, strategizing our advocacy to ensure that the policies reach the right decision-making people and leadership administration [….] You deserve an AUS that works for you.”

Rishi Kalaga, the next presidential candidate, highlighted his mission to increase job security of AUS members and to improve the social life of McGill students.

“You can have your research projects funded and opportunities that are on and off campus that are supported by the AUS,” Kalaga said. “We’re going to partner with the Arts Internship Office and strengthen that relationship that we already have.”

Bogdan Sava, the third presidential candidate, reiterated his commitment to serving different departments in the Faculty of Arts by revisiting the allocation of student funds. Sava emphasized the importance of coordination between the AUS and the different faculties—promising monthly roundtables that would allow discussion and collective decision-making. Incumbent AUS President Aishwarya Rajan then posed questions regarding the balance of student fees, administration, and presidential duties to the three candidates. 

Kalaga mentioned that he would lower the fees of drinks at the student bar, Bar des Arts (BdA)—which was then questioned by AUS Vice-President (VP) Finance Ben Weissman.

“We get a contract from Sleeman that is the lowest that we could possibly get. How would you balance bringing the prices down without diluting the deficit?” Weissman asked.

Kalaga responded by saying the AUS may subsidize drink prices by redirecting the Arts Undergraduate Improvement Fund.

“I don’t think it necessarily would lead us into a deficit,” Kagala said. “The turnover year to year that sometimes happens in these funds isn’t really necessary, because people’s priorities have been clear.”

Sava ended the presidential candidacy round by thanking the participants for their attendance.

“I want to end by thanking you all, and as Keith mentioned, congratulating you for taking this moment here to give life to student democracy,” Sava said.

The VP Internal round came next, where the two candidates—Jane-Andrea Kwa Mbette and Gillian Vetters—debated the need to increase accessibility to faculty voices and collaboration with academic departments. 

Nicholas Coffin and Lucy Crowther, the two candidates running for VP Academic, then discussed the need for more student voices in the McGill administration’s decision-making. Crowther specifically mentioned her commitment to more student initiatives, such as expanding social media outreach and creating study groups with teaching assistants to increase academic transparency.

Ines Wolff, David Luzzatto, and Pearce-Tai Thomasson were the sole candidates running for VP Social, VP Finance, and VP Communications, respectively. Wolff explained that she would like to include more sober events during Frosh, as well as BdA drinks for people with celiac disease. Luzzatto emphasized that his priority, if elected, will be giving students more access to the money that they pay to McGill and the AUS.

“We keep paying money every year, and it’s not going back to students directly, or at least not enough,” Luzzatto said. “Looking at how large expenses, for example, auditing or other insurance lawyers [and] making sure that this is still the best option on the market […] is the best use of student money, because at the end of the day, that’s our job, to ensure that the money that the students trust and get to AUS is used in the best possible way.”

Janya Rajpal and Leonard Cox, the two candidates running for VP External, both discussed the student life after graduation from McGill. Rajpal explained AUS’s duty to help students explore paths beyond undergraduate studies, while Cox highlighted the need for transparency of career and graduation fairs.

The candidates running to be senators and representatives for the Students’ Society of McGill University (SSMU) had their debates next. There are six senator candidates: Rajan Duncan, Mateo Juan, Alexia Juillard, Ellen Kim, Frances Li, and Cindy Zhang. Four candidates are running for Arts representative: Achille Croquelois, Rhys Jones, Charley Letham, and Matias Rodriguez.

The campaigning period opened simultaneously with the voting period on Feb. 19, during which candidates could create social media accounts and present their platforms.

Duncan’s campaign includes revising the Policy on Assessment of Student Learning (PASL) and improving access to lecture recordings. Juan’s emphasizes transparency and accountability, while Kim’s aims to represent minority voices in the McGill Senate. Li promised to implement a textbook subsidy program and a free breakfast program in an effort to tackle food insecurity. 

Among the four candidates running to be SSMU Arts representatives, Croquelois assured greater accountability through more accessible office hours with student governors, while Jones will prioritize funding for clubs and services. 

The voting period will end on Feb. 26 at 5:00 p.m., and election results will be announced at 6:00 p.m. the same day. Students may cast their vote through a link sent to student emails from Elections AUS.

Commentary, Opinion

Welcomed to work, not to stay

by Camila Sierra Ordóñez on

More in Commentary:

As of Nov. 19, 2025, international graduates of Quebec universities and temporary foreign workers are no longer eligible to apply through the accelerated immigration pathway to obtain a Certificat de sélection du Québec for permanent residence. This pathway, known as the Programme de l’expérience québécoise (PEQ), was abolished by Immigration Minister Jean-François Roberge under the François Legault administration, leaving previously eligible individuals with shattered hopes of obtaining permanent residency in Quebec. 

