April
      12,
      2007
     
    
   
   
    
     
      THE
      GADRE
      \
      5
     
    
   
   
    
     
       
     
    
   
   
    
     
       
     
    
   
   
    
     
      CAMPUS
     
    
   
   
    
     
       
     
    
   
   
    
     
       
     
    
   
   
    
     
       
     
    
   
   
    
     
      Wanted:
      Introspection,
      not
      intimidation
     
    
   
   
    
     
      So
      how
      then,
      did
      the
      Executive
      react
     
     
      to
      the
      publicising
      of
      the
      working
     
     
      budget
      in
      the
      Cadre?
      Well,
      in
      addi-
     
     
      tion
      to
      posting
      a
      statement
      (worded
     
     
      quite
      similarly
      to
      what
      I
      predicted
     
     
      in
      my
      last
      opinion
      piece)
      on
      the
      SU
     
     
      website,
      the
      SU
      Executive
      called
      for
     
     
      “an
      emergency
      meeting”
      (to
      which
      all
     
     
      Councilors
      were
      urged
      to
      attend)
      in
     
     
      the
      SU
      boardroom
      to
      discuss:
      “The
     
     
      printing
      of
      the
      UPEI
      SU
      Budget
     
     
      in
      the
      most
      recent
      edition
      of
      The
     
     
      Cadre”
      (the
      notice
      was
      sent
      to
      us
      on
     
     
      the
      very
      afternoon
      the
      Cadre
      was
     
     
      released).
      So,
      about
      twenty-four
     
     
      councilors
      (out
      of
      32)
      met
      that
      eve-
     
     
      ning
      at
      9
      p.m.,
      in
      a
      room
      designed
      to
     
     
      seat
      10;
      and
      it
      became
      quite
      apparent
     
     
      that
      the
      subject
      of
      the
      meeting
      was
     
     
      not
      the
      Cadre
      publishing
      the
      working
     
     
      budget,
      but
      rather,
      the
      letter
      I
      wrote
     
     
      accompanying
      the
      working
      budget.
     
     
      At
      the
      meeting
      —
      and
      I
      use
      the
      term
      .
     
     
      rather
      loosely
      to
      describe
      what
      took
     
     
      _
      place
      —
      the
      SU
      Executive
      presented
     
     
      me
      with
      yet
      another
      letter
      (see
      below)
     
     
      and
      asked
      me
      to
      resign
      immediately.
     
     
      Of
      course
      not
      having
      been
      given
      any
     
     
      time
      to
      examine
      and
      absorb
      the
      letter
     
     
      led
      me
      to,
      not
      only
      react
      to
      it
      in
      a
     
     
      belligerent
      way,
      but
      oppose
      their
      de-
     
     
      mand
      entirely,
      and
      remind
      them
      that
     
     
      only
      my
      constituents
      had
      the
      author-
     
     
      ity
      to
      demand
      my
      resignation.
     
    

    
     
      In
      their
      letter,
      the
      SU
      Executive’s
     
     
      ghost-writers
      (really,
      no
      one
      on
      the
     
     
      SU
      Executive
      writes
      like
      this)
      claim
     
     
      that
      the
      publication
      of
      the
      working-
     
     
      budget
      “opened
      the
      SU
      to
      potential
     
     
      legal
      liability
      ...
      exposed
      members
      of
     
    
   
   
    
     
      the
      SU
      to
      the
      potential
      for
      individual
      -
     
    
   
   
    
     
      harm
      ...
      and
      [exposed]
      the
      commer-
     
     
      cial
      entities
      of
      the
      SU
      to
      a
      significant
     
     
      disadvantage.”
      What?
      ...
      “legal
      liabil-
     
     
      ity
      [and]
      individual
      harm”?
      We
      are
      a
     
     
      not-for-profit
      corporation,
      you
      can
     
     
      be
      assured
      that
      no
      one
      is
      planning
      a
     
     
      ‘hostile-takeover’.
      Besides,
      have
      you
     
     
      seen
      the
      Wave’s
      financial
      statements?
     
