Latest News

News, SSMU

SSMU Legislative Council discusses committee on governance reform

by Emma Avery on

More in News:

At its Nov. 16 meeting, the Students’ Society of McGill University (SSMU) Legislative Council passed the Motion for Nominating Committee of the Board of Directors to Undertake the Selection of Future Board Members Anonymously and the Motion to Amend the Standing Rules to ease the deadlines for presenting motions. Faculty Councillor Anthony Koch was nominated to sit on the Special Committee on Anti-Semitism, which will report to Council in Winter 2018.

Ollivier Dyens and Council talk Governance reform

The first major topic of the session was governance reform. Ollivier Dyens, deputy provost (Student Life and Learning), spoke to Council on this matter before the call to order.

Dyens explained that responsibility for student mental health falls not only on the university, but on students, who must work to cultivate a supportive environment for each other. To Dyens, clarifying SSMU’s constitution is essential to reducing conflicts between students. He suggested hiring an external party to lead the charge in reforming SSMU’s governance structure.

“You guys are going through a turbulent period,” Dyens said. “Your own constitution seems to be, at certain moments, unclear [….] As a university, we want to see SSMU survive. We want to see SSMU together, and being a place where things are healthy for students and debate.”

Council later debated the Motion to Call a Special Referendum Period, which proposed an additional referendum later this month to consider a question regarding constitutional reforms. As the mover of the motion, SSMU Vice-President (VP) External Connor Spencer conceded that the question should be moved to the Winter 2018 Referendum, following concerns over voter burnout within SSMU’s membership. In the interim, she called for Council to commit to starting a larger conversation on governance reform in order to prevent similar issues from recurring every year.

“We need to start having a very large and very long conversation about what governance at SSMU is, and what we’re expecting, and where all the holes are,” Spencer said. “I would really like to pitch […] a commitment to start a larger conversation about [SSMU’s governance structure within…] this body, because we’re all the elected representatives from all the different faculties, and we can make sure our students’ voices are heard within that.”

Following the debate, rules were suspended to add a Motion to Investigate a Committee on Governance Reform, which carried. Council decided that executives and councillors would first look into the options available for starting the process of governance reform, and then determine whether creating an internal committee would be the best solution. VP University Affairs Isabelle Oke explained her stance that more research is necessary before a committee is formed.

“Committees as a first step are one option, [but] I don’t think it’s our only option moving forward,” Oke said. “What I’m suggesting is some kind of mandate, for somebody […] to put together all of the options that we can actually take as a council moving forward, and what resources we’re working with as well.”

Motion for selecting future Board of Directors members anonymously passes

Council voted to remove applicants’ names from applications for future Board of Directors (BoD) seats, through every step of the nominating process until the interview stage. The motion passed with 27 votes in favour, with an amendment added to remove other identifying information irrelevant to the applicant’s qualifications for the position.

While discussing this motion, Council members advocated for the additional need to create a broader policy on hiring processes, which it does not have. SSMU is seeking to fill an equitable hiring position to investigate current hiring practices and alter them for accessibility and transparency.

“This [motion] is an interim step to try and deal with all of the cases that come to the Society now until we have the research that will help us have more rigorous and sustainable practices in our Society,” Oke said.

 
McGill, News

MUS investigates Hype Week participant donning shirt with misogynistic slurs

by Helen Wu on

More in McGill:

On Nov. 3, a student entered the Bronfman Building Quesada wearing a shirt that read “Newhore 17 Year Olds Only” on the back in permanent marker. The shirt was a team uniform for Hype Week, an annual week-long social event with a prominent focus on drinking, organised by the Management Undergraduate Society (MUS).

Mads Motush, U3 Arts student and floor fellow at Solin Hall, reported the incident to the Dean of Students, Chris Buddle, the MUS Executives, and the Students’ Society of McGill University Equity Committee. McGill and MUS have since begun investigating the misconduct, although the circumstances of the investigations are currently confidential. Word of the incident also circulated throughout social media, sparking discussion of misogyny and rape culture on campus on McGill’s subreddit.

