Latest News

The Quarrel in Jeff Wall's exhibit
a, Arts & Entertainment

MACM takes MMFA for a walk on the wild side

by Elizabeth McLellan on

More in a:

The Montreal Museum of Fine Arts (MMFA), in collaboration with the Musée d'art contemporain de Montréal (MACM), has opened its doors and walls to the contemporary and subversive exhibit 1+1=1. Co-curated by Stéphane Aquin and John Zeppetelli, this exploration of multimedia, photography, and other creative installations forces its audience to question the nature and definition of visual art. While the provocative nudity and brash expletives found throughout the gallery no doubt demand anyone’s attention, it is up to the viewer to assess their value beyond the initial shock. In 1+1=1, this arguably gratuitous subject matter is combined with the simplicity of form to create a dichotomous relationship within the artwork, both luring you in and shocking you back.

The alliance of the two disparate museums is a fresh and welcome relief from the constant clash between old and new; innovative and historic. Part of the success of the show lies in its inception through the merging of modernity and classicism, as it stands surrounded by the works of Andrea Mantegna and Claude Monet in surrounding galleries. This seamless amalgamation is accompanied by sculptures, videos, photography, paintings, and less definable artwork that merge together to mesmerize and overwhelm the viewer. As you move through the gallery, a feast of moving machinery and still photography is ready for consumption. Waiting for you in one room in a dark cave-like space are video screens attached to large cylindrical water cans with a still image captured on the screen. As you peer into the water, a small screen lies in the depths with a human face captured on it. They are eerily reflected on the ceiling, and if you are left in solitude, the resulting underwater effect is chilling.

Just as the exhibit’s title challenges mathematical validity, the exhibit’s artwork pushes the boundaries of normalcy and questions societal codes through its taboo subject matter. However, when does taboo become just plainly gratuitous? And can gratuitous subject matter really be effective or meaningful? The artwork certainly plays with these fiery questions, perhaps only to get burnt. Nude paintings have dated back to the dawn of art, yet somehow the upfront and very real presentation of the naked body feels exposed and provokes discomfort. A large mounted series of expletives continues this provocation of your sensibilities. It is so simple in its form, with clean white font on a black backdrop, yet excessive in its use of a series of words that are so visceral and descriptive as to cause physical reactions of disgust.

The success of the exhibit therefore lies in its ability to provoke thought and merge the simplicity of form with the complex and gratuitous content. While its reception is not always one of joyous celebration and praise—as I evidenced by the contorted and confused faces I gathered in the gallery—perhaps that is the point. This art interrogates our moral faculties—as well as its own—to question the very definition and role of art in our society. This gallery participates in a very realist and confrontational form of art, which can at times make it unappealing to those who seek conventional beauty instead. But at the end of the day, it maintains an individuality and distinction that inspires both fascination and awe.

1+1=1 is being shown at the Montreal Museum of Fine Arts (1380 Sherbrooke) until June 15. Tickets online are $12.50.

Tariq Khan presidential invalidation timeline
a, News

Quebec Superior Court rules against Tariq Khan’s interim injunction to be reinstated as SSMU President

by Abraham Moussako on

More in a:

The Quebec Superior Court ruled against issuing the interim injunction filed by Tariq Khan that would have restored Khan as the Students’ Society of McGill University (SSMU) President, following a hearing last Friday. Because the President’s term began on June 1, the interim injunction was filed in order to decide on the President position until the full hearing can occur in the months to come, potentially in July.

While a full hearing will be reviewed based on the merits of the case, the interim injunction was reviewed under four criteria: Clear cause of action, irreparable harm, balance of inconvenience, and urgency.

According to Khan’s motion, he was denied the rights to due process by Elections SSMU and denied the right to a fair hearing due to the Judicial Board’s (J-Board) decision not to disclose the evidence in full. The motion also states that irreparable harm was incurred due to the amount of time and energy Khan spent on his campaign and that the Superior Court is “the only available remedy to Mr. Khan to be reinstated as the validly elected President”.

