Photo C/O Catherine Goce

By: Neda Pirouzmand

Graduating students should not have had an equal say on these decisions in comparison to returning students. As changes regarding student fees are implemented in the following academic year, graduating students will not be paying for them.

This line of reasoning can be extended to graduating students’ influence over the MSU presidential elections. The actions and views of the MSU president only become relevant during and following their transition period into office.

Chukky Ibe won the McMaster Students Union presidential election in 2017. In March of the same year, students passed a referendum to add $95 to their Athletics and Recreation Activity fee in order to build the Student Activity Building and expand the Pulse fitness area.

Last year, Ikram Farah’s winning election was accompanied by a referendum that reduced the Ontario Public Research Group’s funding at the university from $8.07 to $5.50 per student.

Josh Marando will officially take office in May. While he is currently in the process of transitioning into the role of MSU president, his responses to recent events, such as Doug Ford’s changes to the Ontario Student Assistance Program, and any future implementations will directly impact incoming and returning students.

At most, graduating students may be indirectly affected by the MSU’s advocacy efforts at the municipal, provincial and federal levels. This possible indirect impact still does not warrant graduating students to have as much influence as they currently possess.

An alternate system may involve weighting votes, where graduating students’ votes are weighted less than those of returning students. The logistics of the weighting amount could be decided by the MSU.

Those against changing the voting system may state that graduating students have unique and relevant experiences that allow them to make informed votes. Additionally, as graduating students pay the full MSU fee it can be argued that they have the right to exercise their vote.

These concerns could be addressed through adjusting the weight of votes from graduating students, rather than removing their vote altogether. If necessary, this could also be coupled with lowering the MSU fee for these students.

Would reweighting graduating students’ votes have changed past elections and referenda? This information is not publicly available and therefore no concrete conclusions can be drawn.

Elections should allow for a candidate to be selected who is in agreement with the majority of the relevant student population. Thus, the influence that graduating students have in this mix should be decreased.

Following this line of reasoning, incoming first-years should have a chance to vote. Many referenda and elections cannot accommodate this due to their timing in relation to admissions.

However, in some cases, this could be accomplished through implementing appropriate communication channels between incoming students and the MSU.

If this were to be pursued, it would need to be preceded by large-scale exposure and encouragement of voting in high school students.

Once April passes, graduating students will no longer fall under the umbrella of the MSU. As such, they should not influence future MSU decisions as much as they currently do.

 

[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]

Photos C/O Abi Sudharshan

By: Abi Sudharshan

On Feb 3 at 5 p.m, the McMaster Students Union Student Representative Assembly convened for the second time since the Ontario government announced major changes to the Ontario Student Assistance Program and tuition framework.

In the first portion of the meeting, MSU president Ikram Farah took to the floor to address the issue. According to Farah, by the end of this week, the MSU and university administration expect to see the release of an exact breakdown of affected ancillary fees.

Farah says this expected announcement will guide the MSU’s response moving forward.

During the delegation, Farah highlighted the MSU’s current campaign to mobilize students through promoting an understanding of the effects that these changes will have on McMaster students.

Ikram encouraged the assembly disseminate information regarding the impact and importance of MSU-funded services.

Stephanie Bertolo, MSU vice president (Education) noted a modest victory thus far: initially removed, transit passes have been re-included in the list of mandatory fees under the Ontario government’s student choice initiative.  

The SRA meeting also focused heavily on updates on the construction of the Student Activity Building, a four-story building that is projected to feature a grocery store, study spaces, a multi-faith prayer space and a nap room.

According to MSU vice president (Finance) Scott Robinson, the SAB has experienced a minor setback.   

Quotes by companies regarding materials and services for the SAB came back much higher than the original 2016-17 projections.

The past four months have been spent negotiating to bring the project back within the parameters of the viable budget.

Initially, construction for the SAB was slated to begin in October.

Robinson reported that these decisions are to be solidified shortly and that the construction of this student space will begin construction in March 2019.

This will likely mean that the SAB is not in full operation by the fall of 2020 as promised.

Apart from these two primary items, much of the meeting was allotted to the opening and closing of seats on the MSU services, university affairs and elections committees.

