I thought I would update everyone on the events that occurred at the Senate Meeting on Monday January 12th.
The Senate was able to convene, but it was adjourned after the adoption of the order paper, when several students began videotaping the meeting. The President explained the unwritten policy, forbidding videotaping Senate proceedigns, and some heckling ensued from the protesting students.
Mr. Rock asked the Senate whether the meeting should continue under the circumstances, and indicated a vote would be held. I was the first Senate member to speak on this matter, and stated that there was important business that needed to be taken care of, and the Senate should continue sitting. I also mentioned that a clear, written policy concerning videotaping meetings should be presented at the next meeting. One other student senator agreed with my position.
A professor spoke and gave a strict legal approach, saying that the Senate cannot legally convene in the presence of an infringement of established (though unwritten) precedent.
Without calling a vote (as had been promised) President Rock adjourned the meeting, which he was entitled to do, falling within the prerogative of the Chair of the Senate.
Some summary observations need to be made:
1. A clear, written policy as to videotaping policy must be passed by the Senate at the next meeting in February. After the arrest of Mark Kelly at the December Senate meeting, I remember Robert Major (V.P. Academic, who was the acting Chair) saying that there would be a policy on videotaping drafted for the next meeting. The minutes from December (which were adopted today) indicated that Major said the policy would be brought forward at "a next meeting". Perhaps I misheard in December. Either way, I take full responsibility as a Senator for not immediately pointing out this inconsistency today when the Senate discussed the minutes for the December meeting.
2. All students need to take a more collaborative approach to dealing with the University administration. Obstructionist, antagonistic, and strong-arm tactics should only be used as a last resort after trying to resolve issues through cooperation. For example, for those concerned that the University is not being transparent, why not be proactive, write a resolution and present it before the Senate? Get in touch with a student Senator and I am certain that he/she would endorse it. As for as I know, in my four months on the Senate, such cooperative tactics regarding the specific issue of videotaping have not been attempted.
The reality is that students form the minority on the Senate. Moreover, in all relations with the University, we are at a significiant power disadvantage. Acknowledging this fact, my goal as a Senator, representing the Faculty of Law and the student body as a whole, is to work within the established system (imperfect as it may be) to deliver real change for students. I fundamentally believe that members of the University administration are not inherently evil. Therefore, a simple one-on-one discussions about student concerns are an appropriate first step, in my opinion.
Also I would like to see the President of the Student Federation at Senate meetings, as he is the legitimate voice for students. He should seek the opportunity to speak to the Senate, present resolutions (through student Senators), and encourage dialogue.
In closing, I, Joe The Senator, just want to get back to work; working on behalf of students for the betterment of our university lives. Important academic business was post-poned today: the creation of Minors in Latin American Studies and United States studies, the election of a member to the Council on Undergraduate Studies, and a Report on 2008 admissions at the graduate level. It's ultimately students who suffer from these delays.
Allan Rock did promise a vote on the adjournment of the meeting, which did not occur. I am disappointed that the will of the Senate, as obvious as it might be, was not freely expressed in a democratic fashion. Hopefully at the February meeting, nevertheless, order will be restored, academic business can be dealt with, and at the end, everyone can sing Kumbaya ! Until then, I await your comments/concerns/questions. I am here for YOU.
JWR2
Monday, January 12, 2009
The People Have Spoken...
Though the referendum did not go as I had hoped, it was a valiant effort on both sides, and a very close result (52% - Yes, 48% - No). What's more, there was an acceptable voter turnout (20%).
I hope that the campus can unite at this time and keep its independent voice going forward. There are many things that we need to accomplish, and division will only frustrate our objectives.
I hope that the campus can unite at this time and keep its independent voice going forward. There are many things that we need to accomplish, and division will only frustrate our objectives.
Monday, November 10, 2008
I Love CFS...
(...and other fairy tales)
I couldn't resist.
In all seriousness, CFS has their heart in the right place. Promises of lower tuition fees, being a member of a student movement, free ISIC and student saver cards. Ahhh, all the things that make me feel warm and fuzzy inside.
Back to reality...