“The balance of inconvenience clearly favours Mr. Khan as he will otherwise suffer serious prejudice caused by SSMU Elections’ and the Judicial Board’s failure to honour his basic rights to a fair hearing and to a full defense,” his motion states.

The Superior Court ruled that while the criteria for irreparable harm and urgency were both met, certain conclusions requested by Khan, such as the suspension of his invalidation, were not clearly supported by these rights.

“The Court determines that there is no proof of any procedural irregularities sufficient to support the suspension of [Khan’s disqualification],” reads the judgment from the Superior Court.

The Court ruled in SSMU’s favour with respect to the balance of convenience based on the need for SSMU to operate normally in the upcoming months “to meet its ongoing obligations of the members”.

“The membership [of SSMU] must be able to rely on the [SSMU] to function normally and provide services for which […] all students are obligated to pay,” the judgment reads.

One month after the Judicial Board (J-Board) ruling to uphold Elections SSMU’s decision to invalidate his presidential win, Khan filed for an interim injunction in the Quebec Superior Court, seeking to overturn both the J-Board’s ruling and Elections SSMU’s decision. Khan alleged that he was given insufficient evidence of the allegations against him, and was therefore unable to exercise his right to due process at each step of the investigation into his campaign.

SSMU—one of the named defendants in the Superior Court case—countered in the Friday hearing that Khan was given sufficient notice of the allegations against him, and that a temporary injunction restoring Khan to the presidency would incur substantial costs upon the organization. These included re-running the extensive, month-long training that incoming executives undergo, and possible staff displacement.

Khan argued against the idea that reinstatement as president would be disruptive to SSMU or transition activities.

“SSMU has an administrative and a political role and the administrative staff need to do their jobs impartially,” he said. “As for the executives, once I step into the office, we need to be professional. I would be keeping my personal opinions and what I think aside, and I would be fulfilling my mandate and doing my job, and I would hope that others would do it.”

According to Jonathan Mooney, former Secretary-General of McGill’s Post-Graduate Students’ Society (PGSS), this case could have repercussions for student unions across Canada, as provincial courts are rarely asked to intervene on a matters specific to student association elections.

“The lawyers for both sides could not find any caselaw where a court had been asked to intervene in a student union [election],” he said. “There were only cases with labor unions and private associations [….] In that sense it is a very interesting case because it could have serious implications for how student union elections are run.” According to a press release posted on SSMU’s website, a final hearing has not yet been scheduled. “The parties are now seeking to schedule a court date for a hearing on the motion for a permanent injunction,” the press release states. Although the date of the full hearing has not been set yet, Khan has stated that he intends to fully see the case through after the interim injunction ruling. “The injunction had a limited context [and] limited information,” said Khan. “By getting or not getting this injunction, it doesn’t prove that my claims are right or wrong. We are going forward with full passion and motivation [with the full hearing].”

This article was updated June 5, 2014.

Emma Roberts and James Franco in Palo Alto
a, Arts & Entertainment

The kids are more than alright in Palo Alto

by Max Berger on

More in a:

There’s one point during Palo Alto where first-time director Gia Coppola—yes, from that Coppola family—chooses to play the famous Phoebe Cates pool scene from Fast Times At Ridgemont High on a television screen. It’s a bold acknowledgement of one of the all-time greatest coming-of-age films, a legacy that Coppola no doubt hopes her adaptation of James Franco’s short story collection of the same name can match. But if Fast Times is the mother of all films about American adolescence, Palo Alto is its misunderstood daughter—darker, edgier, and ultimately, to Coppola and the actors’ credit, more realistic.

Coppola’s film depicts a Palo Alto where the offspring of the city’s affluent residents party precariously and—more so than your typical teenagers—just can’t seem to figure things out. The most reckless of the bunch is Fred (Nat Wolff), a loose cannon, who constantly challenges everyone around him, including his more laid-back friend Teddy (Jack Kilmer). Their sometimes affectionate, sometimes coarse relationship is heavily explored, as are their relationships with girls. Fred latches onto and begins to take advantage of Emily (Zoe Levin), who is naïve and promiscuous. April (Emma Roberts), on the other hand, is a virgin whose interest in Teddy—which he reciprocates—is blocked by petty circumstances and the uncomfortable sexual advances from her soccer coach, Mr. B (Franco).

