Latest News

Laughing Matters, Opinion

The Old Colossus: A case for the removal of the Statue of Liberty

by Noah Fisher on

More in Laughing Matters:

Lately, American cities have been removing statues that have been deemed no longer representative of the nation’s values. I, as an American, wholeheartedly support this trend. That said, I’m utterly shocked by some of the gross oversights that have occurred. Municipal governments have moved to take down Confederate monuments, which is all fine and dandy, but Americans have ignored the one piece of statuary that least embodies what America in 2017 stands for: The Statue of Liberty.

I’d like to be the first to suggest that we take the stupid lady down already. She won’t be missed. Freedom, liberty, and inalienable rights are bygone terms that have now been hijacked by radical liberals. Have you ever read the hogwash written on that thing? “Give me your tired”? Pfft. Lazy. “Your poor?” A bunch of freeloaders. “Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free?” There it is again, that blasted word “free.” We don’t want it. The freedom to come to America was thankfully reserved for my great-grandparents—so that their descendants could tell everyone else to bugger off. To suggest that the American dream means that anyone—regardless of their background—can succeed if they are willing to work hard, be a good citizen, and pay their taxes is preposterous. Cue the DACA repeal. Dear Lady Liberty, no thank you to the so-called “homeless, tempest-tost”—we only care about them if they’re in Houston anyway.

The real danger with the ethos embodied by the Statue of Liberty is that it gives everyone these ridiculous notions of equality and freedom. Take, for example, the U.S. military: There are currently transgender Americans who want to enlist in the armed forces, risking life and limb halfway across the world from their loved ones in the name of the U.S.A.. The audacity! When did we let this freedom thing ring so loudly? Clearly the wisest reaction to this wasn’t to embrace these people, who were willing to make the ultimate sacrifice for their country, but rather to ban them from serving in the military. God bless America.

Municipal governments have moved to take down Confederate monuments, which is all fine and dandy, but Americans have ignored the one piece of statuary that least embodies what America in 2017 stands for: The Statue of Liberty.

Take a moment and imagine what the Statue of Liberty symbolizes to some people. What if it included some rubbish about a country that holds freedom of speech above all else? What if Americans then believed that the truth should stand on its own and not have to be supported by the censorship of dissenting opinions? Just look in your own backyard. Environmental Protection Agency researchers running amok, indoctrinating American children into thinking that their beliefs must be held up by rigorous experiment. If we continue to let them speak freely, we will not be able to effectively stem the tide of climate change propaganda. People will begin to believe that the largest hurricane in the history of the Atlantic Ocean is more than a mere coincidence. It will be a total nightmare. Fortunately, that’s what gag orders are for.

The truth is, America sure as hell doesn’t want all the baggage that comes along with the Statue of Liberty. Immigrants? No thank you. Transgender equality? Not in my America. Freedom of speech and thought? Dangers to society.

So, there it is. That iconic slab of rubbish in New York Harbour doesn’t effectively personify American ideals anymore, and we have the policies to prove it. So, unless we can clean up our act, we better take it down.

 

Noah Fisher is a first-year student studying Political Science and Economics. He offers free haircuts to anyone willing to be a guinea pig.

 

@mcgilltribop | [email protected]

 

 

Student Life

Freshman frustration: Breaking down the “best four years of your life”

by Katherine Milazzo on

More in Student Life:

Every September, almost 7,000 first-year students arrive at McGill and, after settling into residence and promptly ushering their families out of their dorms, eagerly dive into life’s next chapter. The expectation is that the next three or four years will be the best of their lives. But once the novelty of their new environment starts to diffuse, many McGill first years find themselves facing a gap between their prior expectations and the reality of university life.

A few days into their first year of university, students dive right into Frosh. The expectations established by Frosh leaders are that this will be the best week of their first year. Frosh certainly provides space to make friends and connections that will supposedly last a lifetime. Yet, for some students, this simply doesn’t happen, and it can be  hard not to worry that the rest of the year won’t amount to anything better.

For Carlyn Bujouves, U0 Arts, making friends during Frosh wasn’t as simple as she’d anticipated.

“[During Frosh], you go out with your Frosh group, but it’s hard to connect with other people by screaming, ‘Where are you from?’ over blasting music in a club,” Bujouves said. “I found I couldn’t really dig deeper to build more genuine friendships, and that people were acting in a way that would make them most appealing to others instead of being themselves.” 