But the problem really lies in the lack of causal link between a vote for CFS and lower tuition fees. By voting for CFS, can they honestly promise me my tuition fees will go down next year? That's a bit of a stretch. The cost? Almost $400, 000. I'm not a gambler, but that's one high risk game.
But ask the average student: What's the first thing you would think of doing with $400, 000? I'm sure it would not be to join another student federation. There's so many other causes that are much worthier...creating bursaries for low-income students, more money for the student food bank.
And let me put my fiscal conservative hat on for a second. Uncle Joe will indulge in a bit of Economics 101: we have unlimited wants, and limited resources. Though the Student Federation is carrying a surplus of $90, 000, the rest of us are living through some of the worst economic times in recent memory. One of my fellow law students, whose family's income is directly linked to the state of the economy, had to drop out of a class in order to put extra hours in at work.
So, I ask: Is the most judicious use of $400, 000, joining a student federation? While it might be nice, a luxory if you will, it would be what I call in French a dedoublement de services (duplication of services). Our student leadership has to set priorities because leaders set priorities, leaders get things done (Never again will I repeat that phrase).
So what are our priorities as students? Mr. Haldenby was elected partially on a platform of promising to build a new student centre. Perhaps, a great idea! Price tag? In the millions. Who will finance it? Probably you. My crystal ball tells me there will be a referendum question in the near future asking you for an increase of your student levies once again. Year after year, in the five years I've been here, it seems the student federation, concots plans on how to raise your student levies. But I digress.
Prudent financial planning offers simple solutions to these and other conundrums. Building a new student centre is arguably a more pressing issue than joining CFS. More immediate and certain results would result from Option A, while Option B is like playing craps. Economics teaches us that because we CAN'T have everything, and we have to make choices. In socio-political speak that means priorities. Otherwise, student debt loads increases through continual levy hikes, and the Fed swells to a size that is unmanageable, and it loses its focus of lobbying for students rights. As my old eco prof taught us, "you can try to go against economic theory, but you will always lose".
My friends, that's it. Regardless of the outcome of the CFS referendum, I truly hope our student federation becomes compassionate. That it understands the difficult times in which we're in. An executive that understands that choices have to be made, and every proposed expenditure must be analyzed through the following lens: Is this the most effective use of students' money?
Sound financial planning demands nothing less.
JWR2
I couldn't resist.
In all seriousness, CFS has their heart in the right place. Promises of lower tuition fees, being a member of a student movement, free ISIC and student saver cards. Ahhh, all the things that make me feel warm and fuzzy inside.
Back to reality...
But the problem really lies in the lack of causal link between a vote for CFS and lower tuition fees. By voting for CFS, can they honestly promise me my tuition fees will go down next year? That's a bit of a stretch. The cost? Almost $400, 000. I'm not a gambler, but that's one high risk game.
But ask the average student: What's the first thing you would think of doing with $400, 000? I'm sure it would not be to join another student federation. There's so many other causes that are much worthier...creating bursaries for low-income students, more money for the student food bank.
And let me put my fiscal conservative hat on for a second. Uncle Joe will indulge in a bit of Economics 101: we have unlimited wants, and limited resources. Though the Student Federation is carrying a surplus of $90, 000, the rest of us are living through some of the worst economic times in recent memory. One of my fellow law students, whose family's income is directly linked to the state of the economy, had to drop out of a class in order to put extra hours in at work.
So, I ask: Is the most judicious use of $400, 000, joining a student federation? While it might be nice, a luxory if you will, it would be what I call in French a dedoublement de services (duplication of services). Our student leadership has to set priorities because leaders set priorities, leaders get things done (Never again will I repeat that phrase).
So what are our priorities as students? Mr. Haldenby was elected partially on a platform of promising to build a new student centre. Perhaps, a great idea! Price tag? In the millions. Who will finance it? Probably you. My crystal ball tells me there will be a referendum question in the near future asking you for an increase of your student levies once again. Year after year, in the five years I've been here, it seems the student federation, concots plans on how to raise your student levies. But I digress.