All of the lead actors submit fairly strong performances. If anything, the weakest is ironically the more experienced Franco, who puts his usual relaxed and confident self on display, which doesn’t sit quite right for a teacher risking pretty serious repercussions for his actions. But Roberts, up against a very impressive debut from Kilmer—yes, from those Roberts and Kilmer families—is still the standout of the film. Tasked with portraying the most down-to-earth of all the main characters, Roberts brilliantly reveals to the audience the struggles that April has in her calculated flirtations with experimentation, especially when she is pushed to react impulsively to what goes on around her. With peers who seem to have little inhibition and a coach who is desperately trying to get into her pants, April finds her innocence under attack from multiple pressure points. Watching her come to terms with that while trying to figure out what she wants is arguably Palo Alto’s strongest storyline for the majority of the film.

The intrigue of the Fred-Teddy relationship is another highlight. The two misfits oscillate between being a dynamic duo and completely incompatible companions. Even though Teddy is the more composed of the two, he’s attracted to the same type of illicit and unwise behaviour as Fred. Whereas Teddy’s journey throughout the film has him embracing his artistic outlets and managing to control his self-destructive impulses, Fred is on a downward trajectory. We get several telling moments that reveal the doubt and uncertainty behind his abrasive exterior. Their complicated friendship captures our attention immediately and returns to the fore in a big way at the end.

Just as the lifelike ebbs and flows of that relationship reward our investment in it, Palo Alto is at its best when its realism shines. Coppola, who also wrote the screenplay, infuses her script with dialogue that’s surprisingly spot-on in terms of how teenagers speak, and films the frequent party scenes masterfully. Franco’s stories are based on real-life occurrences (some of them taken from his own life) and Coppola blends elements from many of them together and into a film narrative without losing that real quality. Despite their individual acting success, Teddy and April have certain moments that occasionally feel slightly unrealistic or cliché—though it’s hard to find any major faults throughout the script.

From Fast Times to Francis Ford Coppola, Palo Alto carries the weight of the past on its shoulders, but doesn’t buckle. While the problems of wealthy Palo Alto teenagers might not seem to us like they should be that bad, Gia Coppola and her team bring them to the screen in a believable and absorbing fashion.

Palo Alto begins playing at Cinema du Parc (3575 Parc) June 6. Tickets are $8.50.

Tariq Khan presidential invalidation timeline
a, News

Tariq Khan files case to suspend his electoral invalidation

by Shrinkhala Dawadi on

More in a:

Tariq Khan will bring an interim injunction to the Superior Court of Québec this Friday, May 30 regarding Elections SSMU’s invalidation of his presidential win and the Judicial Board (J-Board) ruling that the invalidation would be upheld. On May 27, Khan announced that he was planning to take legal action to contest the invalidation.

Khan stated that he has now filed a case with the Superior Court, seeking for the court to grant a safeguard order that would reinstate him as the Students’ Society of McGill University (SSMU) President until a full hearing occurs.

The defendants in the case, according to Khan’s lawyer, François Longpré of Borden Ladner Gervais, include SSMU; Ben Fung, Chief Electoral Officer (CEO) of Elections SSMU; David Koots, the Deputy Electoral Officer (DEO); and members of the J-Board. Courtney Ayukawa, who is currently the SSMU president-elect, will be a third party in this case.

Longpré also stated that a full hearing regarding the case would address SSMU’s procedural methods.

“The petition alleges breaches of rules of natural justice in the adjudication process at Elections SSMU and the Judicial Board,” Longpré said.

Khan claimed that Elections SSMU had not followed correct procedure in investigating his campaign. He highlighted Elections SSMU’s public censure of his campaign and its decision to redact certain witness testimony it used as evidence during the investigation of his campaign.