The pressure to make friends right off the bat carries on long past Frosh. But with the party scene and almost a month of first semester behind them, many first years expect to have already found a close group of friends. Sarah Fairbrother, U0 Arts and Science, has found it difficult not to compare her own newfound friendships to the progress that others have made in making friends.

“I’ve met people I like and we hang out, but I haven’t found my ‘people’ just yet, and it can get lonely without a strong social circle,” Fairbrother said. “It seems like most other people have found their cliques. I think I just haven’t been putting myself out there enough.”

Depictions of university in pop culture and on social media as the best four years of one’s life tend to omit the challenges students often face during this time, leaving many first years feeling alone in their struggle. Constant comparisons among friends and acquaintances on social media can exacerbate this; a scroll through one’s Instagram and Facebook feeds perpetuates unrealistic expectations of what first year ‘should’ look like, only highlighting users’ success and happiness.

Being emotionally vulnerable under the pressure to appear perfect can be challenging. But for Chloé Laflamme, U4 Arts and Science, staying honest about hitting a low point helped her connect more deeply with others during her first year.

“After first semester, I was able to realize that I was partaking in certain behaviours for a lot of the wrong reasons,” Laflamme said. “I made my first genuine friend when I hit a very low point, and they showed me compassion and support in response [….So I] tried not to shy away from opening up and being authentic.”

For Laflamme, building such close friendships took time. There were no instant connections, no best-friends-forever right off the bat. Yet, years later, Laflamme remains close with those first-year friends who got her through the toughest parts. 

“I lived with friends from rez all throughout undergrad,” Laflamme said. “My main social circles can be traced back to who I met in first year.” 

The personal growth that occurs over the course of university is not linear—it is filled with ups and downs. While the time frame for adjusting to university life varies on an individual basis—the imperfections are as much a part of it as the sublimity of it all. 

McGill, News

Seventh Annual Indigenous Awareness Week brings together views on reconciliation

by Julia Metraux on

More in McGill:

From Sept. 18 to 22, the Social Equity and Diversity Education’s (SEDE) Indigenous Education Program hosted the 7th Annual Indigenous Awareness Week. Members of the McGill community attended presentations, film screenings, and activities on intersectionality, indigenous rights, and culture. Among them were presentations on the creation and application of the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous People  (UNDRIP) and the experiences of indigenous students in academic institutions.

From Principle to Implementation: Indigenous Rights, the Constitution, and UNDRIP in Canada with Dr. Hayden King and Dr. John Borrows

On Sept. 21, the Indigenous Law Association hosted a discussion led by Hayden King and John Borrows. King is a member of the Beausoleil First Nation and current Director of the Centre for Indigenous Governance at Ryerson University. Borrows is a member of the Nawash First Nation and the Canada Research Chair in Indigenous Law at the University of Victoria Law School.

The United Nations adopted UNDRIP in 2007, but, according to Borrows, only the federal government and the provincial governments of British Columbia and Alberta claim to honour it. The purpose of UNDRIP is for member states of the UN to protect indigenous rights by addressing human rights violations. To Borrows, Indigenous Peoples play a vital role in contributing to UNDRIP; tangible ways Indigenous  groups can do so include translating the document into their languages and citing their own experiences when using the Declaration in their spaces.  

“UNDRIP is […] a challenge to Indigenous Peoples [to enforce UNDRIP in their own spaces],” Borrows said. “We spent about 30 years in the international realm trying to get space to recognize our policies, our languages, our sources, our spirituality. We shouldn’t expect nation-states to only play their role.”

Although King reiterated Borrow’s message on the importance of the Declaration, King highlighted that it is critical to remember the genocidal events behind the creation of this declaration. This dark history includes the impact of the Doctrine of Discovery, a law which permitted Christians to seize indigenous land for Christian monarchs in the late 15th century.

“[UNDRIP]’s emergence in international law in 2007 [was an attempt to reconcile the damage created by] one of the very first pieces of international law which [had] genocidal intent,” King said. “That was the Doctrine of Discovery.” 

Worse, the wording and structure of UNDRIP is too soft on member states, according to King. This allows room for states to fall inactive in addressing Indigenous rights.

“[Indigenous activists] weren’t able to change [the wording in] 43 of the articles,” King said. “[People working on the declaration] removed two articles, and added article 46, which is a back door out of [UNDRIP].”

Borrows said that as the Canadian government continues on its path to recognize indigenous rights through legislation like UNDRIP, the public must maintain an open mind and a discerning eye toward the opinions of politicians and activists.