     
      Conrad
      Black
      and
      Hollinger
      Inc.
      are
     
     
      being
      scrutinized
      for
      fewer
      discrep-
     
     
      ancies
      (I’m
      kidding
      of
      course).
     
     
      Again,
      I
      have
      to
      restate
      my
      earlier
     
     
      point
      that:
      “the
      budget
      issue
      is
      inter-
     
     
      esting
      not
      so
      much
      because
      of
      the
     
     
      document
      itself,
      but
      rather,
      because
     
    
   
   
    
     
      of
      the
      reaction
      it
      evokes
      from
      the
     
     
      Student
      Union
      Council
      Executive.”
     
     
      In
      this
      case,
      the
      SU
      Executive
      re-
     
     
      acted
      by
      issuing
      another
      thinly-veiled
     
     
      threat
      (see
      the
      letter
      below),
      and
     
    

    
     
      by
      deciding
      to
      hold
      an
      “emergency
     
     
      meeting.”
      While
      I
      would
      remind
      the
     
     
      Executive
      (and
      their
      ubiquitous
      legal
     
    
   
   
    
     
      _
      counsel)
      that
      although
      the
      Cadre’s
     
    
   
   
    
     
      managing
      editor
      (a
      fellow
      student
     
     
      and
      SU
      member)
      may
      have
      received
     
     
      a
      copy
      of
      the
      budget
      from
      me,
      I
      did
     
     
      not
      print
      it;
      the
      editorial
      staff
      at
      the
     
     
      Cadre
      made
      the
      decision
      to
      publish
      it
     
     
      independently,
      and
      they
      stand
      firmly
     
     
      behind
      their
      decision.
      Even
      then,
      the
     
     
      question
      that
      has
      yet
      to
      be
      answered
     
     
      is:
      So
      what?
      There
      is
      nothing
      in
     
    

    
     
      the
      SU
      Constitution
      or
      bylaws
      that
     
     
      prevents
      the
      Cadre
      from
      printing
      the
     
     
      SU’s
      working-budget.
      I
      may
      have
     
     
      breached
      protocol,
      but
      Council
      has
     
     
      subsequently
      justified
      this
      action
     
    

    
     
      by
      voting
      not
      to
      publicise
      this
      years
     
     
      budget
      by
      the
      end
      of
      the
      academic
     
     
      year
      (see
      the
      minutes
      from
      our
      April
     
     
      1
      meeting),
      which
      itself
      is
      a
      breach
     
     
      of
      the
      very
      article
      I
      have
      been
      ac-
     
     
      cused
      of
      “violating”
      (that
      would
      be:
     
    
   
   
    
     
      _
      Article
      XIX
      subsection
      A
      of
      the
      SU
     
    
   
   
    
     
      Constitution).
     
    

    
     
      Of
      course,
      what
      is
      most
      impressive
     
     
      about
      the
      SU
      Executive
      calling
      for
      an
     
     
      “emergency
      meeting,”
      to
      which
      the
     
     
      vast
      majority
      of
      councilors
      actually
     
     
      showed
      up
      to
      (on
      a
      stormy
      night
      I
     
     
      may
      add)
      is
      that
      they
      have
      the
      ability
     
     
      to
      mobilize
      on
      very
      short
      notice!
      I’m
     
     
      being
      absolutely
      serious
      here.
      Now
     
     
      imagine
      if
      they
      put
      this
      ability
      to
      use
     
     
      on
      issues
      actually
      affecting
      the
      vast
     
     
      majority
      of
      students
      (as
      opposed
      to
     
     
      the
      power-brokers
      in
      the
      Student
     
     
      Union).
      For
      example,
      an
      emergency
     
     
      meeting
      could
      have
      been
      called
      in
     
     
      response
      to
      the
      projected
      (minimum)
     
     
      12
      per
      cent
      increase
      in
      tuition
      stu-
     
     
      dents
      will
      be
      facing
      over
      the
      next
     
     
      three
      years,
      despite
      the
      fact
      that
     
     
      the
      Federal
      Government
      has
      dedi-
     
     
      cated
      $3.2
      million
      in
      post-secondary
     
     
      transfers
      to
      PEI
      per
      year
      (ironically
     
     
      enough,
      this
      can
      be
      found
      in
      the
     
    
   
   
    
     
      Federal
      budget:
      http://www.budget.
     