“In law—in any procedure—if there is a procedural violation, then the decision becomes void and the decision is overturned,” Khan said. “Elections SSMU has been hiding information from me and not giving me a fair chance to defend myself [….] I was not consulted about [the decision to publicly censure my campaign]. I was not allowed to see the evidence that had been used against me.”

Following the Apr. 29 J-Board hearing, Chief Justice Bennet Misskey explained that the ability to redact certain pieces of evidence is necessary to protect sources who wish to remain anonymous.

“The CEO relies on the use of informants in the process of gathering and evaluating evidence of bylaw infractions,” he said. “Oftentimes, these informants will only come forward if they can be assured that their identity will be protected. The evidence that was redacted in the case of the Khan hearing […] was evidence that would put the informants’ identity at risk.”

Khan has stated that he is planning to overhaul the management of SSMU if his request for a safeguard is granted by the Superior Court.

“If we do win the case, it would raise some serious questions about the internal procedures of SSMU,” Khan said. “I claim to be a student leader, [and the title] comes with great steps and bold actions.”

Khan plans to finance the case using his own funds as well as donations from others.

“I sold everything I could—all my savings I’m putting towards [this case],” he said. “At the same time, those that have supported me have [also] contributed.”

According to Khan, an expedited hearing could take three to five months. Ayukawa is set to take the presidential position on Jun. 1.

Misskey, Fung, and Pauline Gervais, the General Manager of SSMU, declined to comment on the court case.

Hannibal Lecter in the season 2 finale
a, Arts & Entertainment

Hannibal makes a killing in dramatic season two finale

by Morgan Alexander on

More in a:

There are certain things we have come to expect from primetime slots on big-budget channels: drama is a must, and thus, a healthy handful of deceit and heartbreak is an overdone yet long-adored aspect of all good thrillers. Hannibal has navigated these expectations while balancing its loyalty to the novel series from which it is adapted, concluding in an explosive season finale titled “Mizumono”, where the cast and director David Slade artfully wrapped all the craziness of the earlier episodes into a succinct package, lacing it with unrestrained intimacy.

Picture this: all your heroes are sprawled out and wounded—perhaps fatally—as the antagonist strolls past the decay into the rain, cleansing himself of his sins and entering into a life on the run. Hannibal’s finale was just as manic as it was cautious, bringing in surprise twists with the resurrection of previously believed long-dead characters while still making each micromanipulation entirely plausible. The end of the episode left both the characters and the audience in pieces, particularly as Hannibal Lecter (Mads Mikkelsen) delivered his final sermon to Will (Hugh Dancy) before gutting him and slicing the throat of the previously believed deceased Abigail (Kacey Rohl). With this, Hannibal shows us his heart, his trust, and his love for Will, then immediately tears it apart by forcing Will out of his life.

Hannibal prides itself on its skill in the visual arts, using dim lighting and blurred camera angles to its constant advantage in creating an eerie, unpredictable atmosphere. One of my first thoughts during the finale was how beautiful and calculated each action was. While season one relied on grandiose images of meals or decaying corpses interspersed with cuts from the forensic lab, season two shifted into subtlety, instead making use of gestures and the interplay of dialogue with action.

The finale was key in showing how far the show had come in terms of visual perspicacity, the most dramatic image being that of Alana (Caroline Dhavernas) lying face-up on the concrete, surrounded by shattered glass and doused by rain. Her eyes swell and her face recoils in terror as the shoes of Dr. Lecter enter the screen just beyond her. The precarious nature of Alana and all the other characters left to die in Dr. Lecter’s house are simultaneously illuminated and pushed to the wayside as the true power of Hannibal is finally revealed. As described by executive producer Bryan Fuller, in that moment, Hannibal essentially “dropped the mic and walked off the stage.”