“It’s important to pay attention to the nuance that is presented to us and to be aware of the danger of a single source,” Borrows said. “We can get caught in too much optimism, [and] we can get caught in too much pessimism. There are opportunities and obligations to see this world and its richness and its impoverty.”

For NDN Girls at the End of the World: Stories of Sovereignty with Erica Violet Lee

On Sept. 20, the Institute of Gender, Sexuality, Feminist, and Social Justice Studies hosted a lecture from Erica Violet Lee, a Nêhiya community organizer and current University of Toronto graduate student. Lee discussed her own experiences with feeling unwelcome in academic institutions.

“I was wondering at the beginning of [presentations I give as an activist] if I should introduce myself [in a formal] way,” Lee said. “Because it positions me as a young person, a young brown Indigenous woman, who needs to prove my intelligence and worthiness to speak in a room to take up space in the academies.”

Lee stated that she used to have a more pessimistic view on the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada’s (TRC) Calls to Action, which gives guidelines for institutions to follow to improve indigenous rights, until she met the people who worked on TRC’s guidelines. Lee has grown to believe that universities should take steps outlined in the document to fulfill their role in reconciliation efforts, such as hiring more indigenous faculty and paying indigenous communities for use of their land.

“There are very basic actions which institutions like McGill, University of Saskatchewan, [and] University of Toronto can do to start fulfilling these simple recommendations,” Lee said. "And they’re not.”

Ask a Scientist, Science & Technology

Where did these butterflies come from and where are they off to?

by Myriam Driss on

More in Ask a Scientist:

As summer transitions into fall, an increased flow of insect and bird migrations takes off. The McGill campus, as well as greater Montreal, has experienced a southbound butterfly migration in preparation for the winter. Although these butterflies are commonly misidentified as monarchs, they are actually Vanessa cardui, or Painted Ladies.

Insect expert and Curator of the Lyman Entomological Museum Stephanie Boucher pointed out that this misidentification is common.

“Most people know the monarch [butterfly] very well, [since the] monarch has a lot of publicity and attractivity [surrounding it],” Boucher said. “They are both orange, but they have big differences; Painted Ladies have a mosaic of brown, [while] the monarch [has a] darker central body. The Painted Lady [also has] a much smaller wing width. [However, they] are both migratory species [with similar] unique life patterns.”

Different weather and temperature patterns can affect the life cycles and migration habits of many insects, in both good and bad ways.

Vinko Culjak Mathieu, graduate student in ecology at McGill, noted that “migration, [and other life events] are impacted by various factors [such as] daily temperature, moisture, light, etc.”

Warmer winters lead to early snowmelt, and, subsequently, early flowering. This occurrence is unfavourable because it is out-of-sync with the arrival of the butterflies.

“[When] temperatures [are] high, migration happens earlier, and [the butterflies may] get to [their destination] without food or other available resources,” Mathieu said.

However, this summer, the butterflies had a successful mating season.

“[The butterflies] had [access to] a lot of water and [flowers in the south],” Boucher articulated. “[For that reason], they were better able to reproduce when they came up north.”  This year brought favourable environmental conditions from Quebec to Mexico.

Yet, observing the direct effects of rising temperatures on migration patterns proves challenging. Both Mathieu and Boucher agree that trends, instead of singular effects, require observation.

Boucher explained that changes in climate can affect the migratory patterns of the butterflies.

“[The butterflies would] be affected because they would not be able to [return back] to the same site,” Boucher said. “[Overall], migratory species will be affected in different ways and will eventually adapt [to climate changes] slowly, [however] studies would need to be made, to see how their overwintering sites will be affected.”

Butterflies may be abundant this year, but the appearance of orange Painted Ladies in Montreal isn’t totally unique.

“It [may] seem like an exceptional year, but it has been seen before 2012 and in 1973 there were [also] large migrations,” Boucher said. “The environmental conditions at the wintering site [were] good for them, [and so] they came up north in a larger population than before.”

Another reason why we are seeing so many Painted Ladies on their journey south is the result of strong high-altitude winds.

“[Painted Ladies usually] migrate south 300 to 400 metres above the ground,” Mathieu added, “[but] strong winds force them to stay low. They [are also taking] advantage of the warmer weather to collect more nectar to continue their migration journey.”

