Latest News

SSMU’s ‘roaming council’ in Burnside 511. (Michael Paolucci / McGill Tribune)
a, News

Council debates creation of additional representative to TaCEQ

by Jimmy Lou on

More in a:

Last Thursday, the Students’ Society of McGill University (SSMU) Council met in Burnside 511, one of two Active Learning Classrooms at McGill. Included in the topics of discussion was its relationship with the Quebec Student Roundtable (Table de concertation étudiante du Québec, or TaCEQ) and the possibility of creating another representative position on TaCEQ.

McGill currently has four representative seats on TaCEQ. SSMU Vice-President External Robin Reid-Fraser said Council would increase SSMU commitment to TaCEQ if they created another permanent position for representation.

“McGill has a lot of people who are from outside Quebec,” Reid-Fraser said. “My understanding is that a lot of people don’t even know we are a part of TaCEQ, or what it’s for. So it’s important for us to get word out there with things like newsletters or organizing events like panel discussions.”

Created in 2009, TaCEQ is a province-wide round-table for member student associations to lobby the government as a collective. SSMU is currently one of three members alongside student associations from Université Laval and Université de Sherbrooke. With these three associations, TaCEQ represents 65,000 students in Quebec.

“Ultimately, TaCEQ is intended to function as a formalized round-table, where member student associations can, with a louder voice, lobby the government with improved success,” the SSMU website reads. “The structure of TaCEQ is built to prevent it from turning into a large organization carried away with its own purpose and disconnected from its base.”

TaCEQ is mostly volunteer-based and operates with a small budget. It does not charge its own membership fees like other large student associations, according to Reid-Fraser. Instead, TaCEQ approves its finances at the beginning of the financial year and its  expenses at monthly meetings.

“Currently we use this structures because TaCEQ is small and fairly new compared to the other associations,” Reid-Fraser said. “If we get more member associations and are able to work with a larger budget, then the structure may changesomewhat.”

Some councillors raised concerns about electing a new representative to TaCEQ, and suggested that SSMU does not take full advantage of its current level of representation, since many of McGill’s seats are empty during meetings. They also discussed to whom the new TaCEQ representative would be responsible, and under which student organizations on campus the representative would serve.

“I would really want to integrate [SSMU Council] and the TaCEQ representatives,” Reid-Fraser said. “Once we get a better picture of what we need [at the] next [TaCEQ] meeting, I’ll be able to bring the feedback and issues back to Council and go forward from there. Hopefully we can find agreement by then [about] what we’re looking for.”

SSMU Council is usually held in the Lev Bukhman Room in the Shatner Building. Thursday’s meeting was SSMU’s second “roaming Council” of the year, which is why it was held in Burnside 511.

“The purpose of ‘roaming Council’ is to expose the council to different parts of campus, and I think the active learning classroom is an exciting project that could be great for students,” SSMU President Josh Redel said.

As part of the Student-Centered Active Learning Environment with Upside-Down Pedagogies project, Active Learning Classroms (ALCs) were designed in 2009 to facilitate learning and teaching experiences. Since then, the Teaching and Learning Spaces Working Group at McGill has overseen ALCs at McGill to help enrich education experiences.

“You’re not in rows, you’re not facing the same direction, and you can roll around on your chairs,” Oksana Maibroda, McGill’s Educational Technology Consultant, said. “What this room allows for lecture, is that if the teacher wants to work on certain subject, he or she has a lot of ways to communicate to the students.”

Burnside 511 features multiple large overhead projection screens, as well as chairs and desks which allow  students to face one another, rather than a professor’s podium. Much like a computer lab, the rotating chairs are easily adjustable and designed to facilitate students break ing into discussion groups.

“This is one of the many cool things that McGill’s been working on,” Redel said. “At McGill, the problem is how to make classrooms smaller and more interactive. It’s cool that people on the administration and staff members are working on this.”

 

a, Opinion

McGill loan scandal highlights a bigger problem of transparency

on

More in a:

Last week, the Montreal Gazette reported that McGill is filing a lawsuit against Arthur Porter, former executive director of the McGill University Health Centre, over an unpaid loan (see “News in Brief,” page 2). The unfurling fiasco has brought forward one disconcerting revelation after another.

