On Tuesday, Jan. 24, SSMU, PGSS, MCSS and the Office of the Deputy Provost held a consultation fair in the SSMU ballroom to facilitate conversations between students and school administrators on various campus issues, including personal safety, consultation methods, and free speech.
Participants were divided into small groups of around 10 to 15 people that rotated around different tables, allowing groups to concentrate on the topic of each table and to exchange ideas on how to improve the administration and campus life. While specific topics varied greatly, from the lighting on campus to safe spaces in the classroom, the events of Nov. 10 remained the key subject throughout discussions.
Several discussions became heated, including occasional accusations and table banging, but generally the dialogue was civil and constructive. Both students and the administration expressed a desire to improve upon the status quo, especially in light of the three-month-long MUNACA strikes and the Nov. 10 police presence on campus.
Using a personal anecdote to highlight the problem, a student who preferred to stay anonymous explained his concerns.
“I was involved in the demonstration in November and afterwards I received a letter saying I was found in violation of certain codes. I was unaware of this code, and since it was the time of finals, this was quite stressful,” he said. “I think there should be more awareness and information given to the students on the part of [the] administration so that this sort of thing doesn’t happen again.”
This story sparked constructive feedback and encouraged a positive dialogue between the students at the table and Professor Jane Everett, the dean of students.
VP University Affairs Emily Yee Clare, one of the student organizers of the fair, commented on the effectiveness of the event.
“I think it’s going well. I think there are some heated tempers, as you witness … but I think that’s part of the process,” Clare said. “I don’t think you should come to a meeting like this and expect everyone to be happy. There are definite, real issues at McGill and people want to and have a right to be heard. This is definitely a very good environment for dialogue.”
Lily Han, an executive for PGSS, echoed Clare’s sentiments.
“I think it’s a good attendance and I’m happy to see all the tables are filled,” she said. “I think there’s been issues raised that there isn’t enough dialogues between the administrators and the students, so I think this is one of the things to change that.”
A series of brief sessions for the exchange of ideas took place during intermissions, where students discussed topics like the nature of the university and the McGill community’s aspirations for the future. Tension was palpable while participants discussed ideas such as the respect for student referendums and free education for all.
Many students cited their discomfort with some of last fall’s events, requesting to remain anonymous and not to be recorded. The events of Nov. 10, the MUNACA strike, tuition hikes, and the invalidation of the QPIRG referendum were mentioned as additional points of friction that had increased tension to levels unprecedented in recent memory.
“I don’t really want to speak and I think that is pretty representative of how uncomfortable free speech is on campus,” an anonymous student said in a discussion with Provost Anthony Masi. “I mean this is only 12 of us and it’s become this hostile. … I don’t feel comfortable enough to bring up my difference of opinion.”