Justin Trudeau
Commentary, Opinion

“At least you have Trudeau…”

by Danica Jekic on

More in Commentary:

Since arriving at McGill, I have gotten to know many American students. When speaking with them, it is not unusual for our conversation to quickly move into the realm of politics. We talk, laugh, and cry about US President Donald Trump, and then they say, “Well, you guys are lucky. At least you have Trudeau.” As a Canadian, this statement makes me incredibly uncomfortable. The mindset that we should not criticize Prime Minister Justin Trudeau because he is not Trump may do great harm to how Canada functions as a nation.

It is important for a government to have an open dialogue with its people to ensure that it addresses its shortcomings and implements progressive policies and reforms in a timely, efficient manner. It is not enough to simply be more left-leaning than Trump. Trudeau must work harder to pass legislation in the areas of electoral reform, environmental protection, and protection for minorities, before he can be truly praised.

Ever since the contentious 2016 American presidential election, Canadians and Americans have paid much attention to Trump’s daily buffoonery on Twitter and in press conferences. From withdrawing from the Paris Accords, to the Muslim travel ban, to barring trans-gender individuals from serving in the military, there seems to be a new controversy in Washington, D.C. every day. Trump lacks charisma—and quite possibly his sanity. At this point, most politicians are looking better than he is.

Since his election in 2015, Trudeau and the Liberal government have passed only half of the bills that Harper’s government did within the same timeframe. Most news stories about the Canadian prime minister revolve around his publicity stunts. These include photobombing a group of students, kayaking, marching in the Toronto Pride Parade, and—only this past week—meeting students on McTavish while at the McGill Faculty Club. These fun and often exciting events have fueled his public image as a young, intelligent, charismatic leader who actively seeks to relate to his people. He is the opposite of Trump in this sense, and, for many, that is enough. However, his public image will not help him run a country unless he can continue to back it up with concrete action.

 

When Trump makes an offensive comment or signs a controversial bill, it is not enough for Trudeau to calmly wiggle his finger at him on Twitter like a lazy father to his five year-old boy.

One major issue garnering criticism from the NDP and the Green Party is Trudeau’s record on environmental issues. When the United States withdrew from the Paris Agreement in June, Trudeau immediately took to Twitter to berate Trump and reaffirm Canada’s commitment to fight climate change. He carefully expressed his disappointment with Trump’s decision without stirring up conflict. However, while many citizens took to social media and the streets to criticize the American government on its actions, very few people took the opportunity to point out the Liberal party’s approval of several major pipelines, most notably the Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain Pipeline System. According to scientists, the completion of these projects will mean that Canada will not be able to fulfill the requirements of the Paris Accords anyway.

Canadians need to do a better job of addressing the shortcomings of their own government and pressuring it to quickly and effectively implement policies and reforms. We cannot accept Trudeau’s over-reliance on publicity stunts and lack of meaningful policies because ‘at least he’s not Trump.’ Canada voted Trudeau in not only because of his charismatic persona, but because of his appealing campaign promises, such as those related to Indigenous rights, environmental protection, electoral reform, and marijuana legalization. He and his government must be evaluated on those promises, regardless of what politics look like south of the border.

When Trump makes an offensive comment or signs a controversial bill, it is not enough for Trudeau to calmly wiggle his finger at him on Twitter like a lazy father to his five year-old boy. Canadians cannot take pressure off him or excuse his shortcomings, faults, and inaction just because he takes a cute photo shoot with a group of excited students.

 


Danica is in U1 and studies Anatomy and Cell Biology and English Literature at McGill. In her free time she competes in sprint kayaking!

 

@mcgilltribop | [email protected]

 

 

 

 

Sports

McGill rowing team christens seven new boats

by Sam Wendel on

More in Sports:

With their fleet bolstered by brand new boats, the McGill Rowing Team is primed for another exciting season. The rowing team has purchased seven new boats in the past six years. These crafts have been crucial to the team: Team Manager Jeff Hamilton appeared confident that the new acquisitions will inspire the rowers.

“New and better equipment give us a better chance to succeed,” Hamilton said.

The boats were officially christened after practice on Sept. 23. Their names honour both the school and McGill rowing alumni: Red Dawn, Red Wave, The Boys of ’77, Aaron and Sarah Pape, Henry Hering, Ben Storey, and Alison Korn. The christening itself serves both to unite the team and illustrate its strong history.

Red Dawn and Red Wave reference McGill’s iconic red, while The Boys of ’77 is a nod to the rowing team of 1977—the year that the team relocated to the city-made Olympic Rowing Basin where the club still practices today.