The Programme de sélection des travailleurs qualifiés (PSTQ), which replaced the PEQ program, is a competitive, points-based system with stringent requirements regarding French language proficiency, certified job offers, and alignment with the specific labour market needs. Since its establishment, the new program has been heavily scrutinized by immigration experts, municipalities, and businesses. Those who had moved to Quebec planning to apply for permanent residence through the now-abolished PEQ pathway—known as ‘PEQ orphans’—are now placed at the mercy of the PSTQ guidelines.

The abolition of the PEQ is not simply an administrative reform but a breach of trust between Quebec and the people it invited to build their lives in the province. In narrowing immigration to serve short‑term labour goals, the government has undermined both its moral authority and its long‑term economic interests.

This change cannot be understood solely as an economic adjustment. It reflects a broader policy approach under Quebec Premier Legault, whose administration consistently pushed for restrictions, cultural protection, and linguistic conformity. This pattern is evident in recent legislation such as Bill 21, which enforces secularism by banning certain public-sector employees from wearing visible religious symbols, disproportionately targeting religious minorities, and Bill 96, which toughens French language requirements for new immigrants, international students, and institutions under the guise of preserving francophone identity. 

These decisions are part of a long-standing legislative pattern in Quebec, led by political figures such as Legault, who have repeatedly denied the presence of systemic racism in provincial institutions. That pattern is now being reinforced by Roberge’s refusal to implement a grandfather clause for the PEQ, which would have allowed current applicants to retain eligibility for permanent residence.

On Feb. 7, protesters marched in Montreal, articulating the impact of the PEQ’s abolition. A psychology PhD graduate held a sign that read “Assez bonne pour travailler pour le Québec, pas assez pour rester” (Good enough to work for Quebec, not good enough to stay). Others echoed similar sentiments: “Je suis venu donner de la valeur, pas demander une faveur” (I came to contribute value, not to ask for a favour).

The government insists that the PSTQ is necessary to better align immigration with labour shortages, reduce pressure on housing and public services, and distribute newcomers more evenly across the province. These concerns are not irrational, yet by dismantling a predictable pathway for already‑integrated workers and graduates, the government risks deepening precisely the labour shortages it claims to address, particularly in sectors such as healthcare, where over 6,300 temporary foreign workers face expiring permits by 2026.

At its core, this shift raises deeper concerns about the nature of Quebec’s immigration policies. Immigration is not merely an economic tool; it is a system built on integration and trust. When governments change the rules, they reshape the relationship between the state and those who choose to build their lives within it. Instead of addressing the anxieties and expectations of Quebec immigrants by implementing a grandfather clause or equivalent measure, Roberge and his cabinet have merely replaced one immigration pathway for another—a solution that serves administrative priorities while leaving human realities unaccounted for. 

Quebec must not make promises it cannot—or will not—honour; to do so is a failure of governance. At its most basic level, effective governance requires listening to the people whose lives are shaped by political decisions and recognizing the weight those decisions carry. Immigrants are not interchangeable economic units to be recalibrated according to the province’s shifting priorities. They are people who have spent years building their lives in Quebec, contributing through work, study, and engagement. Any policy that ignores this reality risks undermining not only individual futures, but the very trust upon which effective and legitimate governance depends.

Behind the Bench, Sports, Winter Sports

Sport and politics are inseparable at the 2026 Milano Cortina Winter Olympics

by Luke Pindera on

More in Behind the Bench:

During the opening weekend of the 2026 Winter Olympics, U.S. Representative Tim Burchett made a post on X, writing, “Shut up and go play in the snow.” His jeer was in response to comments made by American skier Hunter Hess, who said that “it brings up mixed emotions to represent the [United States] right now [….] There’s obviously a lot going on that I’m not the biggest fan of.” Unsurprisingly, U.S. President Donald Trump also took issue with Hess, calling him “a real Loser” on Truth Social—Trump’s personal propaganda platform. 

Ah, yes: The classic trope that athletes must “stick to sports,” or that they should “leave sports out of politics.” Those have never been sensible arguments. International sport has always been political. 

Finnish historian Antero Holmila argues that the point of the Olympics has not simply been to organize different sports under one international event, but rather to promote “international understanding and ultimately, peace.” The idea of achieving international cooperation through sporting competition is central to Olympism. But the paradox of the Olympics is that while they intend to strengthen internationalism, the very nature of the Games—pitting nations against each other—inherently fuels national competition. The balance between internationalism and nationalism is a delicate one, and as the so-called rules-based order crumbles, the tone and meaning of the 2026 Olympic Games have shifted in tandem with the fierce nationalism of hard power politics.

The hostility hovering over this year’s Games was evident during the opening ceremony, with boos echoing through the iconic San Siro Stadium after U.S. Vice President JD Vance’s face appeared on the video screen. Top European Union diplomat Kaja Kallas commented on the incident, saying that “our public also has a pride, a European pride. So it shows.” This highlights one of the political trends that sits in the backdrop of the Games: The breakdown of the transatlantic alliance. Trump’s tariff threats, belligerence toward Greenland, and withdrawal of military support for Ukraine have led to a historic rift between the U.S. and Europe. JD Vance is a particularly controversial figure in Europe due to his infamous speech at last year’s Munich Security Conference, in which he expressed fear about Europe’s supposed “threat from within” and argued that the continent was not living up to its democratic values. 