Another message stressed the meeting was the importance of ensuring that the SRA maintains a respectful environment and allows all voices to flourish.

The next SRA meeting will held at 5 p.m. on Feb 24 in Room 111 of Gilmour Hall.

 

[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]

Photos C/O Kyle West

On the evening of Jan. 24, Josh Marando was voted in as the next unofficial president-elect of the McMaster Students Union.

Marando, a fourth year arts and science student, garnered over 600 first-choice votes compared to the second-place candidate Jeffrey Campana.

Overall, Marando received 40 per cent of the 2,654 first-place votes.

Marando’s platform consists of 12 pillars, touching on issues like mental health support, sexual violence and education costs.

 

Marando learned of the news of his victory via a phone call from the current MSU president Ikram Farah at 9:00 p.m. on Jan. 24.

He was surprised by how early he got the call.

“I was not expecting to hear as soon as we did. Last year, I knew that they heard at around 3:10 a.m, so when Ikram called me at 9:00 p.m., I was not really sure. I thought she was joking at first. I really expected her to say, ‘Just kidding,’” Marando said.

Marando was relieved to hear he won, admitting the last few days of the campaign were the most stressful ones. On the last day of polling, he went home in the afternoon to relax on his own before his campaign team gathered to await the results.

“We just invited the core team over because either way we just wanted to be happy because I think we did run a pretty good campaign and I think we are all pretty proud of the work that we did, regardless of what the outcome would have been,” said Marando.

After receiving word of his victory, Marando quickly sent a text to his parents.

“I sent a nice little text in our group chat just saying that I won,” Marando said. “I think my parents still don't fully understand what it is. They do not really know what the MSU does. There are obviously so supportive because they know it's something I have been working on for a very long time and they're just very, very excited.”

Looking ahead to the next few months, Marando said he will begin implementing smaller projects, like creating a student lounge in the McMaster University Student Centre, while continuing to consult different services on bigger projects, like academic accessibility and mental health support.

Marando is also focused on formulating a plan to advocate against the provincial government’s changes to the Ontario Student Assistance Program and student fees.

“Something that I am trying to do is fully understand the changes, fully see what impact that will have on students and see what we could do differently than what we were doing before,” Marando said. “We have been advocating to this government for however many months now and we still saw this happen, so clearly something needs to change.”

Reflecting on his campaign, Marando believes he was successful because his message resonated with what students truly wanted.

“Something that we really try to do is just talk to students and see what exactly they wanted, and also some things that they would have wanted when they were in first year,” Marando said. “The people see the MSU president that shirt and jacket and suit and it feels very disconnected from students, but I think the real way that you can create meaningful change is by being one of the students and really connecting with them during this process.”

Slated to begin his term in May, Marando is excited and optimistic about the job in front of him.

 

[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]

Photos by Kyle West, Graphics by Yvonne Lu

CORRECTION: In a previous version of this article, there was a graphic that indicated that Josh Marando answered that he "strongly agreed" with the police presence on campus. However, in our survey, Marando answered that he "strongly disagreed" with the police presence on campus. We apologize for this misconstruction and have changed the graphic since. 

The Silhouette recently surveyed the four McMaster Students’ Union 2019 presidential candidates on their opinions on where the MSU and the university are doing well and where they can improve.

The survey consisted of seven statements. Candidates were asked to indicate their level of agreement with each statement on a scale from “strongly agree” to “disagree.”

[Best_Wordpress_Gallery id="197" gal_title="2019 Presidentials Survey Results 1"]

The first question asked candidates about their opinions on the statement that “The MSU is committed to equality and inclusiveness.”

The candidates all agreed on the MSU’s commitment to equality and inclusiveness. Jeffrey Campana and Madison Wesley indicated they “strongly agreed” with the statements, whereas Justin Lee and Josh Marando said they “agreed.”  

The second question asked candidates whether or not “Increased police presence will promote increased safety of students on and around campus.”

There were a range of opinions on the relationship between McMaster students and the police.

Lee was the only candidate to agree that police presence will promote safety. Campana was neutral, while Wesley disagreed. Marando was the only candidate to strongly disagree.

In September, a string of break-ins in Westdale prompted a greater police presence in the area. During the same month, a video depicting a woman being run over a McMaster police horse was widely shared on social media.