It’s hard to choose which part of the scandal is most shocking: it could be the additional sum of $92,000 Porter was paid, on top of the publicly disclosed salary of $256,000. It could be the undisclosed amount he was paid as an assistant professor in the faculty of medicine, despite no evidence that he taught in that capacity. Most puzzling of all, though, is the $500,000 loan he received from McGill in 2008, at an annual interest rate of one per cent, for which he is now being sued.

Here, some obvious questions emerge. McGill has, to date, failed to specify exactly what the loan was for, and why such a large figure was offered to an executive director at rates far below prime. The Montreal Gazette found that the loan was part of a “housing loan agreement”—a questionable term. According to the National Post, low interest loans are apparently a standard perk for university administrators on top of their salaries. Porter’s teaching salary—for lecturing he allegedly never did—also has yet to be explained.

[pullquote]“There are some serious matters of contention still on the table, and we ask that McGill come forward with an explanation.”[/pullquote]

As paying students of this university, we feel that we are entitled to hear answers to the simple questions of what the loan was for and what teaching Porter actually did. Either something went very wrong and the university simply does not know how this all fits into a larger tangled web of deceit, or the practice of paying nonteaching executives as professors and supplying them with loans at such low rates is standard. Both are similarly disturbing and require explanation.

What concerns this editorial board most, however, is that it’s entirely likely that none of this would have gone public had it not been for McGill’s lawsuit against Porter. The affair raises a number of bigger questions about how our university manages its finances and discloses the salaries of directors and senior administrators.

Most importantly, we would like to know if other university officials have been receiving personal loans of hundreds of thousands of dollars at negligible interest rates, or been appointed to positions and paid for work they never did. Salaries of top university administrators are made public in Quebec through annual reports submitted to the National Assembly. This public disclosure, unfortunately, means nothing if the figures aren’t correct. (Salaries of directors of publically-funded institutions, like the MUHC, are similarly available via access to information requests).

McGill will do its best to brand Arthur Porter as the guilty party, and that won’t prove to be terribly difficult. Before this incident, there was much controversy around the MUHC project, including several allegations of corruption. In September, a provincial anti-corruption unit raided the offices of the MUHC. Porter left the country in 2011, after abruptly resigning as chairman of Canada’s Security and Intelligence Review committee. His departure came amidst allegations that he sent $200,000 of his own funds to a Montreal businessman, hoping to secure a $120 million infrastructure development project that would have benefitted Porter’s own company in his native Sierra Leone.

However, this affair is indicative of a broader lack of transparency. There are some serious matters of contention still on the table, and we ask that McGill come forward with an explanation. At a time when the administration cries bloody murder about underfunding, this debacle could be highly damaging to McGill’s credibility if it cannot provide answers. At the same time, if it cannot account for such large sums, it is going to have a hard time convincing major players, including the provincial and federal governments, that it deserves the additional funding it claims to need.

As students, we would like to know exactly what the loan was for, and whether offering low-interest loans to senior administrators or directors is standard practice. Similarly, we would like answers as to why there was a discrepancy between Porter’s actual salary and the publically disclosed figure, and whether such divergences are common. Assurances that posted salaries are correct—and more generally that there is transparency in compensation for top university officials—are first steps towards maintaining the trust of tuition-paying students.

a, Opinion

Quebec’s refusal to accept Albertan oil is all political

by Ben Carter-Whitney on

More in a:

Last Wednesday, Parti Québécois (PQ) Environment Minster Daniel Breton raised considerable controversy. When asked about proposals currently being brought forward to start moving crude oil from Alberta’s oil sands to refineries in Montreal and further east in the Maritimes, he rejected the notion outright.

“Albertans want to bring their oil onto our land, without our consent,” he told La Presse.

He also cited environmental risks, stating that “this is a question of protecting the environment that’s on our territory.”

The Alberta oil sands are a hotly-debated topic on the environmental front. For years, critics have targeted the extraction process as excessively harmful, but that’s not the issue brought forward by Mr. Breton. His concern, judging by his quote, is the impact of the project on Quebecois land.