Moving forward, the direction of the show is unclear, as can only be expected when the majority of the cast is left facing their impending mortality. A third season has been confirmed, and an after-credit teaser left viewers with just enough to chew on without fully tasting what is to come. What I have most enjoyed about Hannibal is its commitment to the books, enough to satisfy long-time “Fannibals” while still allowing for new arcs and bridges to be inserted into the storyline. I had suspected, and interviews with Fuller have confirmed, that some do survive Hannibal’s massacre. Perhaps season three will be a game of cat-and-mouse between Hannibal and the FBI, or maybe we’ll see Will re-emerge to resume his obsession with destroying Dr. Lecter. Whatever season three has in store, it is sure to be bold, bloody, and undoubtedly delectable.

a, News

Applying AP/IB credits to transcript now optional for incoming, current students

by Chelsey Ju on

More in a:

Under recent changes to McGill’s “Advanced Standing Transfer Credits” policy, students with qualifying AP and IB test scores will now have the option to complete their degree with more than 120 credits. Previously, any transfer credits were required to count toward students’ degrees.

This change was pushed forth by Max Blumberg, U2 Science, who felt that the former policy punished incoming students for having taken advanced courses in high school.

The policy will be in effect beginning next semester, giving incoming and current students more freedom to plan their degree, according to Kathleen Massey, university registrar and executive director of enrolment services.

“[Students have] different reasons for wanting to stay longer—having the time to participate in an international exchange, completing specific courses at university necessary for admission to professional programs, and having time to explore their academic program options at McGill,” she said. “A compelling case was made and was supported by research about practices of some other universities.”

According to André Costopoulos, Dean of Students, financial reasons did not factor into the decision.

“More crowded classes [would occur, but] not necessarily more classes,” he said. “I don’t think it’s a huge factor, but it won’t reduce the problem nonetheless. Nobody knows how many more students will choose to stay.”

He also noted that the effects of the change would be minimal.

“I doubt there will be much of an impact because I think most people that wanted to stay before did so anyway and just accepted the consequences of the limit,” Costopoulos said.

Other options considered included raising the credit limit to 150 credits, and allowing students to receive exemptions for previous coursework without credit.

Blumberg objected both options due to the logistical difficulties behind them.

“Raising the limit to 150 allows students without advanced credits to stay for five years, [for] which McGill doesn’t have the physical capacity,” he said. “For the other option, the problem was professional schools typically only accept [advanced] credit towards fulfilling prerequisites if a student’s undergraduate school gave credit for those classes.”

While all student affairs and advising offices are aware of the revised policy, a public official notification for the change has not been issued. According to Costopoulos, the policy change is not expected to greatly impact the decision for prospective students, who normally choose to receive credits for previous coursework.

“The possibility to get the credits acts as a recruitment tool,” he said. “It makes McGill more attractive to incoming students. It’s later on [in their degree] that they realize they don’t want them. I’m not too sure if advertising this [policy change] to incoming students would make a difference.”

Demonstrators rallying in solidarity with victims of police brutality
a, News

Demonstrators rally in solidarity with victims of police brutality

by Shrinkhala Dawadi on

More in a:

Demonstrators rallied downtown to show solidarity with victims of police brutality on May 7. Approximately 40 people attended the protest, including individuals who had previously acquired injuries as a result of police actions.

The protest was held in part as a response to heightened police presence at an earlier demonstration in April, which protested government austerity and comprised of 10,000 attendees, according to L’Association pour une Solidaritè Syncidale Ètudiant (ASSE), the student union that took part in organising both demonstrations.

One attendee at the May rally, Robert Fransham, a 71-year-old activist, was injured in the April protest. According to Fransham, his leg received lacerations from police actions.

“I got hit by a police officer,” he said. “I was on my bicycle and he hit me with his shield and knocked me down. My leg got tangled up in the frame of my bicycle [….] I had to get stiches in my leg, and I’ve been on crutches because of the damage to the leg.”

The recent rally was also organised by the Collective Opposed to Police Brutality (COPB). Jennifer Bobette, a member of COPB, echoed Fransham’s statements, stating that remembering victims of police brutality is an integral part of mobilising against it.

“[It is] really important to not forget all those victims, and see how they are doing many years after their injuries,” she said. “It’s also important to denounce police abuses, and this is what we’re going to do.”