The candidates were mostly in agreement with the statement that the MSU should oppose the provincial government’s free speech mandate requiring Ontario universities to implement a free-speech policy.

Wesley was the only candidate not to agree with the statement, choosing a “neutral” response instead. Campana indicated he agreed, while both Lee and Marando chose “strongly agree.”

In October, the Student Representative Assembly unanimously passed a motion opposing the government mandate.

[Best_Wordpress_Gallery id="201" gal_title="2019 Presidentials Survey Results 2"]

The next question asked candidates whether or not the MSU should lobby against the government’s changes to tuition, student fees and the Ontario Student Assistance Program.

The survey showed that all the candidates were in stark opposition to the provincial government’s changes to tuition, student fees and OSAP announced on Jan. 17.

Lee, Marando and Wesley all strongly agreed with the statement, while Campana selected the “agree” response.

Regarding McMaster’s accessibility, Wesley and Campana indicated there was room for improvement, as they strongly disagreed and disagreed with the statement that the school is “fairly accessible” for students with various disabilities.

Lee and Marando were neutral on the issue.

[Best_Wordpress_Gallery id="202" gal_title="2019 Presidentials Survey Results 3"]

The results also show that none of the candidates are satisfied with McMaster’s current efforts to prevent and address sexual violence. When asked if McMaster does a “sufficient job” in this area, Campana and Wesley strongly disagreed, while Lee and Marando disagreed with the statement.

McMaster’s sexual violence policy is up for review this year.

Overall, it appears that while there is a high degree of agreement amongst candidates on topics such as the Ontario government’s recently announced tuition and OSAP changes, candidates differ in their views on issues like the relationship between students and the Hamilton police and McMaster’s response to sexual violence.

The voting period for this year’s MSU presidential election is taking place from Jan. 22 to 5 p.m on Jan. 24. To vote, students can fill out the ballot sent to their McMaster email or login and vote at www.msumcmaster.ca/vote.

 

[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]

Photo C/O Madeline Neumann

Elections for the next McMaster Students Union president are wrapping up with polling closing on Jan. 24. As students cast their ballot this year, they are presented with five options: to vote for one of the four candidates, or to abstain. However, students should also be given the option to cast a vote of no confidence.

A vote of no confidence is essentially a vote claiming that the student has no confidence in the presented candidates and would not like any of them to act as a representative for the student. This could be due to a variety of reasons ranging from the infeasibility of the candidates’ platform points to judgements made on the candidates’ character.

While students can abstain, an abstained vote has ambiguous meaning. Although one can abstain because they feel a lack of confidence in all the candidates, abstained votes can also mean the voter feels uninformed to select a candidate, or cannot decide between equally-qualified candidates. Simply put, an abstained vote is not equivalent to a vote of no confidence.

The idea to implement a vote of no confidence is not novel. It was first proposed by Eric Gillis in 2014 when he was the 2014-2015 bylaws commissioner for the Student Representative Assembly. Since his initial proposal, the idea of a no confidence vote has been continuously advocated for by Miranda Clayton, who worked on the bylaws committee in 2014-2015 before her role as operations commissioner in 2015-2016.

Gillis and Clayton hoped to have a vote of no confidence implemented for SRA elections. As it stands, if only one person runs for a seat on the SRA, that seat is considered acclaimed by the individual. This is a consistent issue in the SRA where many seats are acclaimed. In doing so, students are deprived the opportunity to voice their oppositions or give any input into their representation.  

This makes little sense. If others have to create platforms, run campaigns and be supported by the student body to obtain their seat, why shouldn’t candidates running unopposed be held to the same accountability? In essence, acclaimed seats should not exist as those seats are not truly representative of the people they are meant to represent. Instead, students should be able to take a vote of confidence on candidates running for those seats.  

According to Clayton, the reason a vote of no confidence has not been implemented yet is largely due to such a change requiring major electoral reform. Ballots would have to be made to include a “no confidence” option and this would require major restructuring to the online ballot system and perhaps even changes to the MSU constitution.

 Though these changes may be a large undertaking, they are nonetheless critical to ensure students are being represented properly.