In an interview with The McGill Tribune, Motush explained that he, along with other onlookers at Quesada, felt outraged by the message on the student’s shirt. Motush later posted a photo of the shirt publicly on his personal Facebook page. However, even after reporting the sighting to the university through formal channels, Motush was disappointed by the responses he received, which he felt did not address the culture of Hype Week as a whole.

“I felt that, despite my initial email where I detail how the perpetrator must have felt supported enough by the institution in order to wear that shirt, the email that Chris Buddle sent out really only addressed [the misconduct] as a singular instance,” Motush said. “I felt he should have at least acknowledged the structure of Carnival [and] Hype Week that encourages this type of behaviour.”

According to Vice-President Events of the MUS Yannick Leblanc, the MUS worked with McGill to take action against the student on Nov. 4 after receiving reports from Buddle and Motush. MUS President Alexandre Perron also posted an official statement about the incident, clarifying the Society’s stance on the matter.

“The MUS and the Winter Carnival Committee are committed to ensuring that a culture of respect, tolerance, and inclusivity is upheld in every event that we hold," Perron wrote. “The MUS will continue to review and adapt its policies and implementation of events to ensure the safety and wellbeing of all students involved.”

Buddle noted that his administration has been working closely with all student societies in an attempt to mitigate sexual violence at large social events.

“We have been working with all student societies on a suite of their events, including Frosh, Hype week and others,” Buddle said. “I believe there have been many improvements, including additional training and education. Our goal is to continue to work collaboratively with student societies.”

Provost and Vice-Principal (Academic) Christopher Manfredi also addressed this incident of misconduct in an email sent to all McGill students on Nov. 13. Manfredi condemned the Hype Week participant for perpetuating misogyny, and encouraged all those with concerns to reach out to McGill’s Office for Sexual Violence Response, Support and Education (O-SVRSE).

According to Bianca Tétrault, Sexual Violence Education advisor at the O-SVRSE, McGill’s organized drinking events are central to any discussions of sexual violence on campus. She recommended ways to prevent this type of misconduct, including educating students on the impact of inappropriate actions, encouraging bystanders to be active, and holding offenders accountable.

“Inappropriate behaviour are not isolated to specific events,” Tetrault said. “Our office strives to work with all different types of groups on campus to address violence in our community, but we do try to give extra attention to the larger groups as we know that when participant numbers rise, there is a higher chance that problems can occur.”

If you are affected by sexual violence or harassment, McGill has resources that you can turn to. You can contact the Sexual Assault Centre of the McGill Students’ Society (SACOMSS) at 514-398-8500 or [email protected] or the Office for Sexual Violence Response, Support, and Education (O-SVRSE) at 514-398-3786 or [email protected].

 

Commentary, Opinion

McGill Arts Freshman Program needs a rehaul

by Hannibal de Pencier on

More in Commentary:

McGill’s U0 Arts curriculum is failing its students. The Arts Freshman Program’s purpose is to encourage academic diversification, and provide students with a basis of knowledge in the liberal arts. It requires first years to fulfill broad credit requirements across three of four streams—social sciences, humanities, languages, and mathematics and sciences. Ideally, first-year McGill students would see the value of a varied and challenging education and choose their courses accordingly. If this were the case, the current system would be a sufficient framework; however, leaving the burden on students to develop a challenging and well-rounded U0 curriculum is ultimately wishful thinking. McGill’s freshman program has the right idea in spirit, but not in execution. The university needs to radically reorganize the Freshman Program in order to realize its intended value.

The program’s current form allows students to largely subvert its aims. Many courses, like English and French, overlap as two categories (language and humanities), allowing students to avoid one layer of diversification. Instead of pursuing challenging and widely applicable subjects, students often take whatever courses seem easiest in a category, particularly within the categories that they are less academically interested in. Fringe courses, like The Art of Listening, Natural Disasters, and Chemistry of Drugs end up packed with apathetic students, enrolled purely to meet program stipulations, or trying to get an easy A. Such courses may be valuable in and of themselves, but are often insufficient to serve as a basis of knowledge in that field.

Students’ disregard for the value of academic diversification, and inclinations to specialize prematurely are understandable. Undergraduate degrees, especially in the arts, are an increasingly large and uncertain investment. As such, aggressive specialization—especially in majors that are seen as employable—and a subsequent disregard for exploring a diversity of subjects seems like a logical solution. Expertise is marketable, and it’s often tempting to simply take the easiest route to gain proof (a diploma) of such specialized knowledge.