The remaining boats are dedicated to McGill rowing legends, including Henry Hering. Hering rowed for McGill in the 1990’s before competing in the world championships and becoming McGill’s Head Coach from 2002-2006. Ben Storey, another McGill alumnus, won the World Championships in 2000, and Alison Korn was a medalist in the 1996 and 2000 Olympic games. Aaron and Sarah Pape, meanwhile, were both on the McGill rowing team in the ‘90s and also went on to have Olympic careers.

Clearly, having boats named after these impressive McGill athletes is quite inspirational for the young rowers inside. This prestige also brings high expectations. Team President Craig McCullogh outlined the team’s objectives.

“Our goal every year is to get as many rowers on the podium,” McCullogh said.

The standard of excellence that drove McGill rowing to great heights in the ‘90s doesn’t appear to have faded. However, this season looks to be particularly challenging. Western University is always a strong club and will likely play a primary role in competitions once again. McGill’s biggest rowing rival is Queen’s University, which always puts forward a strong team.

The Head of the Rideau regatta on Sept. 24 was an important chance to see how the McGill squad would stack up against the competition. The men’s heavyweight eight and the women’s heavyweight four both won their categories while the men's lightweight eight came in second. The two victories were promising signs that point to an intriguing and competitive season ahead.

In addition to medaling this year, the rowing team also hopes to increase its visibility on campus among both students and faculty. In order to try to increase support and viewership, the team hand-delivered boat-christening invitations to various McGill Athletics staff.

While rowing may be considered by many as a fringe sport, the commitment and dedication of the rowers can match or exceed those of every other McGill team or club. It’s always disheartening to see the lack of a fan base for such a squad—especially with their rich history and strong athletes.

In order to encourage the athletes and support the hundreds of hours they put in—both on rowing machines and on the water—students should take a study break and head out to the basin to support the rowing team. It’s an exciting, intense sport, the athletes are tough and invested, and the fresh air certainly beats anything you’ll find in a McGill library.

A previous version of this article stated that the McGill men’s lightweight 8 earned gold at the Head of the Rideau regatta. In fact, the Redmen finished in silver. Additionally, Queen’s University was not present at the meet. The Tribune regrets these errors.

Montreal, News

Refugees flee the US for Canada, stay in Royal Victoria Hospital

by Ryan Canon on

More in Montreal:

Fearing the revocation of their protected status, thousands of refugees have fled the United States for Canada. While the number of refugees coming per day has dropped since August, processing times are still high, and Montreal is responding to the influx of asylum seekers with temporary housing across the city—including at the old Royal Victoria Hospital (RVH).

Following the devastating Haitian earthquake in 2010 that killed over 200,000 people, all Haitians were granted protected occupation in the United States, giving them temporary immigration status. On May 22,  U.S. President Donald Trump extended the protection of Haitian refugees, which was set to expire at the beginning of 2017, through January 2018. However, in July 2017, the Trump administration suggested that it might revoke their protected status. In response, many Haitians fled the United States via the Quebec-New York border, seeking asylum in Canada.

According to the Government of Canada, the number of asylum claims jumped from 781 in June to 5,530 in August. Refugees who are waiting to be processed—thus waiting to be given asylum, access to health care, and work permits—were given shelter in buildings around Montreal, including the Olympic Stadium, RVH, and other out-of-service buildings.

The Canadian Border Services Agency (CBSA) was unprepared for the seven-times increase in the number of asylum claims. Yet Stéphane Malépart, a representative from the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA), confirmed in an email to The McGill Tribune that appropriate resources were allocated in response to the situation and that temporary shelters are still present at the border.

“Tents have been set up at Lacolle since Aug 9 to offer temporary shelter,” Malépart wrote. “CBSA’s planning makes the most effective use of all of the resources available, including the use of overtime and temporary reassignment of resources [….] We work in close collaboration with other government departments and will draw on their resources as required.” 

 The Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux de l’Est-de-l’Île-de-Montréal (CIUSSS) is responsible for the temporary accommodation of asylum seekers on the island of Montreal. Francine Dupuis, the associate CEO of the CIUSSS West-Central Montreal, expects to shut down sites where the refugees have been processed.

“We have decided that on Friday we are going to decrease the number of sites,” Dupuis said. “Right now we have a lot of different sites [in use] with a lot of space available, and we want to bring it down to maybe two or three.”

Political dimensions make the situation more complicated. In 2002, Canada and the United States signed the Safe Third Country Agreement, which declared the United States a safe country and allowed the CBSA to reject refugees from the US. As such, many of the Haitian asylum seekers fear rejection, and the Canadian government is restricted in the type and number of healthcare and work permits they can provide.