The idea of a no confidence vote, while created with the SRA elections in mind, can be applied to the MSU presidential elections. If students are not confident in any of the candidates running, this is a problem that should be recognized and addressed by the student union.

I understand the risk associated in abstaining to vote or casting a no-confidence vote when multiple seats exist. In scenarios like these, it may make more sense to vote for the “lesser of two evils”. But if students truly feel that none of their options are good, they should have a forum to voice their concerns.

If the majority of voters have no confidence in their presidential candidates, this calls for drastic change. I’m not certain what sort of change this might entail. It could include holding a re-election, or changing the election bylaws to ensure candidates meet a level of standards and qualifications.

This might also be a non-issue. Perhaps students do feel confident in their given candidates. The only way we can know for certain is to allow students to have the option to vote no confidence.

 

[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]

Photos by Kyle West

 

On Jan. 17, the McMaster Students’ Union hosted a debate featuring the 2019 MSU presidentials candidates four candidates. Here are some of the highlights.

The first question of the debate concerned whether the candidates are more focused on advocacy or student life.

Josh Marando said he would be more focused on advocacy.

Jeffery Campana explained that the limited one-year term of a president would mean smaller initiatives are more important to him.

A1: Campana: Platform aims to engage students to get them more involved; focuses on both advocacy points and student engagement. "I am more out for student engagement, but I don't sacrifice advocacy"

— The Silhouette (@theSilhouette) January 17, 2019

The debate quickly turned to Ontario government’s decision to restrict Ontario Student Assistance Program grants and make some student fees optional, a move that was announced the morning of the debate.

Madison Wesley pointed to the announcement as proof of why advocacy is central to the MSU president’s role. Justin Lee and the other candidates were also quick to condemn the new changes.

Q10: Campana - "The PC government is not for students like us". The option to opt out of student fees will cause a reduction of funding to services that the MSU needs in order to thrive.

— The Silhouette (@theSilhouette) January 17, 2019

When the topic reasserted itself later in the debate, Marando noted the need for students to be “prepared to mobilize.”

When candidates were asked to outline their main platform priority areas, Wesley pointed to the need for improved mental and physical health support systems, while Lee chose his “HSR Drivers Accountability” platform point.

Marando said he is focused on making students feel welcome, and Campana spoke about his plan to place free menstrual products in all-gender bathrooms.

On the subject of off-campus housing, all the candidates said they were in favour of the new MSU landlord rating system.

Marando pushed the need to continue supporting landlord licensing, while Wesley and Lee talked about continuing housing education programs for students.

The discussion became more heated when candidates were asked to critique an opponent’s platform point.

Marando pointed to the logistics of Campana’s on-campus ice rink proposal.

Campana, Lee and Wesley criticized Marando’s proposed increase of the maintenance budget and various advocacy goals.

A6: Wesley - Most critical of Marando's point on lobbying to freeze tuition. Previously, OSAP is a provincial legislation issue, problem is that there are entire groups of lobbyists that dedicate time to this and they haven't gotten very far.

— The Silhouette (@theSilhouette) January 17, 2019

One audience member asked how the candidates would increase campus safety.

Ideas ranged from Wesley’s call for improved police response to the need to upgrade lighting and fix emergency poles on campus, put forth by Campana and Lee, respectively.

A7: Wesley - Student safety big concern. Main issue is that Hamilton police have not been involved, advocating for students to Hamilton police important. If we have concrete advocacy coming from the school, we may be able to change a lot for the better.

— The Silhouette (@theSilhouette) January 17, 2019

When asked about sexual violence on campus, all of the candidates agreed that training for students, Welcome Week reps and staff needs improvement.

Marando pointed out that none of the other candidates’ platforms addressed sexual violence.

Campana countered by saying that the issue could not be fixed in a one-year term.

A11 Rebuttal: Campana - Didn't address the issue in his platform because it is not a problem that one president can fix. Several different groups across campus must be involved; it is not enough to put a "bandaid solution" on a platform

— The Silhouette (@theSilhouette) January 17, 2019

The candidates were also given the opportunity to explain what made them unique.

Marando cited his comprehensive MSU experience. Campana did the same while stressing his experiences outside the MSU.