In a field of study as interconnected as the liberal arts, a system funnelled toward specialization limits the possibilities of valuable cross-subject conjecture.

While specialization is necessary in academics, it should be preceded by comprehensive overview of subjects for two major reasons. First, taking a breadth of courses allows students to consider multiple fields that they may not have previously been exposed to. More importantly, it also forms a necessary basis of cultural and intellectual context from which to view and critically examine a narrower academic field. In a field of study as interconnected as the liberal arts, a system funnelled toward specialization limits the possibilities of valuable cross-subject conjecture.

Philosophy, for example, cannot be divorced from any subject in the Arts. Be it art history, political science, gender studies, or linguistics, a basic education in philosophy immediately expands a subject’s potential breadth. A student of 17th-century literature, for example, is at a loss if they are completely ignorant of the era’s popular political theory, just as their study of Wagner is lacking without consideration of Nietzsche. The liberal arts are ultimately cultural phenomena, and lose potency when perfectly siloed.

Examples of comprehensive general programs do exist. Columbia University’s Core Curriculum claims “to provide all students [regardless of major] with wide-ranging perspectives on significant ideas and achievements in literature, philosophy, history, music, art, and science.” The freshman program’s mandatory courses include a survey of moral and political thought since Plato and an introduction of Western literature. In Canada, the Foundation Year at King’s College in Halifax incorporates a mandatory and intensive seminal reading list comprising its entire first-year curriculum. While McGill may not need to go as far as to adopt a uniform curriculum like King’s, the university should be more prescriptive in its role to ensure a foundational freshman education.

McGill cannot assume that students will independently choose a diverse range of courses, rather than the easiest option to fill a quota. Instead, the school should make certain courses mandatory in each of the already specified streams, for example an introductory philosophy course in the humanities. Education should be an end unto itself, and McGill’s Freshman Program should emphasize this principle. That means overcoming the reduction of university education into a simple transaction of money and time for a diploma. McGill needs to re-evaluate its U0 Arts program, and build it as an introduction to new ideas and fields of study, rather than just a hurdle to U1.

 

 

Hannibal DePencier is a U0 Arts student at McGill. He is a canoe tripping enthusiast and all-around granola guy.

 

@mcgilltribop | [email protected]

 

 

News, PGSS

PGSS General Assembly debates DPS and external affiliations under new Secretary-General

by Kendall McGowan on

More in News:

McGill’s Postgraduate Students’ Society (PGSS) held its Fall General Assembly (GA) in the Thomson House ballroom on Nov. 15. At the GA, Unité de travail pour l’implantation de logement étudiant (UTILE) and the Quebec Student Union (QSU) gave presentations on their work and discussed an affiliation with PGSS would look like.

The GA also unanimously voted to condemn Bill 62, endorsed a ‘yes’ vote on the Daily Publication Society (DPS) Referendum after extensive debate, and welcomed recently-elected Secretary-General Maria Tippler to the executive. Following a brief presentation from Students’ Society of McGill University (SSMU) Vice-President (VP) External Connor Spencer on the Our Turn national action plan, GA attendees voted to endorse the creation of a task force to implement the plan within PGSS.

Presentations and debate on Montreal student groups

In their presentation, UTILE President Laurent Levesque, who was joined by SSMU Community Affairs Commissioner Julien Tremblay-Gravel, described the organization and invited PGSS to collaborate. According to Levesque, UTILE is a nonprofit organization that works with student unions throughout Quebec to improve students’ living conditions.

Levesque referenced “studentification,” in which the growth of a student population in a neighbourhood decreases local property values and alienates other permanent residents. He cited the Milton-Parc community and the Plateau as examples of this. According to Levesque, UTILE is conducting a study on this form of gentrification and the feasibility of student housing options that avoid perpetuating it.

However, PGSS Equity Commissioner Emil Briones said they were not satisfied with the UTILE feasibility study proposed, and called for further examination of the disproportionate impact studentification has on minorities.