    
   
   
    
     
      gc.ca/2007/themes/bkrfbse.html);
     
    
   
   
    
     
      or
      to
      address
      the
      increasing
      rates
      of
     
    
   
   
    
     
      assaults
      and
      thefts
      across
      campus;
     
    

    
     
      or
      in
      response
      to
      the
      cancellation
      of
     
     
      ‘supplementary
      exams’.
      Again,
      at
      no
     
     
      time
      did
      any
      of
      these
      events
      evoke
      an
     
     
      “emergency
      meeting”
      of
      Councilors,
     
     
      much
      less
      the
      Executive.
     
    

    
     
      At
      the
      “March
      28"
      emergency
     
     
      meeting,”
      many
      Councilors
      took
      is-
     
     
      sue
      with
      my
      assertion
      that,
      “we
      act
     
     
      more
      as
      rubber-stamps
      than
      voices
     
     
      of
      student-advocacy.”
      But
      what
      else
     
     
      explains
      our
      actions?
      Councilors
     
     
      clearly
      have
      short-term
      memories;
     
     
      because
      only
      three
      days
      prior,
      at
      our
     
     
      March
      25"
      meeting,
      Council
      more-
     
     
      or-less
      unanimously
      (there
      were
      four
     
     
      ‘abstentions’)
      voted
      to
      approve
      rate
     
     
      increases
      to
      our
      dental-plans
      for
     
     
      the
      coming
      year,
      without
      coming
      to
     
     
      know,
      or
      even
      wanting
      to
      know,
      the
     
     
      numbers
      behind
      the
      justifications
     
     
      given
      by
      the
      “Health
      Plan
      Commit-
     
     
      tee”
      (the
      minutes
      from
      that
      meeting
     
     
      will
      confirm
      this).
      Further
      to
      this,
     
     
      and
      only
      four
      days
      after
      the
      March
     
     
      28"
      “emergency
      meeting,”
      Council
     
     
      was
      again
      almost
      unanimous
      in
      its
     
     
      acceptance
      of
      a
      report
      reeking
      of
     
     
      intellectual
      dishonesty
      (and
      a
      subse-
     
     
      quent
      motion
      calling
      for
      a
      referen-
     
     
      dum
      question
      in
      the
      Fall
      elections)
     
     
      written
      by
      the
      “National
      Representa-
     
     
      tion
      Committee.”
      Again,
      I
      can
      make
     
     
      this
      assertion
      because
      I
      sat
      on
      that
     
     
      committee
      (at
      least
      until
      the
      Cadre’s
     
     
      publication
      of
      the
      budget)
      and
     
     
      alerted
      the
      Committee
      members
      to
     
     
      the
      many
      factual
      and
      methodological
     
     
      errors
      I
      saw
      in
      earlier
      drafts
      of
      the
     
     
      report;
      (un)surprisingly,
      these
      very
      er-
     
     
      rors
      still
      ended
      up
      in
      the
      Committee’s
     
     
      final-report.
      I
      would
      urge
      students
      to
     
     
      get
      a
      copy
      of
      the
      two
      and
      a
      half
      page
     
     
      report
      (if
      it
      is
      not
      published
      in
      this
     
     
      edition
      of
      the
      Cadre)
      and
      do
      some
     
     
      basic
      “number-checking”
      (you
      can
     
     
      probably
      do
      it
      online
      even).
      Again,
     
    

    
     
      I
      must
      repeat:
      we
      only
      alienate
      the
     
     
      student-body
      when
      we
      make
      deci-
     
     
      sions
      on
      their
      behalf
      without
      think-
     
     
      ing
      about
      those
      decisions
      critically.
     
