T uesday, January 19 1988
Published by the Student's Society o f M cG ill U niversity
Screening bashed by bigots
FAEs Contravene McGill's Research Regulations by David Schulze Controversial research contracts to develop fuel-air explosives (FAEs), signed by McGill University on behalf of two Mechanical Engineering pro fessors with the Department of Na tional D efence (DN D ) violate McGill’s own Regulations on Re search Policy. Copies of the contracts were recently released under the fed eral Access to Information law. At least two of the four research contracts undertaken by Professors J. H. Lee and R. Knystautas allow the DND to censor publication of research results. If the DND decides that a “manu script, abstract, or other proposed re lease” by Prof’s Knystautas and Lee contains “any design, technical infor mation, invention, method or process” conceived or developed as part of the research contracts, the DND has “the right to require the Contractor (McGill University Office of Industrial Re search) to redraft the relevant sections of the...proposed publication by
deleting...classified or proprietary ma terial prior to its release.” However, regulations on research policy approved by McGill in 1986 do not permit restrictions which “prevent the eventual use of the research under taken by students or staff members for theses or publications”, as the DND does. This is part of McGill’s policy of forbidding secret research on Univer sity premises or using its facilities, whether sponsored by civilian or mili tary agencies. The regulations do per mit delays in publication of up to two years in exceptional cases (such as when patents are pending) but the DND restriction on publication appears to be unlimited. McGill’s Office of Industrial Re search acts as the contractor for re search projects on campus and ap proved at least two studies into FAEs for which the contracts restrict publica tion of results. The first in July 1984 was entitled “Investigations of Transi tion to Detonation and Catalytic Initia-
continued p.4
V olum e 7, Issue 15
Two deadly assassins prepare for the week's hunt, kicking off
Winter Mission '88 - this year's Winter Carnival. See related stories, page 8 and 11.
by Ian Harrold A screening of Gay and Lesbian ex perimental films was disrupted last Friday after three unidentified men began shouting obscenities and offend ing some members of the audience in a packed Frank Dawson Adams Audito rium. The screening of five films was part of the McGill Film Society’s (MFS) regular schedule and was done in con junction with Gays and Lesbians of McGill (G ALOM). There were no seri ous injuries but several people were roughed up and doused by one of the men, who wielded a beer-filled electric water gun. “They came in and started [disrupt ing the screening] right away,” said one person who sat near the three, who were obviously intoxicated. Another spectator, who declined to be identi fied, said the men shouted “great cocks,” “ faggots,” and “I’ll fuck you up the ass” during the screening of a gay male film. Several film patrons jeered the trio with chants of “get out!”
continued p.3
Senate Discusses Course Outlines and Residence by Jennifer Mori The Charter of Student Rights now guarantees that students will receive course outlines within the first week of lectures as Senate voted last Wednes day to approve the changes to the Charter. Professors are required to dis tribute handouts inlcuding office hours, course content, details of evalu ation, and a list of required materials to, “enable students to make informed decisions about course selection,” stated Vice-Principal (Academic) Sam Freedman. The course outline policy, originally confined to the Faculty of Arts, is to be standard for both graduate
and undergraduate courses. Senate voted to maintain residence returning student ratios at 1987-88 levels (20% per hall; 25% overall) despite approving a 5% overall reduc tion for 1988-89 last spring. The policy was adopted because of the high num ber of well qualified applicants being refused residence admissions. “Stu dents would go to other universities because they were guaranteed a place in residence,” said Freedman. Engineering Senator Phillipe Beaumier commented on the lack of role model upper year students in resi dence and about the student comprised
hall re-admission committees which made residence re-admission a “popu larity contest.” Dean of Students Irwin Gopnik hastened to reassure Beaumier that returning students’ applications were also scrutinized by an academic committee with access to student rec ords and that each residence director had veto power over re-admission. McGill’s Faculty of Engineering will phase out its present mining engi neering program to offer a joint co operative degree with Ecole Polytech nique. Students will alternate work periods with classes from both univer sities in the course of their four year
120 credit degree. Test classes are already being implemented and “feed back from students is good,” reports Freedman. Professor S.J. Noumoff expressed concern about the effects of provincial government pressure to rationalize low enrollment programs in Québec uni versities. “Has there been any discus sion of the impact of this program, of the long term consequences for the university?” he asked. Freedman replied that the program had been entirely instigated by the en gineering deans of both universities and claimed that he, “was not aware in
seven years of pressure to rationalize programs we don’t want to rational ize.” Senate voted to lengthen the Uni versity cyclical review cycle to seven years as opposed to the five year cycle that has been in effect since 1982. Cyclical reviews involve evaluation of courses, teaching, and administration by a committee containing students and faculty external to the academic unit involved. Under the new cyclical review guidelines passed by Senate faculties will have to plan their reviews five
continued p.3
Grad Students want out of StudSoc by Chris Flanagan “We want out,now !W edon’twant to negotiate!” So said Lee Iverson, Graduate Rep. to Council, in the middle of Council’s three hour debate on PGSS’s (PostGraduate Students’ Society) proposal to secceed from StudSoc. In order for PGSS to constitutionally separate from StudSoc, they must achieve a twothirds majority vote from Students’ Council and then win a student-wide referendum on the question. PGSS came very close to convincing StudSoc to let them go last Tuesday night but fell short, capturing 55 per cent of the vote.
96% voted "yes" Although PGSS held an internal referendum last February which indi cated that 96 per cent of grad students want independence, StudSoc’s main argument is that grad students don’t really want out. “We want documenta tion, proving that this is what they want, not this flawed referendum,” demanded Students’ Society VP Fi nance Don Samoil. Samoil pointed out
that there was no “NO” committee for the referendum, nor was there any explanation of what grad students pres ently get out of StudSoc. “This motion (to secede) repre sents a real consensus as far as we can tell amongst all grad students,” stated
Iverson. StudSoc VP External Chris Alexander also feels that it is illogical for grad students to want out of StudSoc: “If graduate students under stood the ramifications of this issue more clearly, they would choose to stay.” continued p.4
Imminent but Messy Divorce by Angela Chapman The Students’ and Post-Graduate Students’ Societies marked the new year with continued wrangling over the issue of secession. The Post Graduate Students’ Soci ety (PGSS), whose membership voted to secede from StudSoc last March, proposed to StudSoc amendments that would delete all references to graduate students from their constitution. These changes would require a campus-wide referendum. The proposal was, how ever, rejected by Council. The following evening StudSoc’s Chris Alexander (VP External) at tempted to persuade PGSS to recon sider secession. “I don’t think this
issue has been taken to its logical con clusion,” explained Alexander. He praised the unique character of McGill’s “two-tiered system of Socie ties” which prevented “splitting the student voice” and argued that McGill’s graduate students receive, as part of SSMU, “the best services that any student receives in Canada.” PGSS, however, feels that the bill for these services is excessive. André Couture, PGSS President, believes the payment “would be greatly reduced” if a “cost-benefit analysis” were con ducted. In order to bargain for a better price tag, Couture favoured “secession before negotiation.” “It would be quite
continued p.4