Demonstrators also rallied against the Montreal Police Service’s (SPVM) use of the municipal by-law P6, which requires demonstrators to provide their marching routes to the SPVM and bans the wearing of masks. If these regulations are not met, the demonstration can be declared illegal in accordance with the by-law.

In an earlier response to the controversial by-law, police spokesperson Stéphane Lemieux defended to CTV that the by-law helped ensure the safety of individuals involved in the protests.

“It helps us control the protests,” Lemieux said. “They can’t march against traffic and risk getting hit by cars.”

According to Michelle Moore, a media activist who attended the rally, the SPVM have been inconsistent in their enforcement of by-law P6.

“It’s up to police to decide whether or not they want to enforce the P6 rule [….] In my opinion, that is arbitrary,” Moore said. “[The police] are not enforcing this controversial law in a way that’s consistent. They’ll use it for some groups but not for others.”

For example, Moore noted that an Earth Day rally on April 22 was a protest that did not give an itinerary to the SPVM and was permitted to march.

Fransham said that he hopes that the recent events will bring awareness to the issue in the future.

“Police are very provocative, much more than they need to be,” he said. “My personal statement is to boost young people, who will take risks and come out to demonstrate against problems that exist in our society.”

Police at the scene declined to be interviewed.

SSMU Building at McGill
a, News

J-Board upholds invalidation of Tariq Khan’s SSMU presidency

by Shrinkhala Dawadi on

More in a:

Elections SSMU’s controversial decision to invalidate Tariq Khan’s presidential win has been upheld by the Judicial Board (J-Board) of the Students’ Society of McGill University (SSMU) following a hearing on April 29.

The J-Board’s unanimous ruling, which was ratified by the Board of Directors on April 30, confirms Elections SSMU’s decision to appoint  runner-up Courtney Ayukawa as the SSMU president-elect.

Khan was elected SSMU president on March 21, winning the position by 78 votes over Ayukawa. On Apr. 1, Elections SSMU announced the invalidation of the result, following an investigation into multiple allegations of misconduct by Khan and members of his campaign during campaign period. Alleged bylaw infractions included unsolicited messages regarding the elections, external influence on Khan’s campaign, the obstruction of free voting, and financial inconsistencies within his budget report, as investigated by Elections SSMU through evidence such as witness testimonials, video footage, and message screenshots.

Khan’s petition to the J-Board was an appeal of the April 1 ruling. His legal advocate argued that Elections SSMU had not properly exercised discretion regarding the admission and publication of the evidence of the investigation, and that Elections SSMU had used biased evidence for its ruling.

“There were a lot of biases and inconsistencies in the testimonies, and the assessment by the Chief Electoral Officer (CEO) was biased towards those who made the allegations,” said Kiran Ross, Khan’s advocate. “For these reasons, the invalidation should be immediately overturned.”

Elections SSMU’s advocate, Catherine Hamill, stated that they had conducted their investigation with due diligence and had considered the possible biases of all pieces of evidence. Hamill stressed that Elections SSMU had ensured evidence possibly marked by bias had been corroborated by other evidence before taken into account.

“Elections SSMU is aware of the impact this invalidation has on Tariq Khan and McGill,” she said. “Considering the totality of all evidence that was used to invalidate [the election], the decision is reasonable.”

Khan’s advocate also argued that although she and Khan received the evidence prior to the hearing, some of the sources had been redacted by Elections SSMU, which obstructed Khan’s attempts to conduct investigations into the legitimacy of the testimonials. The J-Board, however, received and reviewed the unredacted evidence.

According to Chief Justice Bennet Misskey, the ability to redact certain pieces of evidence is necessary to protect sources who wish to remain anonymous.

“The CEO relies on the use of informants in the process of gathering and evaluating evidence of bylaw infractions,” he said. “Oftentimes, these informants will only come forward if they can be assured that their identity will be protected. The evidence that was redacted in the case of the Khan hearing […] was evidence that would put the informants’ identity at risk.”

In his explanation of the J-Board’s decision to uphold Elections SSMU’s invalidation of the election, Chief Justice Misskey highlighted the quasi-judicial mandate of the J-Board.