Unlike the hotly disputed Keystone XL and Northern Gateway projects, which would lay down new pipelines in a process both lengthy and harmful to the surrounding areas, these current proposals primarily involve the repurposing of existing infrastructure. Enbridge is seeking to reverse the flow of their pipeline, which currently moves crude oil from Montreal to Sarnia. Similarly, TransCanada wants to convert their Canadian Mainline pipeline, which currently carries natural gas, into an oil line. The work required to make these modifications is minor.

Mr. Breton also cited the 2010 Kalamazoo River oil spill as a reason for Quebec to be wary of the proposals. While the disaster in Michigan certainly serves as a harsh reminder of what can go wrong with pipelines, these are risks that Quebec is already taking with the existing Enbridge line. Reversing the flow of oil will not increase the likelihood of a rupture.

The environmental concerns seem even more dubious when one considers that New Democratic Party leader Thomas Mulcair has come forward in favour of these proposals. Mulcair has vehemently opposed the other aforementioned pipeline initiatives, on the grounds of both environmental and economic concerns. However, provided the project developer pays for any environmental damage caused, he believes that the economic benefits greatly outweigh any drawbacks in this case.

Currently, refineries in Eastern Canada process crude oil shipped in from Saudi Arabia, Africa, and Venezuela. Once refined, the oil is sent inland to Canada, to the eastern United States, or as far south as Texas. Replacing these imports with Albertan oil would keep more profits within Canada.

As Mulcair rightly points out, the alternatives to this proposal involve shipping the bitumen to the U.S. or China, eliminating potential high-paying Canadian jobs. The West-East pipeline would create more jobs in the East, and increase the export capacity for our refined oil.

Ultimately, Mr. Breton’s comments seem to indicate an ideological opposition to the proposal, rather than a stance based on the facts of the issue. Rather than addressing environmental or economic concerns, his comments derive from a purely political stance. The rhetoric used is distinctly nationalist, even employing the Quiet Revolution slogan ‘maître chez nous’ (‘masters of our own home’). While Mr. Breton’s sovereigntist approach is certainly in keeping with the Parti Québécois’ stance, it may be problematic for the province’s future.

This sort of dogmatic unwillingness to even consider proposals such as these could prove seriously harmful to Quebec, deterring job creation and economic growth. The PQ has vowed to get tough on corporations, but a recently filed lawsuit—in which a number of corporations including Wal-mart and the Gap are threatening to pull out of Quebec over increasingly strict language laws—seems to demonstrate that this stance is to the overall detriment of the province thus far. To set a precedent in which opportunities are being struck down on uniquely partisan grounds will only worsen this. While the party did get elected on a platform stemming from a particular set of ideologies, these cannot take precedence over general economic well-being.

The questions of judgement that these issues bring forward could ultimately damage the party itself. As a newly-elected minority government with an upcoming confidence vote, this is not the time for the PQ to be trying to score political points with a separatist base by shunning real issues. If the Party plans to occupy any sort of long-term leadership role, it will have to learn to temper its ideologies and take all aspects of that role seriously.

a, Opinion

Justin Trudeau and the Political Centre

by Cedric Smith on

More in a:

I never knew too much about Justin Trudeau—who is now in the race for the leadership of the Liberal Party of Canada—other than the fact that his father’s stint in the Prime Minister’s office inspired my own father’s lifelong conservatism.

“Pierre Trudeau was the first and only Liberal I’ve ever voted for,” my father would say. My inclination  was to paint all Liberal Party members with the brush of its late leader Stéphane Dion—whose infamous cry of “Do you think itʼs easy to make priorities?” fit right in with the Conservatives’ ‘Stéphane Dion is not a leader’ advertisements. This led me to expect a humiliating defeat in Trudeau’s March 2012 boxing match against Conservative Senator Patrick Brazeau. The upset raised the possibility, that, behind Trudeauʼs flowing brown hair and smoldering eyes, may lie reserves of true strength. I didn’t think about it for too long, though, because he is, after all, part of an increasingly irrelevant third party.

Since Trudeau entered the leadership race, many have noted the similarities he shares with Barack Obama. Trudeau is young, handsome, charismatic, and has a real chance of bringing optimism and enthusiasm back into Canadian politics. But the similarities don’t end there. Like Obama, Trudeau was in Parliament for less than four years before beginning to campaign for higher office. And like Obama, Trudeau’s pre-political experiences reveal him to be a lightweight. Before serving in Parliament, Trudeau was more or less a permanent student, flitting from one intellectual obsession to another. He studied literature at McGill, education at UBC, engineering at the University of Montreal, and then, finally, returned to McGill University to begin a degree in environmental geography. This last degree was ultimately abandoned in favour of his 2007 parliamentary run. Some may look at Trudeau and see a Renaissance Man. Others may view him as unable to begin something and stick with it.