“It’s really an unintended consequence of a bad policy […] and if we fixed [the Safe Third Country Agreement], this would stop happening,” McGill Social Work Associate Professor Jill Hanley said. “As long as these people are kept in limbo and not given the rights of regular refugee claimants, it makes them vulnerable to exploitation.”

Although the number of asylum seekers in Canada has increased within the past year, these numbers are not historic for Canada, and Hanley confirmed that Montreal has adequate space to handle the influx.

“The numbers that have been coming in are actually not that exceptional in Canadian history,” Hanley said. “The numbers prior to 2001 were higher than what we have today [….] There used to be more shelters in Montreal for refugees […] but it’s not like the community centers don’t have room for them now. Maybe it is time for Canada to get back up to its old levels of refugee claims, and make it possible for people to get here and claim refugee status.”

 

A previous version of this article referred to Royal Victoria Hospital site as belonging to McGill. In fact, the building is the property of the Province of Quebec. The Tribune regrets this error.

News, SSMU

SSMU Board of Directors discusses constitutionality of current membership at public session

by Domenic Casciato on

More in News:

The Students’ Society of McGill University (SSMU) Board of Directors (BoD) held a public session on Sept. 24 to discuss the constitutionality of the composition of the current membership of the body, among other agenda items. SSMU Vice-President (VP) Finance and Director Arisha Khan introduced a motion to add the discussion to the agenda, and explained her stance that the BoD’s current 12 director membership is not in accordance with the SSMU constitution. 

“As of right now, we have a composition of three officers and nine members-at-large, which is not in line with the constitution,” Khan said. “Any potential decisions that have been made by the Council with this composition […] could also be up for contention.”

Section 6.2 and 6.4 of the SSMU Constitution stipulate that the BoD has up to 12 voting members: Four Directors from the student-elected SSMU executive, four Directors from the student-elected Legislative Council, and four members-at-large who are appointed through the BoD Nominating Committee. The eight non-executive Directors are then approved by student referendum or at the SSMU General Assembly. The President, VP Finance, and VP Operations and Sustainability automatically sit on the Board, while the fourth executive is nominated by SSMU Legislative Council. 

Jonathan Glustein, a member-at-large of the BoD, pointed out that the Board could not maintain its stipulated composition.

“It is impossible, within the parameters of reality, for the Board to be at 12 members all the time without appointing members-at-large,” Glustein said. “I think it's pretty evident that not only was the Board acting within the best interests of the Society by filling it to 12 members, but in fact it would have been unconstitutional for the Board not to put 12 members in the Society.”

Section 7.4 of the SSMU constitution defines quorum for the BoD to be seven Directors, a simple majority of the voting members. Khan stated that the constitution does not explicitly mandate the BoD to fill all 12 of its seats at all times, and raised concerns about the accountability of a Board with many appointed members.

“I think the discussion item here is, while the constitution may be murky, is it ethically murky,” Khan said. “In order to meet quorum, [it would only require] seven Directors such that Legislative Council could appoint members come the first Council meeting, specifically the […] executive because that is quite important [….] Right now we are a Board of nine [members-at-large.] So these are members that have not been elected by the membership [to the BoD] and are not accountable to the membership in the same way that elected Board members or officers should be.”

Given that all 12 seats of the BoD are currently filled, one of the members-at-large must resign in order for the constitutionally-mandated fourth executive to be nominated. On Sept. 14, the Legislative Council met, but a motion to elect a member of the SSMU executive to the Board was not presented.

Glustein reiterated that keeping a Board of only seven members would be of detriment to the SSMU membership.

“I think, considering the fact that we had five resignations in a month's time [in Winter 2017…] and the fact that if the Board falls below seven members we cease to function as a Society, […] it would be extremely imprudent […] to keep that number at seven and […] hope that someone doesn’t have any extenuating circumstances,” Glustein said. “One resignation would render the entire Society ineffective.”

SSMU General Manager Ryan Hughes, who was also present at the meeting, recently consulted the Society’s legal team to review the constitutionality of the BoD’s current composition. The legal opinion he received stated that, while falling in somewhat of a constitutional grey area, the membership is in accordance with the SSMU constitution, but that the BoD, along with Legislative Council, will be in violation if they fail to expeditiously nominate and appoint a fourth executive member at the bodies’ next meetings.