Prudent financial planning offers simple solutions to these and other conundrums. Building a new student centre is arguably a more pressing issue than joining CFS. More immediate and certain results would result from Option A, while Option B is like playing craps. Economics teaches us that because we CAN'T have everything, and we have to make choices. In socio-political speak that means priorities. Otherwise, student debt loads increases through continual levy hikes, and the Fed swells to a size that is unmanageable, and it loses its focus of lobbying for students rights. As my old eco prof taught us, "you can try to go against economic theory, but you will always lose".
My friends, that's it. Regardless of the outcome of the CFS referendum, I truly hope our student federation becomes compassionate. That it understands the difficult times in which we're in. An executive that understands that choices have to be made, and every proposed expenditure must be analyzed through the following lens: Is this the most effective use of students' money?
Sound financial planning demands nothing less.
JWR2
Concerning My Motion for Remembrance Day Academic Amnesty
At the November meeting of the Senate, I brought forward a motion for Remembrance Day Academic Amnesty.
Since the Senate had established a precedent, in granting amnesty for the Drop the Fees Campaign, certainly we should grant it for November 11 (a quasi-holiday already), a day when we remember our fallen soldiers as well as those currently fighting for our country. Many of the students at "Canada's University", come from provinces that recognize Remembrance Day as a statutory holiday, and it was on behalf of those students that I submitted this motion.
Here, in the Nation's Capital, at "Canada's University", I believe we should aspire to great heights, seeking to accomplish what our political actors fail to see the importance in doing.
The motion was defeated. It did, however, generate a lively discussion, and will most certainly be a topic in future Senate sessions.
I only wish I thought of bringing this motion sooner (i.e. in September), when it would have been more accepted by professors.
JWR2
Since the Senate had established a precedent, in granting amnesty for the Drop the Fees Campaign, certainly we should grant it for November 11 (a quasi-holiday already), a day when we remember our fallen soldiers as well as those currently fighting for our country. Many of the students at "Canada's University", come from provinces that recognize Remembrance Day as a statutory holiday, and it was on behalf of those students that I submitted this motion.
Here, in the Nation's Capital, at "Canada's University", I believe we should aspire to great heights, seeking to accomplish what our political actors fail to see the importance in doing.
The motion was defeated. It did, however, generate a lively discussion, and will most certainly be a topic in future Senate sessions.
I only wish I thought of bringing this motion sooner (i.e. in September), when it would have been more accepted by professors.
JWR2
About My Vote Concerning Academic Amnesty (November 5)
At the September meeting of the Senate, I voted against giving academic amnesty to the November 5 Day of Action ("Drop the Fees" Campaign).
My argument was simple:
Granting academic amnesty could lead down a slippery slope. Why should we give special recognition to this day, and not any others? On the debate on this motion, I specifically brought up protests on humanitarian crises (i.e. Darfur) as examples of causes that might be more important than the "Drop the Fees" campaign. As academic amnesty does not force professors to do anything (other than write make-up exams), I felt that ultimately it is up to students to take responsibility for their academic lives.
Thus, this decision of the Senate was injudicious in my view, especially since the University had not established clear criteria for groups requesting academic amnesty.
JWR2
My argument was simple:
Granting academic amnesty could lead down a slippery slope. Why should we give special recognition to this day, and not any others? On the debate on this motion, I specifically brought up protests on humanitarian crises (i.e. Darfur) as examples of causes that might be more important than the "Drop the Fees" campaign. As academic amnesty does not force professors to do anything (other than write make-up exams), I felt that ultimately it is up to students to take responsibility for their academic lives.
Thus, this decision of the Senate was injudicious in my view, especially since the University had not established clear criteria for groups requesting academic amnesty.
JWR2
And so I begin...
As a Senator of the University of Ottawa, my goal is to promote transparency and inclusiveness into the decision-making processes at the University. This blog will attempt to chronicle some important issues that come up.
I will also comment on all the happenings of campus life.
Disclaimer: The comments on this blog are mine and mine alone.
Cheers,
JWR2
I will also comment on all the happenings of campus life.
Disclaimer: The comments on this blog are mine and mine alone.
Cheers,
JWR2
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)