    

    
     
      The
      concern
      here
      is
      that
      we
      are
     
     
      simply
      going
      ‘through
      the
      motions’
     
     
      on
      Council;
      and
      by
      not
      thinking
     
     
      critically,
      nor
      independently,
      about
     
     
      the
      vast
      majority
      of
      policies
      brought
     
    
   
   
    
     
      to
      us
      to
      approve
      (on
      behalf
      of
      the
     
     
      student
      body)
      we
      do
      the
      student-
     
     
      body
      a
      disservice.
      At
      some
      level
      this
     
     
      creates
      detachment;
      not
      only
      between
     
     
      Council
      and
      the
      student-body,
      but
     
     
      also
      between
      Councilors
      and
      their
     
     
      duties.
      As
      reflected
      in
      the
      fact
      that
     
    

    
     
      a
      fifth
      of
      all
      Councilors
      have
      missed
     
     
      at
      least
      4
      (and
      in
      some
      case
      more)
     
     
      meetings
      of
      the
      16
      that
      we
      have
      all
     
     
      year
      (these
      numbers
      rise
      sharply
      if
     
     
      one
      examines
      how
      many
      Councilors,
     
     
      including
      the
      Executive,
      have
      missed
     
     
      at
      least
      3
      meetings).
      And
      while
      some
     
     
      Councilors
      may
      think
      they
      are
      vol-
     
     
      unteers
      (this
      comparison
      has
      actually
     
     
      been
      made),
      they
      should
      know
      that
     
     
      they
      are
      not;
      this
      is
      why
      there
      exists
     
     
      a
      Constitutional
      bylaw
      calling
      for
      the
     
     
      automatic
      impeachment
      of
      Council-
     
     
      ots
      who
      miss
      4
      meetings.
     
    

    
     
      Readers
      will
      be
      pleased
      to
      see
      that
     
     
      aside
      from
      complaining
      about
      the
     
     
      state
      of
      student
      affairs
      on
      our
      cam-
     
     
      pus,
      I
      do
      have
      some
      suggestions
      for
     
     
      those
      students
      who
      may
      be
      encour-
     
     
      aged
      (or
      at
      least,
      less
      discouraged
     
     
      than
      others)
      to
      run
      for
      Council
      next
     
     
      Fall
      and
      Spring.
      Run
      on
      a
      populist
     
     
      platform,
      of
      (1)
      Promising
      complete
     
     
      financial
      transparency
      (which
      would
     
     
      include
      not
      only
      promising
      to
      pub-
     
     
      licise
      our
      working-budget,
      but
      also
     
     
      having
      a
      referendum
      on
      whether
      the
     
     
      VP
      Finance
      position
      should
      remain
     
     
      unelected);
      (2)
      Promise
      to
      institute
     
     
      job
      reviews
      of
      all
      the
      salaried
      posi-
     
     
      tions
      by
      the
      entire
      Executive
      (there
     
     
      are
      other
      Student
      Unions
      who
      do
     
     
      this);
      (3)
      Promise
      that
      you'll
      hold
      a
     
     
      minimum
      number
      of
      ‘consultations’
     
     
      with
      your
      constituents
      each
      term
      :
     
     
      (and
      advertise
      them
      well
      in
      advance);
     
     
      (4)
      Promise
      to
      lower
      SU
      fees
      (even
      if
     
     
      it’s
      by
      cents
      and
      not
      dollars);
      (5)
      For-
     
     
      mulate
      (and
      express)
      a
      clear
      position
     
     
      on
      tuition-hikes
      (you
      will
      be
      sur-
     
     
      ptised
      to
      know
      that
      we
      don’t
      yet
      have
     
     
      one).
      There
      are
      many
      more
      issues
      of
     
     
      course,
      you'll
      probably
      come
      up
      with
     
     
      them
      while
      studying
      for
      finals.
      -
     
    
   
   
    
     
      Faiz
      Ahmed
     
     
      April
      4,
      2007