Recent articles in the National Post and the Toronto Sun have revealed that Trudeau is seeking to hire Mitch Stewart, a top campaign strategist for Barack Obama’s 2008 and 2012 election bids, to join his leadership campaign. To quote the National Post, Trudeau is seeking to exploit “the U.S.-style tactics and U.S.-style strategy used in the recent U.S. campaign” to ease his way to the leadership.

Does Trudeau really think this is going to help him? Barack Obama’s 2012 campaign, lest we forget, hinged entirely upon tearing down Mitt Romney’s character, shifting the focus of the election away from his own record, and appealing to the Democratic base through wedge issues. Obama abandoned any pretense of being a centrist, Clinton-esque, pro-business Democrat through his misleading attacks on Bain Capital and patronizing tone towards the successful (“if you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that”).

The Liberal Party has always been a big-tent organization, appealing to broad swathes of the Canadian population. It has never strayed too far left of Canada’s political centre.

Now, more than ever, its viability depends on portraying itself as a ‘middle-of-the-road’ alternative between a ‘far right’ Conservative Party and a ‘far left’ New Democratic Party (NDP). If Justin Trudeau were to adopt the divisive and polarizing campaign tactics of the United States Democratic Party (and, to be fair, its Republican Party as well), the Liberal Party will enter NDP territory and complete its fade into obscurity.

Justin Trudeau seems like a nice guy, even if his pre-political experience suggests he would be an ineffective Prime Minister. But for the sake of a middle-of-the-road, ‘left-of-center’ Canadian political faction, however, I do hope he eschews the divisive and polarizing rhetoric of Barack Obama’s 2012 re-election campaign.

a, Opinion

Letter to the Editor

by Slawomir Poplawski on

More in a:

Provost Masi’s letter in the last issue of the Tribune was a response to The Daily’s editorial “Demanding student voices at the top” (Oct. 29, 2012). The Daily editorial criticized the lack of student involvement in the selection of a new Deputy Provost (Student Life and Learning).

Our administration can play politics with competing student papers, which can even be healthy, but shouldn’t do so without mentioning the source of the letter.  The Provost used many big words about democracy in his ‘letter,’ but his submission is little more than a strong assault on those with differing opinions about the role and achievements of his Deputy Provost and the procedures currently in use to select his new successor.

The Daily piece noted, “the advisory committee is just that: advisory.” This summarizes the disappointment of fee-paying students who are not recognized as true partners with this educational institution.

Also troubling is the committee’s over-representation of McGill-elected working academics and staff members.  It reminds me of the famous Communist public relations notion of “social consultations,” when party members (who represented five to 10 per cent of the total population) were asked at special meetings to approve some key decisions that the Politburo had already agreed upon.  Nobody was allowed to criticize top policies that were then officially recognized as the ‘will of the majority.’

Manipulative methods used by power-hungry functionaries have analogous patterns—no matter if these techniques are applied in former Libya or Iraq, Communist Russia, or here today.   We have learned by chance about the questionable McGill techniques disclosed by a former student leader, Andrew Doyle.  In an online comment on the editorial in question, he revealed that all previously democratically-selected delegates of one such advisory committee “were made to sign confidentiality agreements several times, and the Provost stressed the secrecy of the process over and over again.”  In his letter, Masi describes McGill as “a student-centred University that puts student considerations at the forefront” after quoting various Task Forces that supposedly solve the university’s problems. Those two quotes are quite consistent and reflect the true treatment of our community by McGill’s governing bodies.

Until today, we were uninformed about the ‘intimidation sessions’ that convert isolated representatives into puppets of the administration.  It is deplorable that strongly-supported delegates of academics, staff members, and students were denied the right to oppose such questionable requirements of confidentiality.

