McGill Tribune

Referendum Question Regarding SACOMSS Fee Renewal—YES

This referendum question proposes the routine, tri-annual approval of the 75-cent opt-outable fee that funds the Sexual Assault Centre of McGill Students’ Society. SACOMSS provides a good and important service to the McGill community, and the Tribune endorses this motion wholeheartedly. If you aren’t compelled to vote on the basis of the other two more controversial issues, at least take two minutes to go online for this one, to demonstrate the McGill community’s overwhelming support for this worthy organization.

Referendum Question Regarding SSMU Charity Committee and Fund—UNDECIDED

This asks students to approve a $0.50 opt-outable fee for disaster relief that would be overseen by a new “SSMU Charity Committee.” The Tribune is divided on the question.  Some of us believe it should be approved because any effort toward the “relief of acute suffering” is worthwhile, and because it could raise a significant amount of money while costing students less than a cup of coffee.

Others, however, believe that while the proposal seems theoretically innocent, it might have a few practical flaws. Even though disaster relief is important, there’s an argument to be made that students should be able to make their own individual choices about donating to charity AUS-organized fundraisers for Haiti last year raised thousands of dollars and proved that students are willing and able to donate to causes they believe are important.

Another concern was that the Charity Committee, in deciding where to direct the funds, could get mired in controversial politics, as seems to happen so often on this campus. Also, some of us don’t believe there should be a levy on students, many of whom are without income, for issues that aren’t directly related to campus life. In many cases, students’ parents pay their tuition, and SSMU shouldn’t be responsible for deciding how these families’ charitable donations are allocated.

Plebiscite Question Regarding Addition of an Interfaculty Arts and Science Representative on the SSMU Legislative Council—YES

Currently, students in the Arts and Science program can represent either faculty on the Students’ Society Legislative Council and are represented by both. However, the “whereas” clauses of this question claim that Arts and Science students constitute a “distinct entity within the McGill student body whose needs and interests are not completely aligned with either” Arts or Science. Therefore, the argument goes, there should be a representative on council whose sole purpose is to represent these students. The Tribune’s understanding is that if this new position were created, Arts and Science students could no longer represent either faculty, but only their own “distinct entity.”

This is a worthy initiative and it should pass. Other small groups on campus, like students in Architecture and Education, have their own representatives, and there is no good reason why Arts and Science students sho uldn’t, as well. Ironically, as there are currently four Arts and Science students on council, designating a single representative for this faculty could result in less representation.

The complexities of this issue shouldn’t blind anyone to the fact that it is largely inconsequential. Arts and Science students will continue to be represented no matter what happens with this question, and SSMU councillors will continue to be eager to hear and advocate on behalf of their concerns.