“Housing is a really loaded issue and I was not satisfied from the response of the UTILE representatives,” Briones said. “We know from empirical studies on social inequality that there are hard racial lines to be considered when we discuss housing, and at McGill in particular. Because of the demographic makeup of the student body we are very much complicit in the displacement of minoritized communities.”

In the second presentation, QSU Vice President Guillaume Lecorps gave an overview of the organization, which advocates for 77,000 students in Quebec at both the provincial and federal level. Some PGSS members took issue with the Union’s stance on Bill 62, which only condemned its specific effects on students, not its broader social impact.

PGSS External Affairs Officer Hocine Slimani explained that he invited QSU to speak because PGSS is currently unaffiliated with any student advocacy group, leaving it unrepresented on a provincial and a federal level. He also explained that former Secretary-General Jacob Lavigne observed both QSU and the Association for the Voice of Education in Quebec (AVEQ), and wrote a report recommending that PGSS join the former. The PGSS currently remains unaffiliated with any federal student association, but hopes to vote to change this at some point in the future.

DPS endorsement vote narrowly succeeds

Family Medicine Graduate Student Society (MSc) Representative Jacquie Safieh moved for the PGSS to endorse a “yes” vote on the DPS Referendum. Safieh highlighted the Daily’s 116-year history and Le Délit’s status as the only francophone newspaper on campus.

Financial Affairs Officer Matthew Satterthwaite spoke against the motion because of frustration over how the referendum was implemented. He raised concerns that undergraduate students were overrepresented in the vote, and referenced confusion with distributing the ballot to all PGSS members, a miscommunication that led Elections SSMU to cancel the original online ballot at the end of the first day of voting.

“I don’t want this to be seen as me being against the DPS, I’m not taking a stance on that,” Satterthwaite said. “I’m against this referendum itself because it has not been run in a transparent manner, and it has been very full of confusion for everyone involved.”

The motion passed 35-25. The DPS has since won its referendum vote.

Introduction of new Secretary-General

Nov. 15 marked PGSS’ first meeting since electing Tippler to fill Lavigne’s vacant seat. Satterthwaite welcomed and congratulated her, and thanked the executives who fulfilled Secretary-General duties while the position was vacant.

“It has been fairly difficult for the executives in the past few months, and we have been without a Secretary-General since August, essentially,” Satterthwaite said. “I’d just like to take a moment to acknowledge the hard work of all the other executives, a lot of which are sitting here. Everyone really stepped up and we survived throughout all of this. We’re very fortunate to have a very strong team.”

 

Science & Technology

McGill hosts speakers on the ethical and legal ramifications of stem cell research

by Gwenyth Wren on

More in Science & Technology:

On Nov. 1, the McGill Journal of Law and Health hosted a speaker series with the goal to explore the ethical and legal ramifications of stem cell research. Michel Tremblay, a professor in the Department of Biochemistry at McGill, was the first speaker. Tremblay began by giving the audience a brief history of stem cell research.

Stem cells, discovered at McGill in the 1950s, reproduce through mitosis to produce more stem cells. There are two main types of stem cells; embryonic and adult. A large number of these cells can be used to treat various diseases such as cancer, obesity, spinal cord injuries, and organ failures.

“The idea of [using] embryonic stem cells is good,’ Tremblay said. “However, it isn’t easy, and brings up a lot of ethical questions.”

Fortunately, in 2006, Shinya Yamanaka, a Japanese Nobel Prize winner in stem cells research, proved that it was possible to use cells other than embryonic cells. He discovered that fusing stem cells with tumor cells can render them more potent, as their gene expression becomes dominant over that of the tumor cell. This means that stem cells multiplied to the extent where they fully suppressed and wiped out the tumor cells.

Despite the advancement in stem cell research due to technology like CRISPR-Cas9, there are issues of designer babies, stem cell tourism, and stem cells for tissue and organ replacement. These technologies allow for the specific manipulation of genomes in any human stem cell, which bring to rise ethical questions that must be considered when conducting future research.

“Technology to mute certain gene expression will change the world,” Tremblay said.

William Stanford, associate professor in the Department of Cellular and Molecular Medicine at the University of Ottawa and researcher at the Ottawa Research Institute, spoke to these ethical issues of gene expression.

