to that which occurred during the forum and find her very hard to work with.

Miss Arsenault's actions over the time she has been in office as V.P. Internal and S.U. President reflect those of a John Crosby School of Diplomacy graduate. She is, in my opinion, bull-headed in stature and when negotiating, more concerned with winning arguments than achieving the best possible outcome for students.

Miss Arsenault sees things in a way which I can only call both defeatist and dictatorial. Outcomes, according to Miss Arsenault’s debating style, are not negotiated, but rather fought for. She either comes out of a meeting thinking she has won or lost. This is not the case. Everyone wins if the decisions made in a meeting are the right decisions. It doesn’t matter whether they reflect your opinion at the start of the meeting or someone else’s.

A Student Union President is the Student Union’s spokesper- son and leader. This requires a person capable of acting in the interests of students and not oneself. The office is ideally filled by someone as capable of being a mediator as aleader. A Student Union President should never be

"Miss Arsenault is bull-headed and more concerned with winning arguments than achieving the best possible outcome for students" Ar ae capers

ashamed to admit they were wrong and should always be open to other peoples ideas. He or she should be there because of a genuine interest in student politics and not because he or she has something to prove or wants an im- pressive resume. A good President doesn’t compete with his or her executive but works with them, respecting their opinions and speaking on their behalf.

Miss Arsenault has ‘pulled rank’ in the past with yours truly, Claiming that her opinion is the only legitimate one because she was voted in and I was hired. But this fact is irrelevant. Elected officials have made mistakes in the past and will Continue to do so in the future. The fact that they were clected does not make them as infallible as Miss Arsenault Seems to think.

It is too late for Miss Arsenault to save face on this issue, but I have a little advice for her, if she will listen to an Unelected colleage’s illegitimate opinion: Argue until Someone proves you wrong and then thank them for enlight- _ ‘ning you. But, for your own sake, when you’re wrong about Something admit it. Don’t, after seeing the truth, deny that you thought anything else.

CONCERNING THE PETITION

by KENT MURNAGHAN

Many students attending U.P.E.I. will have an opportunity to voice their choice in the upcoming national referendum on October 26. At the same time our own campus may be involved with a similar electoral process. A referendum will likely decide the fate of Student Union president Tracey Arsenault. At the present time two identifiable petitions are circulating; the first calling for a full-scale referendum, the other drumming support for the president.

A pertinent informational bulletin of sorts, the following offers insight into the two sides, as I entertain the views of Laurie Callaghan and Heather Morrison.

Laurie Callaghan, a former member of the Student Union council strongly believes that the president of the student body’s needs additional support rather than impeachment. She expresses an ardent desire that Tracey remain in posi- tion. Laurie has surely not been alone with her wishes. Several other students have been eager to distribute copies of the petition she backs with conviction. Laurie earnestly believes that Tracey handled the entire issue in the best way that she could. She sees the counter petition as necessary. She adds that it is vital to focus upon the issue of impor- tance, sexual harassment, as opposed to straying to other less important concerns. The possibility also exists that the student council will be ill-equipped without a president to deal with upcoming issues. Essentially, Laurie bélieves that ‘‘many are approaching this issue from an emotional standpoint rather that thinking rationally.’’ Laurie could not be more concerned with the alleged sexually assault (printed so for legal reasons only) and the safety of others. She simply believes that it is in the best interests of all to remain focused. Of interest she is also concerned with the methods used by the supporters of the other petition (class- room presentation). Does this somehow present a one-sided view?

Heather Morrison, also a former member of the Student Union Council, believes that a referendum is the only solution. She wants everyone to have an opportunity to express his/her opinion and concerns. Heather and several other students are distributing a petition which will inevita- bly lead to areferendum or vote of non-confidence following submission to the student council. Heather sees it as an issue separate from the alleged sexual assault (once again for legal reasons?). She wishes that this petition is not — viewed as a personal quest with ulterior motives. She believes that Tracey has not fully represented the student body and has committed significant errors. Heather wishes that all have a say and this is the reason she is supporting a