Clearly, more transparency is needed in decisions concerning the selection or evaluation of administrative leaders.  It is also depressing to hear that Doyle, instead of feeling humiliated by this experience, now advises new members of such committees: “Just try not to do any damage but make the most informed recommendations as possible.”  This reaction resonates with my personal impression after dealing with colleagues afraid to utter even one sentence about their work on such a commission for fear of retribution.

Taking these events into perspective, we should not be astonished by the total silence of the latest committee mandated to search for a new principal, which was formed months ago. How can we be assured what documents, statements, or declarations they were expected to sign or not? It is clear, now they are scared and so remain quiet, that it will be more effective to ask previous members of such committees. This may work, as some of them are now retired.  The first steps toward demanding more transparency and respect for democracy in our universities are the most important, and thus, the most difficult. However, change is never easy.

Students gather in James Square for the event. (Remi Lu / McGill Tribune)
a, News

Students and faculty reflect on Nov. 10 and student movement

by Erica Friesen on

More in a:

Last Friday, students gathered in James Square to hear a series of presentations on the historic and present challenges faced by McGill. Student and faculty speakers presented on topics including unions, disciplinary charges from last spring’s student demonstrations, and the question of the democratic nature of the university’s structure.

The Post-Graduate Students’ Society of McGill University (PGSS) and the Students’ Society of McGill University (SSMU) organized the event as a commemoration of International Students’ Day, which falls on Nov. 17. According to PGSS Vice-President External Errol Salamon, the event also allowed students to reflect on the events of Nov. 10, 2011, when an occupation of the James Administration Building ended with riot police dispersing students on campus.

“There are still long-standing issues from the 2011-2012 academic year that haven’t been resolved,” PGSS Vice-President External Errol Salamon said. “This event ties into International Students’ Day because it enables not only students, but also other members of the McGill community to share … their local struggles and issues, many of which are common struggles.”

As examples of these ongoing struggles, Salamon pointed to the Quebec debate on tuition, as well as the academic disciplinary charges that some McGill students still face for participating in non-violent protests during the Winter 2012 semester.

Former SSMU Vice-President External Joël Pedneault gave a presentation that emphasized the importance of continuing to raise awareness about those who face ongoing disciplinary action or criminal charges for their participation in student protests. He received a ticket for participating in a demonstration last year.

“It’s important not just to ask for a general amnesty,” Pedneault said. “That seems like the most obvious thing … but the danger of formulating demands in that broad, sweeping way is that they could easily be taken halfway by those who have the power to decide who gets criminalized and who doesn’t.”

Pedneault said it is more important to spread information about those who have been banned from the island of Montreal, or who face jail time for cumulative charges.

Another presenter, Justin Marleau, stressed the importance of unions on campus. As the vice-president Teaching Assistants for the Association for Graduate Students Employed at McGill (AGSEM), Marleau said unions help to address the problems caused by the high student turnover rate at universities, which results in a lack of institutional memory among student organizations.

“We need to fight this administration every single day, for every single right that we should have,” Marleau said. “Every time we negotiate a new collective agreement they cut our hours, and they like to justify it with budget cuts. … But it has nothing to do with money. It has to do with what they care about—nice buildings, fancy facilities, HD TVs all throughout campus, with nothing about the quality of education for undergraduate and graduate students at McGill.”

Although the event was held in part to commemorate International Students’ Day, some speakers pointed out that struggles at McGill are not confined to students. Thomas Lamarre, a professor in East Asian studies, said the way McGill is run affects faculty as well as students.

“At McGill, we’re given an image that the form that our struggles should take is democracy—that we are supposed to go and sit in meetings, deliberate, pass bills, and vote on things,” Lamarre said. “But the truth is, a university is not structured like a democracy. So when we’re told that if we behave, it will become democratic, it’s simply a lie. It simply misdirects all of our energy from the actual struggle.”

Lamarre concluded by calling on students and faculty to stop “pretending” the university is a democracy.

McGill Dean of Students Andre Costopoulos attended the event, and said he thought the speakers made relevant points about the university’s history and community.

“Unfortunately, sometimes the way those important points are expressed doesn’t favour dialogue,” he said. “For example, some of the speeches started with [personal] attacks  instead of focusing on the issues at hand. But the issues and the points themselves are important and should be considered.”

