The McGill Tribune Published by the S tu d en ts Society o f M cG ill U niversity
Vol. 2 N o. 22, Tuesday, M arch 1, 1983.
Students to Vote by Gregg Gibbons At the Students’ Society meeting two weeks ago, it was decided that the question of whether McGill should rejoin RAEU (Regroupement des associations étudients universitaires) should be put to a referendum. Earlier in the year McGill withdrew its membership because, according to VP Ex ternal Benjie T rister, of R AEU’s “inability to effectively disseminate inform ation, lack of financial regulations, and its limited member ship.” The purpose of RAEU is to represent as many of the students as possible, in both CEGEPs and universities, in relations be tween students and the government. But Trister stated that ANEQ’s main concern was the betterment of ANEQ interests. With its withdrawal, McGill hoped to prod RAEU into becoming more represen tative of the students in Quebec. Apparently this tactic worked. Since McGill withdrew, RAEU has become very vocal against government cutbacks in education, has
provided more docum entation in English, and has shown a willingness to change its voting structure to be more representative (according to the num ber of students each member has). While McGill was not a member of RAEU, it tried to unify the students in Quebec. But, according to Trister, there is no way to unify so many diverse groups. So, since this isn’t possible, McGill decided that it should join the largest group, which happens to be RAEU. RAEU currently represents 16 CEGEPs and three universities. Trister added that there are three more universities that will sonn vote on referenda concerning joining RAEU. If these three pass their referenda, R AE U’s representation would be all that much greater. If McGill joins again, it will push for a university caucus so as to separate CEG EPs’ wants from those of universities when it becomes necessary.
A SU S Elections: Comments Concerning Scandal, Subjectivity and Sovereignty in Student Politics and Political Ethics by Edgar Wedig
I
f th a t title is shocking (and in te n tio n a lly so),
th en so it ap tly describes the re cent events of basem ent student politics, that have been pervading our student lives. And if you feet relieved at your disinvolvement or un
interestedness, then think again, (or read on), and realize th a t decisions m ade under your feet affect much more than the petty, sordid and dark political environm ent from which they are egested. These decisions have as their defined pur pose to bear on all your “cultural, educa tional, and social activities”, according to the Constitution o f the A rts and Science Under graduate Society (A S U S ) o f McGill Univer sity. A more overt manifestation of this per vasiveness principle can be seen currently posted all over the bulletin boards of our University. See if you can find ASUS cam paign propaganda that does not appeal to increased support for 1) “the journals” 2) the departm ents (especially the “smaller” ones), and 3) guest speaker and entertainm ent “programs”. While everyone recognizes these seeming ly age-old unchanging issues, it remains to be proved that the proponents of this familiar platform actually understand, let alone serve their promises. But we must not try to find fault with our present ASUS candidates, for they have noble intentions. It is the system we must work with. As with any democratic a d m in istra tiv e n etw o rk , th e essence of ASUS politics is electoral choice. And for the ASUS, electoral choice is even more es sentially essential to the process. The Executive Council of the ASUS (ASEC) is not accountable to any higher authority. For those of us who thought there was recourse to the tyranny of these sorts of so-called autonom ous political organiza tions at McGill through the Juridical Board
of the Students’ Society, this realization is shocking and frightening. But th at’s precise ly why there are elections. ASUS elections are basically the only practical way we can make the ASUS and the ASEC responsible. As an extension of the fundam ental prin ciple of electoral choice, com petition must be central to these elections. Com petition is especially vital when we, the electorate, show so little sympathy, as now, for student polit ics in general—that is, when through our uninterestedness, we become ignorant. Now here is my point: ignorance is what the A S U S currently thrives on. Few people realize the extent to which these student poli ticians, unresisted, involve themselves with our “cultural, educational and social” stu dent lives. And the degree of political and economic control they have over these facets of our student lives might be partially indi cated by the fact that the ASUS makes cru cial decisions on the “appropriate” alloca tion of over $100,000 of our money. So, let me proceed to tell you the story of my political encounter with the ASUS. This ASUS exposé is not intended as a malicious attack on certain members of the “tightly knit” organization; rather it is an exhorta tion to fellow constituents to take notice of our big, bold and bureaucratic little govern ment. If nothing else, perhaps 1 can try to break down the veil of pseudo-democratic ideology that the official AS.US and their “constitution” feed on, and the veil of ignor ance that we, constitutents of all these sorts of organizations, have allowed to descend upon us. Maybe we can eventually all emerge from our camouflage , be it of “constitution ality” or “apathy”, and at least acknowledge the true comrtion values and ethics that should serve as the moral basis of our ac tions. (For the reason of this underlying theme, I will not try here to conceal the essential moral subjectivity of this article by making use of the jaded journalistic and social-sciencontinued on page 3
Jerom e Kilty’s Dear Liar, a witty, hum orous play which highlights the correspondance between Mrs. Patrick Campbell, the famous English actress, and George Bernard Shaw, the well-known playwright and vegetarian, will be staged Tuesday, March 1, to Friday, March 4, at Players’ Theatre.
Peter D otsikas: D oin g His Best Continued from last week by Brian Forsythe Todd This is the continuation of the final (hon estly) interview with the members of the Executive Committee of the Students’ Society. We now rejoin "Peter Dotsikas: Doing His Damn Best" already in progress. Tribune: How about this semester, other than things you’ve already mentioned last week, are there any other things you’ve got planned for University Affairs? Dotsikas: There are a number of motions I’m bringing to amend the rules to give stu dents and Students’ Society more inform a tion and better com m unication with the Senate. Right now as it stands, we don’t have to be informed about everything. I would like to introduce motions where we have to be told about every single committee. T hat sets a precident that brings us closer tow ards Senate. It’s more or less a recogni tion of Students’ Society officially. T hat is a problem we’re going to come up against in the Student Charter of Rights (whether or not Students’ Society is going to be recog nized as the official representation of the students on political issues.) As far as within Students’ Society itself, as a member of the executive there are a number of issues that have to be addressed. We are hoping this semester to organize some sort of campaign to show students what Students’ Society can do for them. We will be hopefully going to classes, speaking to students, telling them what we do, where we are and how they can find us. A nother very im portant problem is the whole issue of cutbacks. There is a Cutbacks Committee set-up of which 1 am the chair man, which is going to be responsible for organizing dem onstrations and inform ation
centres so that we can inform students of how cutbacks affect them. It makes no dif ference today whether you’ve got the money or not to go to university because every year your education and degree become worth less and less as the quality goes down. It’s a problem we’re all facing. Tribune: Are there any changes you would like to see made in the job of V.P. (University Affairs)? Dotsikas: The V.P. (University Affairs) has to deal with a lot of people. There is a struc ture and he has to try and maintain that structure and that structure is our com mit tees. The other thing the V.P. (University Affairs) tries to do is increase that structure so that he has more feedback. What I’ve found is probably the same thing other V.P. (University Affairs)’s have found too, they have to spend so much time trying to keep that structure running that they don’t have time to use it effectively as they’ve wanted. If we had people who could do their job effectively, who would do their homework on an issue, who would walk into a meeting with all the inform ation and know all the questions to ask then we’ll gain a lot of sup port from within these committees. The other problem and it’s more of a prob lem for all the members of the executive I believe and also for the VP (University Affairs) is having to deal with bad press. Again I’m referring to the Daily. A great deal of time is spent trying to justify and explain and fight a lot of things that are written in the Daily. A great deal of time goes into it, trying to convince people that there is a lot more to continued on page 3