“The remarkable potential of stem cells to improve all spheres of biomedical research and treatment has spawn great competition due to lucrative potential of these technologies,” Stanford said.

With great power comes great responsibility, and despite the remarkable potential of stem cells, Stanford recognized there is still a need for a legal framework to mediate their applications and development–especially given that stem cell tourism, fake treatments, and non-clinically certified centres are growing and harming people. Stanford gave the example of a phony clinical trial in Florida that left 3 women blind because the procedure they underwent was not based on legitimate research and was essentially a money grab. Stanford warned that these fake treatments and trials are all too common.

Despite ethical concerns, it cannot be forgotten that stem cells have the power to save lives. William Brock, a guest speaker at the event, is a lawyer and partner at the Davies law firm, and a Leukemia survivor. Brock was told he had 8 months to live 13 years ago. One of his brother’s stem cells matched his own, and Brock underwent a stem cell transplant in Montreal.

“Society shouldn’t have the right to decide if I should have a life-saving treatment,” Brock said. “Whatever ethics looks like in Ivory castles, [it] looks different when you’re the one dying. For you, it’s an ethical issue for someone else, it’s their life.”

After Brock spoke, Trembly and Stanford recognized that his subjective nature of experience alters his viewpoint. They remained firm in the belief that due to its wildly immense potential, stem cell research and treatment and research must for the foreseeable future continue to be held to ethical and legal rules.

The speakers were eloquent, well informed, well received, and added more layers to the multi-faceted topic of stem cell research and treatment. In the future, more questions are expected to be raised and solved in Canada. At McGill today, students and staff are living not only in the age, but in the place of discovery about stem cell research. Stanford emphasized that Canada is an important player in the field.

“If hockey is Canada’s sport, stem cell science is Canada’s research,” Stanford said.

Hockey, Men's Varsity, Sports

Packed house watches McGill Redmen hockey take down Concordia Stingers

by Jordan Foy on

More in Hockey:

The McGill Redmen hockey team (12-2-0) faced off against the Concordia Stingers (8-2-2) in their home barn on Nov. 17 in front of a massive crowd. Over 900 fans turned out for the game—a fundraiser for the Movember Foundation—with a dollar from every ticket donated to the organization. The Redmen, many of them sporting ‘staches of their own, defeated their rivals 2-1.

Despite only scoring one goal in the first period, McGill outperformed their opponents at both ends of the ice. The team’s lone tally was scored on an early 5-on-3 powerplay: The Redmen expertly moved the puck around the outnumbered Stingers defenders, eventually finding third-year defenceman Dominic Talbot-Tassi, who had plenty of time to fire the puck into the back of the net. On the few chances the Stingers did have, second-year goaltender Louis-Philip Guindon shut the door, absorbing all shots directed his way.

In the second stretch, Concordia displayed more life. The Stingers had some dangerous offensive opportunities that tested the Redmen defence, posing a much bigger threat than they did in the first period. Early in the frame, the score was evened at a goal a piece when the Stingers jammed the puck in after a chaotic pile-up in front of the net. For the rest of the period, both teams had their share of chances, but goals remained elusive. Despite the tight score, the Redmen were undeterred. Third-year forward Frederic Gamelin noted the importance of sticking to their game plan.

“They’re a pretty good team […], they skate fast, and they had good players,” Gamelin said. “We just stayed calm and didn’t panic in the second period, and I think it paid off in the third.”

In the final stanza, McGill reasserted control over the game, remaining composed and focused in the face of some penalty trouble. The Redmen came roaring out of the gate, bombarding the Stingers net with a barrage of shots in the early minutes of the period. An early attempt found the back of the net but was disallowed due to goaltender interference. Regardless, the Redmen maintained their high-tempo play, and managed to score midway through the period when third-year Jerome Verrier capitalized on a scramble in front of the net.

The Redmen penalty kill was exceptional in the third. The Stingers had five power play opportunities—including a five-minute major—but were unable to generate any kind of momentum due to McGill’s stellar defence. With Concordia unable to produce offensively, McGill closed out the game 2-1. Overall, the Redmen were content with many areas of their game.

“Everything went well,” Gamelin said. “We didn’t make too [many] turnovers. Defensively we played a big game, our [penalty kill] was awesome, and we created a lot of chances offensively.”