Throughout the presentations, students frequently expressed their support by cheering. Isaac Stethem, U3 arts, said he appreciated the presenters’ comments, and emphasized the importance of encouraging dialogue about challenges at McGill.

“I thought it was really important to remember what happened on campus last year … but also to remember that it’s not just about one thing that happened a year ago,” Stethem said. “It’s about … continuing the struggle to make the university more democratic [and] to make it more responsive to the needs of students and faculty.”

 

a, News

McGill Senate discusses student disciplinary procedures

by Andra Cernavskis on

More in a:

On Nov. 14, the McGill Senate met to discuss student disciplinary cases during the 2011-2012 academic year. Interim Dean of Students Linda Starkey presented the Committee on Student Discipline’s (CDS) annual report.

The Senate also heard a presentation by Vice-Principal Research and International Relations Rose Goldstein on how McGill could expand its funding for research.

The Report

The CSD report notes that the total number of allegations was slightly higher this past academic year—427 compared to 408 in 2010-2011. The non-academic allegations made against students increased by 48 per cent, from 193 to 286.

“This increase can be attributed to improved reporting of e-mail harassment or inappropriate use of McGill posting sites, the growing number of residence spaces, and the campus atmosphere last year,” the report said.

Last year, several students faced disciplinary allegations after McGill Security Services videotaped students at protests on campus, including an occupation of the James Administration Building’s sixth floor. Science Senator Moe Nasr questioned the role of McGill Security Service within the disciplinary procedure at McGill, specifically with regards to cases where students express political opinions on campus.

According to Starkey, the mandate of Security Services is not to accuse a student of violating a specific protocol, but to report alleged violations to a disciplinary officer.

“I’m not aware that the notion of student politics is a factor [in what Security Services reports to a disciplinary officer],” she said, noting that the only time that someone from Security Services would mention political leanings in a case is when describing words on signs used by students on campus.

Catherine Lu, an associate professor of political science, expressed concern over whether there was equity in CSD’s punishments.

“There were different penalties that came out of similar offenses,” Lu said. “What needs to be done institutionally to correct this for the future?”

In response, Starkey explained that CSD does not issue standard sanctions, and that every case is heard and assessed individually.

Several students attended the Senate meeting to observe Starkey’s presentation. Some held a large red sign that read ‘McGill’s Committee on Squashing Dissent.’

“We are here because the University’s rules and procedures related to student discipline are interpreted and applied inconsistently and with bias against known student activists,” read a flyer that the students distributed at Senate.

Research Funding

Senators also voted to endorse McGill’s new Strategic Research Plan (SRP) for 2013-2017. The plan is intended to improve McGill’s research capabilities. An SRP is required for many external funding programs, such as the Canada Foundation for Innovation. The previous plan was adopted in 2006.

Almost 75 per cent of McGill’s current research funding comes from both the federal and Quebec governments. Presently, McGill is the second-ranked university in research intensity, according to the Tri-Council Agencies, the federal agencies which provide a majority of research funding in Canada. Goldstein said the new plan aims to diversify research funding, and should help McGill surpass the University of Toronto as the top-ranked University for research intensity.

“We need to reorganize funds if we are going to be competitive in the next few years,” Goldstein said. “Provincial and federal pools are not growing … we need to diversify.”

Several senators expressed concerns over the SRP’s logistics, including the source of the potential new funds. According to Goldstein, McGill plans to launch a Business Engagement Centre to reach out to new businesses for funding.

Brendan Gillon, associate professor of linguistics, expressed concern that dependency on external organizations like private businesses for funding might affect the topics chosen for research, and that McGill may consequently see less curiosity-driven research.

Senate also passed a motion to broadcast their sessions on the internet for a one-year trial period, starting in January 2013. These broadcasts will only be available to members of the McGill community, and will be accessible through a password-protected login.

The Ad Hoc Committee on the Recording and Transmission of Senate Meetings brought this motion forward with the intention of making Senate meetings more accessible to the McGill community.

“We want to have engagement from the broad university community,” Chandra Madramootoo, chair of the committee and dean of agricultural and environmental sciences, said.

a, News

Former director general of MUHC, Arthur Porter, sued by university

on

More in a:

Last Tuesday, McGill announced its decision to pursue legal action against Dr. Arthur Porter, the former director general and chief executive officer of the McGill University Health Centre (MUHC). McGill seeks the reimbursement of $317,153.89—a total that includes a $285,000 loan granted to Porter in 2008, and $30,131.63 in salary overpayment following his resignation in December 2011.

