The McGill Daily Vol. 112, Issue 9

Volume 112, Issue 9 | Monday, November 7, 2022 | mcgilldaily.com Astrologically accurate since 1911

The McGill Daily is located on unceded Kanien’kehá:ka territory.

Published by The Daily Publications Society, a student society of McGill University.

2

table of Contents

November 7, 2022 mcgilldaily.com | The McGill Daily

Table of Contents 3

Editorial •

The State of Veterans Affairs

4 • News Court Victory for the Mohawk Mothers •

10• Commentary Xi’s Reelection in China

SSMU Accessibility General Assembly

11 8

Feature •

Evaluating McGill’s performance in the 2022 Sustainable Campus Index

Compendium!

• •

Horoscopes! and answers to last weeks queer crossword Comics!

EDITORIAL

Volume 112 Issue 9

November 7, 2022 mcgilldaily.com | The McGill Daily

3

editorial board

3480 McTavish St, Room 107 Montreal, QC, H3A 0E7 phone 514.398.6790 fax 514.398.8318 mcgilldaily.com

The State of Veterans Affairs

The McGill Daily is located on unceded Kanien’kehá:ka territory. coordinating editor

Anna Zavelsky managing editor

Olivia Shan news editors

Saylor Catlin Emma Bainbridge Zoe Lister Robert Muroni commentary + compendium! editors

Will Barry Meena Thakur culture editor

Yehia Anas Sabaa features editor

Zach Cheung

science + technology editor

Vacant

sports editor

Vacant

video editor

Vacant

photos editor

Genevieve Quinn

illustrations editor

Vacant

copy editor

Catey Fifield design + production editor

Hyeyoon Cho

social media editor

Frida Morales Mora radio editor

Vacant

cover design

Genevieve Quinn contributors Cleo Chuying Cao, Emma Bainbridge, Catey Fifield, Randa Mohamed, Abigail Popple, Mitchell Sullivan le délit

Gabrielle Genest Published by the Daily Publications Society, a student society of McGill University. The views and opinions expressed in the Daily are those of the authors and do not reflect the official policy or position of McGill University.The McGill Daily is not affiliated with McGill University.

T

he Canadian government is ignoring the needs of its veterans. In 2015, Justin Trudeau campaigned on a promise of Real Change for Veterans. “No veteran will be forced to fight their own government for the support and compensation that they have earned,” he declared. Six years later, however, veterans are still fighting for the support they deserve.

Though ready to deploy more Canadians abroad, Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC) fails to provide the emotional, physical, and financial support soldiers need for a smooth return to civilian life. The Liberal government has repeatedly spurned funding on veterans: in 2020, it was reported that the federal government left $105 million earmarked for veterans go unspent.

That money could have been put toward improving the programs and benefits that would ensure veterans get the aid they so desperately need.

For veterans across Canada, this inadequate infrastructure has hindered their ability to access the disability benefits granted to them as part of their service.

Despite promising to reduce wait times for veterans seeking disability claims to 16 weeks, a government report conducted in May found that many veterans ended up waiting almost 40 weeks. The report also found that from April 2020 to September 2021, women had to wait 24 per cent longer than men, while francophones had to wait 21 per cent longer than anglophones.

A lack of access to financial aid is not the only issue.

Canada’s inadequate veterans support systems force veterans to seek out social services on their own. Case managers are government employees who help veterans with “complex needs” by “develop[ing] plans for their successful re-entry into civilian life.” After the ratio of veterans to case managers ballooned to 40:1 under the Conservatives, the Trudeau government pledged to reduce the number of veterans assigned to each case manager to 25. Yet despite returning $105 million to the Canadian government, VAC has inexplicably been unable to hire more case managers to fulfill this promise. VAC has said that the average case manager across Canada has 33 veterans assigned to them. Meanwhile, the union that represents case managers says that this is likely an underestimate; a survey of its members over the summer found that the majority had more than 35 files and that some had over 50. Without a robust support system to ensure their successful re-entry into civilian life, veterans consistently struggle to make that adjustment.

Studies show that veterans with untreated mental health issues like PTSD commonly turn to alcoholism and drug use, causing many veterans to experience homelessness.

They may face challenges such as poverty, lack of affordable housing, job instability, health problems, and family breakdowns. Veterans face added difficulties such as a loss of identity and camaraderie that comes with leaving the military and trying to re-enter civilian life.

Even in cases where support is available for veterans who seek it, a lack of supervision and monitoring allows case managers to abuse their power. On October 24, testimony before the House of Commons revealed that a former case manager had repeatedly pressured a combat veteran to consider Medical Assistance in Dying (MAID) despite repeated refusal from the veteran. “We can do it for you because we’ve done it before,” the case manager allegedly said. Referring to another veteran who received MAID, he added, “we now have supports in place for his wife and two children.” While advocates told MPs that this should “serve as a serious wake up call” during testimony, such a wake up call should have occurred long ago. For years VAC has refused to acknowledge or address the systemic problems within its organization. The Union of Veterans’ Affairs Employees, which represents 2,900 individuals who work in VAC, has written three times to Veterans Affairs Minister Lawrence MacAulay voicing concerns that VAC is generally insufficient in providing access to case managers, lacks checks on when employees can recommend MAID, and is ineffective in processing disability claims. Yet MacAulay ignored the first two letters sent by the union, opting only to respond to the third letter after the aforementioned MAID case broke.