While acknowledging their relative inexperience, Lee and Wesley stressed the creativity of their platform and noted that they represent the only ethnic minority candidate and only female candidate, respectively.

The full debate can be found on the MSU Facebook page.

 

[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]

Photo by Kyle West

Justin Lee’s platform highlights 13 points, but almost all of them lack specificity and the ability to effect unique and meaningful change on campus.

Several of Lee’s initiatives do not specify how they differ from current McMaster Students Union projects, including his plan to improve the MSU’s social media presence.

Similarly, free menstrual products are already offered without charge by the Student Health Education Centre, the Student Wellness Centre, and the Women and Gender Equity Network. Lee’s plan to add these products to single use and female washrooms extend this service, but the logistics and costs of stocking the washrooms must be worked out.

Other points, such as strengthening student involvement in campus events and providing “life skills” programs to students, are vague. The proposal to provide fundraising training services for all MSU clubs in order to make them fiscally independent lacks context as to why it is necessary to improving student life or how it will affect MSU spending.

Where Lee’s ideas are novel, they lack feasibility and do not appear to be supported by consultations with relevant groups.

For instance, Lee does not appear to have consulted software developers, the Hamilton Street Railway or the MSU regarding his proposed “Uber for Buses” project.

There is also the obvious question regarding how such a project would be feasible and affect non-student HSR users.

Another project that Lee aspires to implement is an after-hours takeout service on campus. However, this project once again lacks detail as to how it will be implemented.

Lee’s platform, which primarily includes small projects, could also be more ambitious and comprehensive.

Points such as the addition of a second ClubsFest do not seem likely to make a noteworthy improvement to student life.

It is also worth noting that the day after the 2019 MSU presidentials campaign period kicked off, Lee still did not have an accessible official Instagram or Facebook page.

This lack of transparency about Lee’s platform appears to weaken Lee’s credibility.

Overall, there are significant gaps in Lee’s platform when it comes to addressing more prominent student concerns and ensuring that larger initiatives are both original and feasible.

 

[button link="https://www.thesil.ca/meet-your-msu-presidential-candidates" color="red"] RETURN TO ALL CANDIDATE PLATFORM OVERVIEWS[/button]

 

[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]

 

On Jan. 11, McMaster Daily News published an article by Catherine Munn, an associate clinical professor from McMaster University’s psychiatry and behavioural neurosciences and lead psychiatrist at the McMaster Student Wellness Centre.

Titled ‘Why are so many students struggling with mental health?’, the article discusses the factors that may lead to why students are struggling with mental health and the support systems in place, both on and off-campus, for those who find themselves struggling. It also demonstrates that students are in severe need for better mental health support on campus.

From inadequate funding for Student Accessibility Services, severely long wait times to see a counsellor and over 23,000 students accessing support from SWELL, it’s interesting to see that candidates in the McMaster Student Union presidential election aren’t prioritizing mental health in their campaigns.

Out of the four candidates in this year’s race, only three of them have a single platform point related to mental health support on campus. Out of these three, only one platform is feasible in theory, while still remaining financially unclear.

Generally, once these platform points are simmered down, they don’t amount to anything more than a relatively ambitious and opportunistic points to gain your vote. Each platform that has a talking point about mental health support has no plan that is feasible or realistical to implement structures that support students on and off-campus.

Sure, there is only so much that can be done within a year’s term. But within a year’s term, the MSU president’s role is to advocate on behalf of students and to bring your concerns to higher levels of governments and to university administration.

We can turn these talking points into feasible opportunities to support those who are struggling on campus by prioritizing their needs over self-indulgent platforms from our presidential candidates.

So let’s be clear, we can do a whole lot better for the many students who are struggling with mental health.

 

[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]

Photos C/O Housing & Conference Services

Graphic by Sukaina Imam

 

In recent years, questions of bylaw enforcement have been at the forefront of the McMaster Students Union presidential elections. While most students may not concern themselves with the details of election rules, past years’ rulings show us that while infractions may seem minor, enough violations may cast the integrity of the election into question.

A look back at last year

In the 2018 election, the elections committee voted to disqualify two candidates, Rabeena Obaidullah and MSU president Ikram Farah.