“The Judicial Board interprets the legality of the [decisions made by the] SSMU body,” he said. “Upon an independent review of all the evidence, the Judicial Board found that the CEO’s decisions regarding his findings of fact and the sanctions imposed for bylaw infractions fell within a range of reasonable alternatives that were open for him to make and were therefore within the scope of his discretion.”

According to the CEO, Ben Fung, this case has highlighted the importance of complying with SSMU’s bylaws, but has also raised issues regarding their clarity.

“I think this entire process showed that in general there are a lot of things that need to be fixed in the electoral process,” he said. “We’ll be looking to more clearly define the way Elections SSMU oversees elections in general and how we perform our investigative duties.”

Khan also emphasized the need to clarify the bylaws.

“Even though both parties do agree that there are a lot of ambiguities in the constitution and the bylaws, and [that] a lot of work that needs to be done,” he said. “It is sad that I am the one who’s paying the price for all those discrepancies.”

Fung said that after this case, there will be reform to the Elections SSMU voting system through a modification of the bylaws, including shortening of the voting period and a change towards the preferential ballot.

“In the case of an invalidation, there wouldn’t be a need for a re-election [with a preferential ballot] because votes can just be transferred,” he said. “It’s more of a fair and representative way of voting.”

 

a, Opinion

Call for intervenors

on

More in a:

Posted on behalf of the SSMU Judicial Board:

The Judicial Board has accepted jurisdiction to hear an appeal submitted by Tariq Khan regarding the invalidation of his election as President.  The appeal will be heard at the end of April and we are extending an invitation to anyone wishing to intervene in the dispute to duly complete a Judicial Board FORM I-1 “Application for intervention” (found on the Judicial Board website) and submitting an electronic copy to the Chief Justice. You will have until noon on Tuesday, April 29th to submit an application.  Please be advised that the J-Board recognizes intervening parties only where those parties are necessary for a complete solution to the questions in issue. Intervenors will be notified by the Chief Justice whether they have been accepted within a reasonable time.

SSMU legislative council
a, News

SSMU Council votes to re-run University Centre Building Fee in Fall 2014

by Jenny Shen on

More in a:

The implementation of a University Centre Building Fee will be the subject of a referendum question in Fall 2014, following approval of the referendum question at the April 10 meeting of the Students’ Society of McGill University (SSMU) Legislative Council.

Students voted against implementing a University Centre Building Fee during the Winter 2014 referendum period. SSMU President Katie Larson said the details of this new referendum would be up to next year’s Council.

“They could mandate a special [referendum] earlier in the semester,” she said. “They will have options, which we will be passing onto the new executive.”

Clubs and Services representative Zachary Rosentzveig spoke against the motion.

“I think it’s problematic that this Council wants to vote on a referendum question that next year’s council will be tasked with defending and presenting,” he said.

Vice-President Finance Tyler Hofmeister defended the motion, noting that without the fee, access to the SSMU Building would be limited next year.

“All-hours building access has been cut for the building, given the current amount that we can afford,” he said. “In that case, it’s very likely that the future Council would want to pass a referendum early in the year, so as to keep the building open for all-hours access.”

Council also approved the 2014-2015 budget, which reflects the changes SSMU would make to its operations should the building fee fail to pass once again. Besides the removal of after-hours access to the SSMU Building, other changes include an increase to the price of mini-courses to run a $10,000 profit, as well as an increase in prices at Gerts to run a roughly $17,000 profit.

Library Improvement Fund Committee Report

Erin Sobat, a representative of the Library Improvement Fund (LIF) Committee, presented a plan to allocate approximately $756,000 worth of funds to various library projects this year.

The LIF is funded by student fees which are matched by the university.

These projects include the renovation of the Redpath washrooms, an expansion of the Redpath group study zone with new seating areas and computers, an increase in seating options at the Schulich library, and the purchase of group study room presentation equipment for McLennan Library. Other allocations include an increase in student employment at the library through work-study programs.

1 … 923 924 925 926 927 … 1,363

Read the latest issue

Read the latest issue