According to the Montreal Gazette, McGill originally lent Porter $500,000 at one per cent annual interest in 2008. When Porter resigned from his position at MUHC, he had paid back $214,409 of the loan.

“Despite the fact that [Porter] had promised to reimburse the university, the amount owing remains outstanding,” McGill’s press release read. “The university has therefore decided to take action to ensure the prompt repayment of these sums.”

McGill has not disclosed the reason for the loan, nor any information regarding the university’s loan policy to date.

According to the Gazette, evidence suggests that the loan is related to Porter’s real-estate investments. Porter allegedly purchased a penthouse apartment in downtown Montreal for over $500,000 in September 2004, and his wife bought a penthouse condominium for over $1 million in December 2007.

In March 2008, Porter received the $500,000 loan from McGill, and signed a promissory note acknowledging it. The loan was signed again three months later in the presence of a notary, at which point it became a “housing loan agreement.”

Further investigation by the Gazette has revealed that, in addition to his nearly $350,000 salary as the head of the MUHC, Porter earned a second salary at McGill for teaching as a professor of oncology in the faculty of medicine. However, when the Gazette inquired into Porter’s position as a professor, none of 12 professors in the department of oncology who responded could admit to ever having seen Porter teach.

“I was surprised to learn … that Dr. Porter was receiving a salary as a professor of oncology,” Dr. Vincent Giguère, professor in oncology and biochemistry, told the Gazette. “He is not listed as a professor of oncology on our department website … and I have never seen him at departmental functions.”

McGill has refused to disclose Porter’s professorial salary to the public, saying that information about professors’ salaries is “private.”

Quebec’s anti-corruption squad is also seeking to question Porter about MUHC’s procurement of the $1.3 billion superhospital contract. However, Porter’s current whereabouts are unknown. Porter’s most recent communication with McGill was an email dated Oct. 23, in which he promised to pay back the loan.

McGill has stated that it will make no further comment on the lawsuit, as the case is currently under review by the Quebec Superior Court.

 

a, News

New student advocacy committee underway

by Christos Lazaris on

More in a:

Two weeks ago, the Students’ Society of McGill University’s (SSMU) Legislative Council approved a trial run of the Student Advocacy Resource Committee (SARC). The new committee aims to guide students through McGill’s  bureaucracy and to help make students’ voices heard within the administration and SSMU, according to David Benrimoh, who presented his vision of SARC to Council on Nov. 1. The trial run will end March 15, 2013.

SARC is Benrimoh’s creation. He is a first-year medical school student who has previously worked with SSMU and First Year Council. He said he saw the need for a service to help students navigate McGill’s institutional infrastructure.

“We felt that a lot of students at McGill have a lot of ideas, questions, and things they want to see changed, but they don’t necessarily know how to go about doing it,” Benrimoh said.

The group began this year as an interim club. Now that Council has passed the motion to create SARC, the club has achieved SSMU Committee status, in order to increase its credibility and make it more accountable to SSMU Council.

“[Now], we’re directly accountable to Council, and people know that we have the support and backing of [SSMU],” Benrimoh said.

Benrimoh is SARC’s head steward, which means he is responsible for supervising the committee and establishing its long-term vision. He said he hopes SARC can act as a liaison between students and those who can help address an individual student’s needs on campus, like SSMU’s elected representatives and administrators.

The Committee works on a case-by-case basis. Cases are divided under the categories of services, student government, and campus issues, and are dealt with accordingly by SARC.

“We [will] develop a campaign plan based off of [each] case,” Benrimoh said. “Some cases might have a need for events or setting up meetings with campus administrators. There’s all sorts of different venues we can help students take advantage of.”

After roughly three weeks of existence, SARC is currently dealing with a total of seven actual and potential cases.

“Potential cases [are those] where we have identified an issue or met with a requestor and where we have not yet signed the case but we are confident that we will in the very near future,” Benrimoh said. “We are very new and we haven’t yet had time to do the kind of outreach that is necessary to accrue a large number of cases … until now, we have been focused on actually getting set up.. . and training our stewards.”