“I will concur with the rest of the Board that [the situation] is murky,” Hughes said. “This is what happens when you have a constitution that is as complex as ours [….] It is very difficult to navigate sometimes, and sometimes you may make an oversight [….] When it gets discovered, it is your obligation and duty to repair it, to address it. This is what this Board needs to do, this is what Legislative Council needs to do [….] It's known, we’re going to repair it, and get back to business. That’s it.”

SSMU VP Internal and Director Maya Koparkar said that the most pressing matter for SSMU going forward is re-establishing trust with its membership and that she intends to begin the fourth executive nomination process at Council’s next meeting on Sept. 28.

“I’m actually bringing a motion to Legislative Council next week to nominate a fourth [executive] from SSMU to the Board of Directors,” Koparkar said. “I don’t know what happened [this summer], would it not have been possible to just have 11 members of the Board of Directors?”

Commentary, Opinion

Talk is cheap: Canada must act in response to DACA debate

by Caitlyn Atkinson on

More in Commentary:

On Sept. 5, in one of his cruellest acts yet, US President Donald Trump ended the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. DACA was an immigration policy enacted by the Obama administration that allowed individuals who moved to America illegally as minors to remain in the country, given a certain set of conditions that ensure they make productive contributions to society. If Congress doesn’t find a way to legalize DACA and develop a plan in which DACA participants—affectionately known as “Dreamers”—can apply for US citizenship, upwards of 800,000 individuals face possible deportation to countries they barely know.

While Trump’s actions have led to an emotional outcry both within the US and internationally, at the same time, there exists a rising unwillingness to accept immigrants among Canadians. Under the presumption that an influx of Dreamers will attempt to migrate to Canada, some believe that the Canadian government should have the absolute power to admit only those with high academic or economic abilities. However, Canada’s approach to accepting thousands of Dreamers must reflect the diversity that Canada claims to embrace, and go beyond allowing only those the government subjectively deems as ‘the best.’ As Trump tries to rip these young people from all that they have ever known, Canada—and particularly its universities—has the humanitarian duty to provide a safe place and a legal channel for Dreamers to become citizens.

Though Canadians who oppose the northward immigration of Dreamers argue that it will overwhelm the country’s immigration system, it is incredibly unlikely that all 800,000 individuals in the DACA program will relocate to Canada. In a quote in a Vice article, Ontario Independent Senator Ratna Omidvar suggested that Canada should look to welcome 10,000 to 30,000 Dreamers. Canada, she argues, must capitalize on the opportunity to welcome a new wave of skilled workers, who will help to boost the economy.

Canadian post-secondary institutions should support the aspirations made possible by the DACA program in the first place, by accepting and helping to fund Dreamers’ transitions into Canadian society.

McGill students can surely empathize with the plights of Dreamers, especially those who are in the process of completing university degrees. Dreamers have spent the majority of their lives in the United States, and many have come to hope for the same type of social and financial success that McGill students aspire to. Now, they face the possibility of deportation, compromising their futures. Canadian post-secondary institutions should support the aspirations made possible by the DACA program in the first place, by accepting and helping to fund Dreamers’ transitions into Canadian society.

Huron University College in London, Ont. has already set an important example, offering $60,000 in scholarships to students affected by the overturn of the DACA program. At McGill, compensating for an increased number of transfer applicants when planning classes would allow for more space in programs to accommodate Dreamers. To further ease the transition, McGill students can start groups that lobby the administration to take action and recognize the unique circumstances of Dreamers and work to welcome them into the McGill community. By removing barriers to Dreamers’ enrollment in Canadian universities, Canadians can help to reverse the damage being done by the Trump Administration, and help to give these young adults a third chance at a future. Those who have already dedicated their time and energy into their schooling have a right to finish their education.

Morally, Canadians need to recognize the inherent abuse of power in the argument that the Canadian government should be highly selective in choosing which Dreamers have sufficient test scores or employability, and thus the right to immigrate to Canada. All should have the opportunity to apply and be fairly considered, without the constant paranoia of fitting narrow acceptance criteria. While, opposers of immigration harshly critique prioritizing citizens of other countries over born Canadians, its supporters argue that it is necessary for growth. What critics must recognize is the need for empathy, and to recognize the injustice that will occur if Canada does not provide social and economic opportunities.

Given that none of these individuals have criminal records, nor histories of violence, they deserve the opportunity to continue on their quest to achieve their goals, just like those fortunate enough to be born in Canada. Canada and its universities have the capacity to welcome Dreamers, and as a country that prides itself on compassion and diversity, we have a responsibility to protect the dream that Donald Trump is so desperately trying to crush.