According to the Jan. 25 elections committee meeting minutes, Obaidullah’s disqualification resulted from an accumulation of bylaw infractions, including campaigning in closed Facebook groups, using the McMaster logo in promotional material and misrepresenting expenses.

At the first elections committee meeting, Farah received fines for rule violations but was not disqualified. However, after another candidate brought forward additional complaints against her, the elections committee reconvened and voted to disqualify Farah due to the repeated nature of rule violations.

Both candidates made appeals to overturn their disqualifications. The MSU electoral appeal board determined that the violations did not harm the integrity of the election and therefore reinstated both candidates, allowing Farah to win the election.

Who counts as a campaign team member?

A candidate’s campaign team consists of MSU members that actively campaign on their behalf.

Campaign team members must be MSU members, which means that part time students, graduate students, potential students, and community members are not able to publicly voice support for presidential candidates.

According to the MSU elections department, rules regarding campaign team members exist to monitor campaign activity so that individuals and groups cannot use their monetary resources or positions of power to unduly influence the results of the election.

Responsibility for team members

The presidential election rules state that a candidate is responsible for the actions of their campaign team members, and can be fined, and in some cases disqualified, for actions taken by their team members.

A consistent question that has come up throughout elections committee meetings and appeals processes was whether it is the responsibility of the candidate or the elections department to ensure that both team members and the larger student population are abiding by the campaign rules.

According to the presidential election regulations, it is the candidate’s responsibility to ensure that their campaign team plays by the rules. In practice, however, this can be complicated.

Given that the elections committee can retroactively add people from outside the campaign team if they appeared to be publicly supporting the candidate, it is not always enough for the candidate to educate their campaign team about the election rules.

In the appeals process, a candidate petitioned against the fines that they had received, stating that it was unfair to be held responsible for violations outside of their control.

At the March 11 Student Representative Assembly meeting in 2018, former vice president (Administration) Shaarujaa Nadarajah stated that there could be more formalized rules to address how to respond when candidates rectify issues, especially when violations are committed by non campaign team members.

Additionally, the rulings of the elections committee regarding campaigning of non team members have differed year to year.

In 2016, a non-team member used the MSU logo to post on behalf of Mike Gill, one of the presidential candidates. The use of the MSU logo in campaign material is prohibited, as is campaign material released by a non team member. Since Gill took the steps to have the post taken down, the charges were dismissed.

However in 2018, individuals who were not on Farah’s campaign team posted endorsements on Snapchat and Instagram stories, both of which were not permitted for promotion. In contrast to the 2016 decision, the individuals were retroactively added to the campaign team and the candidate was subsequently fined.

The restriction of involvement of individuals from outside the campaign team was criticized during the appeals process during the 2018 election. A candidate expressed that public support from people from outside the campaign team meant that students who had never before been involved in elections were getting engaged.

The rules for this upcoming election seem to provide more leeway for involvement of non campaign members through the introduction of “campaign supporters” who show support for a candidate but do not belong to a campaign team.

However, campaign supporters still have to be MSU members. Additionally, the elections committee can determine that a campaign supporter is in fact a campaign representative.

A candidate is also subject to receiving a fine for a serious violation if their campaign supporter engages in harassment. Given these restrictions, it remains to be seen whether the addition of the “campaign supporter” category will increase opportunities for involvement in elections.

Grounds for Disqualification

Since 2016, the elections committee has voted to disqualify three different presidential candidates for violating the election rules. One disqualification occurred in 2016 and two occurred in 2018.

Violations ranged from campaigning in Facebook groups, to bad taste violations to misrepresentations of expenses.

The electoral appeal board voted to overturn all three disqualifications because the integrity of the election had not been sufficiently affected, thus reinstating the candidates.

The original decisions to disqualify candidates resulted from the accumulation of standard and severe violations that were deemed to violate the integrity of the election.

The integrity of an election is difficult to quantify, and has therefore been left up to the interpretation of the election committee. Since the elections committee is made up of SRA members, there is a high rate of turnover, meaning that the interpretation of rules can vary significantly from year to year.

This year, a new clause has been added to the election rules that removes some ambiguity from the disqualification process. Section 7.12.1. outlines conditions under which a candidate will be automatically disqualified.