SSMU Vice-President University Affairs Haley Dinel helps supervise SARC on behalf of SSMU, and will also sit on the Committee. Dinel said Benrimoh reports to both her and  Council, and explained how committee members were chosen this year.

“The [current] stewards were chosen, and they went through their own internal application process,” she said. “[If SARC becomes a permanent committee], the names will be given to the SSMU nominating committee, and they’d be screened and interviewed.”

According to the motion presented to Council, stewards are  committee members responsible for dealing with and writing reports on individual cases. In addition to the head steward, there are individual triage, services, campus issues, and student government stewards. The Committee also includes three councillors from SSMU.

At the Nov. 1 Council meeting, some SSMU councillors expressed concern over the creation of SARC as a permanent SSMU Committee. Arts Senator Max Zidel questioned the sustainability of the Committee.

“This proposal requires a lot of man power and a lot of interest and time, and although it’s wonderful that right now we have a group of students who are really fond of this idea, what happens when they graduate?” Zidel said. “I see trouble … finding enough students every year to fill the necessary positions.”

Despite his reservations, Zidel said he hopes the Committee will succeed.

“I think good things will come out of it,” he said. “The idea itself is good, which is that you want to make it easier for students to understand the way that the university works. I’m pleased that people want to fill this gap.”

a, News

McGill launches Frugal Scholar Money Management Program

by Veronica Rozynek on

More in a:

Last week, McGill’s Scholarships and Student Aid Office launched the Frugal Scholar Money Management Program—a service that helps students create a financial plan by using online tools to track expenses and deal with student and government loans. The launch was part of Financial Wellness Week, which featured workshops and student-run activities covering topics such as student loans, taxes, and affordable living.

Evelina Balut, associate director of scholarships and student aid and one of the organizers of the week, emphasized the Frugal Scholar Program’s open-door policy, stating that students are always welcome to confidentially discuss their finances with advisors.

“Part of my job is to be here for students [and] let them grasp control over their finances so we can teach kids to become smart consumers now, and for later in life,” Balut said.

The program also features an anonymous live chat system, which allows students to chat confidentially with peer advisors. Since this service is partially run by peers, Balut said it is more approachable for students who may feel uncomfortable or embarrassed by their current financial situation.

The Scholarships and Student Aid Office offered a workshop on the program as part of Financial Wellness Week. Other workshops included last Thursday’s “Living Thrifty” workshop, run by Shelby Levesque, a student ambassador for the Frugal Scholar Program. Levesque gave tips on how to spend less money, and encouraged students to spread awareness of the financial services McGill offers.

As a student paying her way through school, Levesque shared her outlook on money and how to maintain a healthy relationship with it. She emphasized the importance of keeping track of finances—short-term as well as long term—and keeping receipts to maintain a budget.

Levesque outlined many basic ways to save, in areas such as grocery shopping, gym memberships, and traveling.  Some tips for groceries included collecting coupons and buying in bulk. While students may think it is convenient to go to grocery stores close to McGill, Levesque suggested taking the extra time to go to thriftier places such as Segal’s Market could help save a lot of money in the long-term. For travelling, she suggested couch surfing or staying with friends instead of paying for a hotel room.

Levesque emphasized that the Frugal Scholar Program can serve as an outreach to students, who remain unaware that McGill provides financial services.

“As a freshman, I wish I knew that McGill offered entrance bursaries,” Levesque said.

She said it is important for students to know that entrance bursaries are provided on the basis of need—they are not exclusive to students with high marks.

Anne Marie Trickey, U0 arts, said that it is difficult to deal with money matters while having a student’s social life.

“Going out is expensive,” Trickey said. “I can’t squander away money like all my friends, so most of the time I find it easier to stay home and watch movies instead.”

Levesque, however, discouraged students from feeling guilty about spending money.

Levesque said that every now and then, a small reward—like buying coffee instead of making it at home—can be satisfying, and can reduce chances of extravagant spending in the future. She also emphasized that living thrifty becomes easier over time.

“There are many ways to save,” Levesque said. “Once you start, it becomes a habit, then, a way of life.”

1 … 1,064 1,065 1,066 1,067 1,068 … 1,363

Read the latest issue

Read the latest issue