Commentary, Opinion

Airbnb short-term cities are impacting long-term rentals

by Thea Borck on

More in Commentary:

Most students I know have at some point benefited from the services provided by Airbnb, whether for travel, a night out, or to make some extra cash on the side. However, in recent years, the rapid increase of Airbnb listings has become cause for concern for the housing market, as it hinders the ability of local residents to find affordable long-term rental locations. Left unresolved, this problem will cause the already severe housing crisis in major Canadian cities to get further out of hand. The main debate is whether it is the housing shortage or the proceedings of a free market that should be protected. Ensuring citizens can put roofs over their heads should be the priority, and provincial government regulation is crucial and needed immediately to this end.

This summer, I found myself without a place to live in the town of Tofino, B.C., largely due to impact of Airbnb. Tofino is a small fishing town which has become a world attraction for surfers. As a result, the tourism industry has taken over the town and with it has come the convenience of Airbnb. I went to Tofino wanting to work and experience Western Canada; however, it was impossible for me to find a place to stay. Long-term renting was impossible in Tofino—locals blamed it on a housing shortage—yet there were over 250 listings available on Airbnb. The truth is that it was more lucrative for locals to post their empty rooms on Airbnb than it was to have seasonal workers rent the space for the whole summer—homes that would otherwise be available as long-term rentals were being listed on the home-sharing site, aggravating the lack of supply. As a result, the seasonal workers, many of whom came from Eastern Canada, resorted to living in tents or garden sheds.

Megan Dolski reported in The Globe and Mail that the town is unsure of how to handle this growing issue. According to Dolski, the town is focusing on adding new housing but has yet to discuss the ramifications of excessive Airbnb listings. This is a band-aid solution to a problem that demands to be properly confronted.

The situation in Tofino is not an isolated incident. As a recent McGill Urban Politics and Governance research group report shows, Montreal, Toronto, and Vancouver are having similar problems, even without the significant influx of seasonal workers looking for housing each summer. These three cities alone totaled 81,000 active Airbnb listings this year and garnered $430 million in revenue last year, with every listing receiving roughly $5,000 per year.Of those active listings, there are around 13,700 properties across all three cities, serving as “de facto hotels” instead of as residential homes, meaning that no one uses that property as a residence. The number of Airbnb listings and the number of available rental spaces is almost equal, at close to two per cent. This heavily impacts the housing market, due to these “de facto” or entire-house listings taking away possible rental space from long-term residents. These “de facto” hotels are using Airbnb as a loophole to forgo the hassle of tourism regulations. The number of listings on Airbnb and number of new construction listings in some parts of Vancouver and Toronto are at a ratio of two to one. According to the report, the rapid growth of Airbnb listings has now outpaced new construction, thus impacting the net available housing stock.

The report makes it clear that the current regulations—or lack thereof—are putting the housing market in danger. So far, Quebec has been the only province to introduce legislation to control the number of listings by taxing revenue and making licenses mandatory for “regular users.” Unfortunately, Quebec forgot to define the difference between what a “regular user” and “occasional user” of Airbnb is. Fewer than one per cent of Montreal’s 6,356 full-time listings have acquired the license and are paying the 3.5 per cent revenue tax, making the law pretty useless.

In comparison, Berlin handled its Airbnb dilemma by completely banning most entire-home rentals. This approach is more concerned with the well-being of its citizens than the survival and flourishing of Airbnb. Canadian provinces must adjust their priorities to mirror  those of Berlin’s policy, and protect their own residents from homelessness or from being driven out of city centers. Airbnb was created to provide an alternative to hotels, and therefore it would not be out of the scope of reason to heavily regulate the entire-home rentals now serving as “de facto” hotels.  

Housing shortage must take precedent over the free market, as shelter is a necessity for life. A focus on the well-being of the state, and not just on the well-being of the economy, should be the Canadian government's priority. That said, it isn’t Airbnb’s responsibility to react to this dilemma, for their main function is to provide a platform. It is up to the municipal and provincial governments to regulate it, in ways such as licensing limits and restriction on entire-home listings.

Thea is a U2 McGill student majoring in Political Science and minoring in Philosophy and German Studies.

 

@mcgilltribop | [email protected]

 

 
1 … 642 643 644 645 646 … 1,363

Read the latest issue

Read the latest issue