These violations include deliberately sabotaging another candidate’s campaign, accumulating fines over half the spending limit, or accumulating five severe or 15 standard violations.

Had this rule been in place last year, two candidates had enough violations that they would have been automatically disqualified.  

While the 2019 bylaws clear up some of the uncertainty that existed last year regarding what constituted cause for disqualification, larger issues surrounding the rules and the appeals process remain.

During the March 7 electoral appeal board meeting Farah criticized the validity and justice of the appeals process. She stated that she had not been given the opportunity to respond to appeals made against her. Additionally, she criticized the appeals process for being non transparent and for demonstrating conflicts of interest.

Additionally, during the 2018 appeals process, multiple candidates expressed concern that candidates could use the complaints process as a tactic to get their competition disqualified. Given that the 2019 rules provide grounds for automatic disqualification, this may remain a problem.

The presidential election bylaws are meant to ensure an equal playing field for all candidates, while also ensuring that rules are not so restrictive that they discourage participation. In the upcoming election, both candidates and the elections department will be held to a high level of scrutiny to ensure that rules are being publicized, interpreted, and enforced fairly.

 

[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]

Photo C/O Haley Greene

President Ikram Farah

Ikram Farah has begun a series of initiatives over the first term and has mostly been on schedule with her year-plan thus far into the academic year.

Farah worked with Metrolinx to implement extended Go bus hours on the busiest nights of Welcome Week and throughout the year, a prominent platform point for her. There are now two added trip times at night for the 47 eastbound and the 15A Aldershot routes.

Farah has also pushed for more bus shelters on campus. Currently, three out of the planned four bus shelters have been installed at Sterling Street and Forsyth Avenue and at University Avenue and Forsyth Avenue. While the Sterling Street and Forsyth Avenue shelters have been completed, the University and Forsyth stop on the hospital side is still in progress.

Improving lighting on and off campus to increase student safety was also an important year-plan target for Ikram. A few lights have been upgraded, but these projects will mostly carry into 2019 as Farah is working with city and university staff to complete the improvements.

A successful initiative for Farah was the recent launch of the “Tax Free Tuesdays” pilot project, which allowed students to purchase food from La Piazza at a 13 per cent discount.

In addition, Farah had discussions with university stakeholders about changes to the McMaster student absence form policy and exam scheduling, including opting out of back-to-back exams, which she initially proposed. However, she now believes examining the current teaching methods and assessment structures at large will better address this issue in the long-term.

”We are looking at accommodations and we are looking at students’ well-being and a lot of the mental health concerns,” Farah said. “I don’t want to look at MSAFs in isolation with exams or teaching and learning and evaluations.”

Free speech has been another important issue that has come up during Farah’s term. Farah sought out student feedback via the Student Representative Assembly. In November, she helped organize a town hall discussion where students could ask questions in an open forum.

In 2019, Farah aims to focus on exam scheduling and MSAF policies, lighting and lobbying for an international student shuttle bus.

V.P. Finance Scott Robinson

Scott Robinson outlined 26 objectives in his year-plan and has stayed busy largely with revamping the McMaster Student Union-run restaurants.

Robinson has worked to update TwelvEighty’s menu and install new event centre flooring in the restaurant. Robinson has also helped introduce new TwelvEighty nightlife events such as trivia nights.

In addition, Robinson led efforts to rebrand and revitalize Union Market, which, according to Robinson, saw increased sales over the summer.

In partnership with the Student Activity Building ad-hoc committee, Robinson oversaw the interior design consultation campaign for the SAB, which is slated to open in 2020.

Robinson also helped implement an online loading system for the Hamilton Street Railway student presto card system through Mosaic.

In addition, Robinson is planning to release a video for the MSU in late November or early December to explain where exactly student fees go towards in the MSU. This is part of a larger effort to increase the union’s financial transparency.

Robinson has also helped improve the MSU’s social media strategy, creating video updates directly from the board.

Another one of Robinson’s projects entailed helping to implement a pilot project to use the $23,000 surplus from last year’s Welcome Week funding to buy essential items for reps and subsidize meals.

While Robinson has added more seating area to the McMaster University Student Centre, his objective of adding more moveable tables and different furniture has been more complicated than expected.