Moving forward, McGill know that they needed to remain consistent, especially before their game against Concordia the night after, on Nov. 18.

“The real good teams are able to put together two games against a good team,” Head Coach Kelly Nobes said. “We won a lot of the parts of tonight’s game, and we want to do the same tomorrow.”

In that matchup, the Redmen and the Stingers completed their home and away series, and McGill increased its lead in the OUA East standings with a 3-2 overtime victory.

 

Moment of the Game

While on a penalty kill in the third period, goaltender Louis-Philip Guindon made an inhuman save when he stretched his stick back behind his body to deny a shot.

 

Quotable

“A big crowd here at McConnell, it’s pretty sick. We’re all used to playing junior teams [where there’s] 4,000 people in the stands [….] Against [teams] like Concordia and [other] strong teams, it’s really nice to have the support of students. [It gives us] really good vibes.” – Goaltender Louis-Philip Guindon on the attendance of the game.

 

Stat Corner

In total 937 spectators came out to support the McGill Redmen on Nov. 17.

News, Private

Daily Publications Society wins existence referendum despite heated ‘No’ campaign

by Ozanay Bozkaya on

More in News:

Between Nov. 13 and Nov. 17, the Daily Publication Society (DPS), which publishes both The McGill Daily and Le Délit, faced a referendum on the renewal of its Memorandum of Agreement (MoA) with the Students’ Society of McGill University (SSMU). Despite a vocal ‘No’ campaign team calling for a majority vote against its existence, the DPS won the vote with 65 per cent of students voting ‘Yes.’

Every five years, Independent Student Groups (ISG) with mandatory student fees, such as the DPS, must renew their MoA through a referendum of its members. This year, the ‘Yes’ and ‘No’ campaigns—which push for and against the continued existence of the DPS, respectively—fought a particularly intense battle to influence the referendum.

Inori Roy, the Coordinating Editor of the Daily, characterizes the vote as a matter of protecting the freedom of the press.

“[We] believe that it is crucial for us to remain on this campus […] as voices for students who otherwise may not have that much of a voice,” Roy said. “These may be marginalized students, these may be Francophonie students. We think that it is crucial to continue to [provide] a platform.”

At the end of the first day of voting, Elections SSMU released a campus-wide email to both undergraduate and graduate students stating that the ballot would be cancelled and started anew following mistakes in the list of students made eligible to vote in the referendum.

“The elector’s list provided by the DPS omits a number of students within the SSMU, and potentially the Post-Graduate Students’ Society (PGSS) as well,” Elections SSMU wrote.

However, hours after this notification was sent out, the Elections SSMU team followed up with another email clarifying that the DPS was not at fault for the mistake.

“The DPS committed no wrongful action, and the mistake emanated purely from confusion by all parties involved about how to compose electors lists for this question,” Elections SSMU wrote.

Roy stated that she believed this interpretation was correct, and further stated that she was convinced that the “No” campaign had used this event to its advantage.

“I hope that the student body was able to recognize [the mistake] and also to critically engage with the ways the ‘No’ campaign mobilized around what ultimately turned out to be a misunderstanding,” Roy said. “From the facebook page to the pensketch, the ‘No’ campaign has been mistaken in many of their assertions, including our finances and the status of our MoA in the case that we lost the referendum.”

Andrew Figueiredo, a prominent member of the “No” campaign, told The McGill Tribune that he felt that DPS’ publications were not sufficiently representing its members..

“My main concern is that students are currently forced to pay for a paper that has been exclusionary, unaccountable, and divisive,” Figueiredo said. “My number one reason in calling for a ‘No’ vote is because I believe that students should be empowered to demand changes in the DPS and to control where their money goes.”

Figueiredo further explained that, in his opinion, the “No” campaign had successfully illustrated the Daily’s antagonism.

“Specifically, the ‘No’ campaign has highlighted some of The Daily’s more divisive posts and actions, including the closing of their comment section, so that people can see why we need change,” Figueiredo said.

Elections SSMU Deputy Electoral Officer Isaac Levy claimed that Elections SSMU remained neutral on the matter. Since internal DPS by-laws regulate the referendum, Levy explained that, although Elections SSMU would normally consider the “No” stand’s distribution of food at the Y-Intersection contradictory to Article 6.2 of the SSMU Internal Regulations of Elections and Referanda: Campaigning, the incident was outside of its mandate.