The athletes themselves may not be wrapped up in the political ramifications of their performances, but with two Latvian fans hoisting the flag of Greenland during the men’s ice hockey match between the U.S. and Denmark, it is clear that onlookers understand that Milano Cortina serves as a political arena. 

The American-Canadian sporting rivalry is another affair to watch, as Trump has spent the last year and a half provoking and intimidating his northern neighbour. Former New Democratic Party Member of Parliament Charlie Angus said that “we’re looking at a next-door neighbour who makes increasingly unhinged threats towards us. So to go to international games and pretend that we’re all one happy family, well, that’s gone.” After the intensity of last year’s 4 Nations Face-Off hockey final, which saw Canada defeat the U.S. in overtime amidst Trump’s invasion threat, all eyes have been on men’s and women’s hockey in Milan, a sport that is central to Canadian identity. Both the women’s and the men’s gold medal games saw the Americans defeat the Canadians in overtime, which clearly landed well in the White House.
The competitive nature of international sport makes it a useful tool for nationalist actors. There are implicit Darwinian notions of physicality, fitness, and competition in sports, indicating how sports can serve as propaganda to convey ideas of national superiority. With today’s Great Powers approaching foreign policy through conquest and coercion, the mood of national confrontation hangs over the fragile international liberal order. One could argue that sport is an important avenue for nations to exert their competitive energies—after all, the ice rink is preferable to the battlefield. But as hard power politics become increasingly legitimized,  international sporting competitions will offer important opportunities for nations to display their might and defeat their rivals.

Arts & Entertainment, Culture, Music, Pop Rhetoric

Bad Bunny’s Puerto Rican pride combats hateful rhetoric

by Lia James on

More in Arts & Entertainment:

The Super Bowl has long been an annual time of excitement for both Americans and international football fans alike. Although some love the opportunity to get together with friends and family to passionately root for their team, others with no interest in football still tune in for the halftime show. The musical performance during the game’s halftime has hosted acts by many iconic artists such as Prince, Michael Jackson, and Beyoncé. Even weeks later, this year’s performance by Bad Bunny still resonates. 

Bad Bunny is a Puerto Rican rapper and singer who rose to fame after releasing his 2016 song “Diles.” Today, he has six solo studio albums and is the only artist to have been named Spotify’s number one Global Top Artist four times. Bad Bunny’s music honours and celebrates Latine culture, denouncing American imperialism and the ongoing effects of colonialism—especially in his most recent album, DeBí TiRAR MáS FOToS. 

Throughout his Super Bowl performance, the staging itself venerated his Puerto Rican heritage. The set, a field of tall grass, paid homage to Latino labour—a reference to sugar cane extraction, which was collected through slave labour in the Americas. Bad Bunny also had actors play roles across many different industries dominated by Latino workers, including construction, food service, and more. In spotlighting labour that is often overlooked, the artist created a space of acknowledgement and appreciation for those workers and the generations before who have toiled in these workforces. 

Bad Bunny also celebrated love during his performance. He invited one lucky couple to get married on the football field, which ended with the introduction of Lady Gaga’s performance of Die With a Smile. This is a stunning example of how celebrities can use their fame to make others’ dreams come true. It also highlights how love in the face of hatred can encourage others to combat political polarization through community building.

One of the most noteworthy segments of the performance featured a Latino boy and his father watching Bad Bunny’s recent Grammy acceptance speech, where he discussed the vital impact of immigrants on American success, condemning ICE’s violent treatment of citizens and non-citizens alike, and advocating for the celebration of multiculturalism. Bad Bunny was the first artist to win Album of the Year for a fully Spanish album. Amidst the rise of anti-immigrant sentiment and prejudice towards Latin Americans, Bad Bunny serves as a model of Latino resilience and accomplishment for immigrants and youth. This inclusion highlights the importance of representation as a way to dismantle stereotypes that dehumanize marginalized groups. 

As Bad Bunny concluded his performance, he gave a shoutout to every country in the Americas. Naming them in geographic order from south to north, his final shoutout went to his home of Puerto Rico. As he exited the stage with a group of musicians and dancers carrying flags of the Americas, he sang the chorus of his song “DtMF”, filling the field with the elation of North and South American cultural diversity, forever marking this performance. On the stadium’s jumbotron, the message “The Only Thing More Powerful Than Hate is Love” shone in large print while Bad Bunny held a football that read the message “Together, We Are America.”

Bad Bunny’s display of pan-Americanism is particularly impactful during a time of intense division. Over time, global superpowers, specifically the U.S., have revealed prejudice towards Latin American communities, as evidenced by the increasing atrocities committed by ICE. Bad Bunny’s theme of unity in the face of hatred sends the message that everyone should have a place in America—the nation’s cultural diversity is its greatest strength.

1 … 12 13 14 15 16 … 1,363

Read the latest issue

Read the latest issue