In January, Robinson will help run the “Life After Mac” program, which helps graduate students transition into the workforce.

Over the rest of his term Robinson will focus on developing the MSU’s long-term food and beverage strategy and looking at the effects of OHIP+ on the MSU health plan. He also aspires to improve new SRA members’ financial literacy before they approve the union’s 2019-2020 budget.

V.P. Education Stephanie Bertolo

Stephanie Bertolo and the education team have worked to promote student engagement in two elections and continue to cultivate relationships with politicians and student groups.

The provincial election in June and municipal election in October were two major focuses for Bertolo. She organized two respective MacVotes campaigns, which included the all-candidates Ward 1 debate before the October Hamilton election.

During the campaign period, Bertolo and Farah met with all 13 Ward 1 candidates. She is also planning to meet with newly elected Ward 1 councillor Maureen Wilson in the next few weeks.

In September, Bertolo helped lead the Ontario Undergraduate Student Alliance  #TextbookBroke campaign, which advocated for the adoption of open educational resources at the university.

Bertolo and her education team wrote the MSU's university budget submission, which included OERs, and increased funding for sexual violence response.

Over the past few weeks, the education team, led by Bertolo, wrote three policy papers for the MSU on on-campus infrastructure, student engagement and retention and tuition and student financing in post-secondary education.

Bertolo is also involved with OUSA and co-wrote their Tuition Paper, which calls for province-wide tuition freezes for all students, including international students.

As part of her “Unsettling Campus” year-plan initiative, Bertolo has begun discussions with the McMaster Indigenous Student Community Alliance and the Cooperative of Indigenous Studies Students and Alumni, two Indigenous student groups.

“I’m working with CISSA right now to set up a meeting with [McMaster president] Patrick Deane,” Bertolo said.

In January, Bertolo is planning to soft launch the landlord rating project for students. The rating system was originally planned for first semester, but it was pushed back.

The landlord licensing project is an ongoing city-wide initiative that Bertolo is hoping to work with Maureen Wilson and other city councillors to implement.

Over the rest of her term, Bertolo will help run the experiential education campaign in partnership with OUSA, finalize the municipal budget submission for Hamilton and further develop the unsettling campus project.

V.P. Administration Kristina Epifano

Kristina Epifano’s year-plan included thirteen objectives. Her other ongoing responsibilities entail supporting MSU part-time workers and reviewing Welcome Week and MSU hiring practices.

As promised in her year-plan, Epifano has scheduled bi-weekly or monthly meetings with each part-time manager and has held two feedback meetings for all the PTMs.  

Epifano has also updated job descriptions and required skills for each MSU job opening to aid the hiring board.

She also restructured the SRA training back in May, specifically by bringing in different full-time staff to speak. Epifano promises more changes for SRA training next May.

To support MSU staff and volunteers, Epifano has also renovated the committee room to provide a better space for students to work.

Epifano chaired the first strategic themes advisory committee, which prioritized four themes for Welcome Week: responsible drinking, sexual violence response and prevention, mental health and wellness and community engagement.

Throughout the year, Epifano, Bertolo and Farah have been in talks with McMaster sexual violence response coordinator Meaghan Ross to fulfill the objective of making campus safer.

“There was a survey that went out last year that we are still waiting to get the data from, and we want to advocate to the university to increase the support we have for Meaghan Ross and survivors of sexual assault on campus,” Epifano said.

Another priority for Epifano was increasing SRA transparency. The SRA bi-weekly meetings are now live-streamed on the new SRA Facebook page, which has resulted in significantly increased views.  

Epifano is currently creating Welcome Week planner job descriptions, which she hopes will better ensure that hired individuals are qualified. She has also been collecting feedback from first years and looking into the possibility of turning the welcome week planner role into a paid position.  

In January, Epifano will oversee the second round of hiring for PTMs, present her Welcome Week research findings and begin planning training for PTMs and the incoming SRA. Beyond that, she will begin planning the strategic themes for Welcome Week 2019 and continue her support of sexual violence education and response.

[spacer height="20px"][thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]

Subscribe to our Mailing List

© 2024 The Silhouette. All Rights Reserved. McMaster University's Student Newspaper.
magnifiercrossmenu