“As the issue cannot be sanctioned or regulated under the SSMU campaign rules or guidelines, the question of permissibility depends on what the DPS by-laws for campaigning state,” Levy said.

Levy said that Elections SSMU, which allows ISGs to host their existence referendums on its OnlineVoting System, would look into the establishmentof stricter rules for similar votes in the future.

 
Hockey, Martlets, Sports

McGill Martlet hockey claims first victory of the season against Concordia Stingers

by Miya Keilin on

More in Hockey:

On Nov. 12, the McGill Martlets (1-4) faced-off against the Concordia Stingers (4-2). Coming into the game, the Martlets, ranked seventh nationally, had lost four consecutive games while the Stingers, ranked fourth, were riding a four-game winning streak. It was certainly not the start to the season that the Martlets had wished for, but on Sunday they showed what they were made of, defeating their cross-town rivals 4-3.

“We focused on the little things,” Second-year forward Jade Downie-Landry said. “We did what we had to do.”

It was Downie-Landry who gave the Martlets the lead just over a minute into the game when she capitalized on a mistake by Concordia’s goalie. The Stingers fought back, creating scoring opportunity after scoring opportunity, but thanks to some huge defensive plays, McGill held Concordia scoreless in the first period. Meanwhile, the Martlets set up a few chances of their own and with a goal from second-year forward Léa Dumais, they headed into the first intermission with a 2-0 lead.

After the break, it took the Stingers only six minutes to tie the game back up, and they continued to dominate throughout the second period. With five minutes remaining in the frame, the Stingers overpowered an exhausted McGill defence and netted another goal to take a 3-2 lead. The Martlets weren’t done fighting, however. Third-year forward Olivia Atkinson capitalized on a power play right before the end of the period, creating a much-needed change of momentum.

The third period was a much more even battle than the second. The Martlets found themselves in the penalty box often but went eight-for-eight in successful penalty kills for the game, which frustrated Concordia’s offence.

“It’s a funny thing about momentum,” Martlet Head Coach Peter Smith said. “A power play can certainly build momentum but it can destroy momentum if you don’t score.”

Downie-Landry assisted a goal from rookie forward Christiana Colizza late in the third period to give the Martlets the lead again. They took a penalty with less than two minutes on the clock but managed to hold off the six-on-four to clinch their first victory of the season.

This was a big win for the Martlets, who are currently sitting in last place in the RSEQ conference. The team aims to use the positive result as a turning point for the rest of the season.

“I think this win is going to serve as a bit of an inspiration to show what our team is capable of. Nothing feels better than a win and we just gotta carry the momentum forward,” Martlets captain Alison MacKenzie said.

The Martlets next face the Carleton Ravens (3-2) this Saturday, Nov. 18 at 7 p.m. at McConnell Arena.  

 

Moment of the game

In a quick break out of McGill’s defensive zone, Martlet forward Jade Downie-Landry connected with Christiana Colizza, who skated past a Stingers defender and found the back of the net from 10 yards out to give McGill a late lead in the third period.

 

Quotable

“I don’t have to motivate them. They motivate themselves.” – Head Coach Peter Smith

 

Stat corner

Despite being outscored 3-1 in the second period, the Martlets got 14 shots off while the Stingers took just nine.

Commentary, Opinion

Who does SSMU serve?

by Arisha Khan on

More in Commentary:

I’ve been working at the Students’ Society of McGill University (SSMU) in various capacities for almost three years. During this time, I have seen the vital role that SSMU plays in improving student life, and the potential of the Executive team to truly affect change on campus. So, when my colleagues encouraged me to run for the Vice-President (VP) Finance position, I agreed. I assumed, somewhat naively, that with the right mindset of hard work and integrity, I would not fall into the same patterns that led to past difficulties within SSMU.

However, I have learned that as a SSMU Executive, working hard is not enough: Interpersonal conflicts within SSMU and individual Executives’ efforts to advance personal agendas have prevented me from fulfilling the mandate I wanted to achieve. Ultimately, I made the difficult decision to step down from my role primarily for my mental and physical health.

As the Fall semester progressed, it became increasingly difficult to use my time productively and meet my broader goals of supporting marginalized students. I was burdened with numerous tasks outside of my portfolio, I was let down and targeted by the leader who was supposed to support me, and I was attacked by the Board of Directors (BoD) for prioritizing due process and student consultation over personal political beliefs and exerting unnecessary power over the membership.

To be clear, SSMU’s problems extend beyond my personal experience. Over the past few years, the Society has become polarized to the point of impeding its functioning. Meanwhile, well-intentioned endeavours, such as advocating for a more democratic BoD, have been quashed, turning instead into political debates.

Our current system allows a small faction of career politicians to pad their resumes at the expense of the average student, by working through undemocratic structures […] to promote their personal ideologies and suppress dissent.

The self-serving political climate within SSMU troubles me, and it should be of concern for students as well. Student fees and Executives’ time are being used to attack other members of the Executive team, rather than to further the student initiatives that SSMU exists to support. This year, the President’s unwillingness to resolve internal conflicts led the Board to approve the use of student fees —$15,000, to be precise—to professionally mediate between her and other Executives. In fact, the funds were later used for her to launch an investigation against the rest of the Executive board, including myself. Student funds should be used to better the student experience at McGill, not for self-fulfilling inquisitions.

The SSMU Executive needs to operate as a functioning unit, regardless of inherent personal and political differences. This year’s executive team has achieved a lot so far: We broke a record with Activities Night attendance; we published the Our Turn Action Plan to end Campus Sexual Violence and held forums to develop our own Gendered and Sexual Violence Policy; we introduced a pilot program for unlimited counselling services; and we had the most successful Halloween event in the past three years. Unfortunately, these achievements have been overshadowed by interpersonal conflict and public scandals.

In 2016, the current University of Toronto Student Union (UTSU) President, Mathias Memmel, wrote an article, asking, is the UTSU worth saving? Memmel argued that when a student association runs into trouble, it has two options. The first is “to hide what’s going on and become progressively more authoritarian,” and the second is “to throw open the doors and let the members see the corruption.” As Memmel concludes, “A [student union] that exists only for the benefit of a small clique of student politicians isn’t worth anyone’s time.”

Our current system allows a small faction of career politicians to pad their resumes at the expense of the average student, by working through undemocratic structures like the Board of Directors to promote their personal ideologies and suppress dissent. This year, I watched a Board composed of mostly unelected members make controversial decisions without proper consultations, undermine our General Assembly, harass and suspend me without due cause, and extend their own tenure past their term limits. Left unchecked and unbalanced, the Board of Directors this year has used its disproportionate power within SSMU to to embrace positions which alienated a significant proportion of the membership.

To do better, and truly work for the student body’s interests, SSMU first needs more democratic leadership, and an Executive team that prioritizes mandated day-to-day responsibilities over personal agendas. To that end, decisions need to be made with adequate student consultation, and we need more rigorous standards for internal procedures. Second, complaint mechanisms need to be created and adhered to, with specific accountability mechanisms to deal with cases where student representatives no longer abide by their mandates. Third, student leaders must make all of their decisions public at democratically accessible forums, with sufficient and accurate reporting. SSMU would benefit from restructuring its constitution and governing bodies to be directly accountable to the average student. This would entail directing more of the decision-making power to the General Assembly, and reaffirming the primacy of Legislative Council as a body which facilitates direct participation from the membership.  

I leave SSMU hoping that the Executive team will be able to move past current divisions to continue the projects they have planned. SSMU must continue to champion the wellbeing of McGill students, both through providing essential services and through supporting advocacy for marginalized communities.  Additionally, I urge the student body to take part in critiquing governances structures when they are unfair and unaccommodating of the student body’s needs. Recent history at SSMU has shed light on its failures: a lack of oversight, and blatant abuses of power. SSMU can be better, and it should be better. By speaking out and holding their representatives accountable, students can make SSMU the representative, democratic institution it was always intended to be.

 

Arisha Khan is the former SSMU Vice-President Finance.

[email protected]

 

1 … 614 615 616 617 618 … 1,363

Read the latest issue

Read the latest issue