This Remembrance Day, support veteran advocacy groups like the Union of Veterans’ Affairs and the National Council of Veteran Associations in Canada, two groups that look to address the lack of adequate infrastructure within VAC by voicing the concerns of veterans and employees that work with Veterans Affairs.

Get involved with disability advocacy groups such as the Disability Justice Network of Ontario, which opposes coercive MAID practices. Finally, you can support organizations that look to find housing for Canadian veterans, such as Built for Zero Canada, and you can get involved with organizations that look to provide social services to veterans in Quebec, such as Centre CASA.

3480 McTavish St, Room 107 Montreal, QC H3A 0E7 phone 514.398.690 fax 514.398.8318 advertising & general manager

Boris Shedov

sales representative

Letty Matteo

ad layout & design

Mathieu Ménard dps board of directors

Natacha Papieau (Chair), Saylor Catlin, Louis Favreau, Gabrielle Genest, Asa Kohn, Antoine Milette-Gagnon, Boris Shedov, Philippe Shi, Laura Tobon, Anna Zavelsky All contents © 2018 Daily Publications Society. All rights reserved. The content of this newspaper is the responsibility of The McGill Daily and does not necessarily represent the views of McGill University. Products or companies advertised in this newspaper are not necessarily endorsed by Daily staff.

Printed by Imprimerie Transcontinental Transmag. Anjou, Quebec.

ISSN 1192-4608.

Read us online! website Facebook Instagram twitter

www.mcgilldaily.com www.facebook.com/themcgilldaily @mcgilldaily @mcgilldaily

CONTACT US Coordinating NEWS COMMENTARY CULTURE FEATURES SCI+TECH SPORTS

coordinating@mcgilldaily.com news@mcgilldaily.com commentary@mcgilldaily.com culture@mcgilldaily.com features@mcgilldaily.com scitech@mcgilldaily.com sports@mcgilldaily.com

Managing PHOTOs ILLUSTRATIONS DESIGN + PRODUCTION COPY WEB + Social Media MULTIMEDIA

managing@mcgilldaily.com photos@mcgilldaily.com illustrations@mcgilldaily.com design@mcgilldaily.com copy@mcgilldaily.com web@mcgilldaily.com multimedia@mcgilldaily.com

4

News

November 7, 2022 mcgilldaily.com | The McGill Daily

Historic Win for Mohawk Mothers Judge grants interlocutary injunction

Emma Bainbridge | News Multimedia Editor Emma Bainbridge News Multimedia Editor

O

n October 27 and 28, the Mohawk Mothers went to court against numerous defendants, including McGill University and the Société Québécoise des infrastructures (SQI), to demand an interlocutory injunction on McGill’s “New Vic” project. This interlocutory injunction, granted by Justice Gregory Moore, will halt any further excavations on the Royal Victoria Hospital site.

The Mohawk Mothers have requested a delay in the start of the project because they believe that the site contains unmarked graves of Indigenous children brought to the Royal Victoria Hospital for unethical medical experiments, including the MKUltra mind control experiments conducted in the 1960s. Lana Ponting, who was sent to the Allan Memorial Institute in 1958,

testified to seeing experiments performed on Indigenous children and believed that bodies were buried on the grounds.

She added that many survivors of these experiments and their family members support the Mohawk Mothers’ request for a complete investigation of the grounds. Despite telling the Mothers that they would not start work until “information meetings” were completed, McGill’s hired firm, Arkéos, started excavations during the week of October 11.

The goal of the Mohawk Mothers is justice for the wrongs committed against their families and community. “All the different things that were done [to our children], we have a lot of evidence of that,” said Kahentinetha, one of the Mohawk Mothers, in an interview with the Daily . “The main reason why we do this is for them.” She adds that it was not just Indigenous

children experimented on but other groups as well, notably the Duplessis orphans.

The Mothers’ opening statement, delivered by Kahentinetha and Kwetiio, outlined many of the abuses that occurred in the Royal Victoria Hospital, indicating the likelihood of unmarked graves on the site.

They explained that McGill was built on the site of a precolonial Iroquois village, alluding to the possibility of further graves from that era. They don’t trust McGill to conduct a thorough and objective investigation that would respect the remains of their families.

The Mohawk Mothers have been aware of the possibility of graves for years; Kahentinetha told the Daily about her previous attempts to confront McGill about their use of the land, including filing a seizure against them in 2015 to which she received no response.

“I wanted to know why these things are being done on our land.

“All the different things that were done [to our children], we have a lot of evidence of that ... The main reason why we do this is for them.”

- Kahentinetha There are certain things that have to be followed and one of them is that you have to ask for our permission,” she explained. “You [McGill] insist it’s ours, so why are you doing all these things, digging, and tearing this down and that down, and rebuilding all of Montreal?”

Initially, the Mohawk Mothers did not want to go to court to stop the New Vic Project. “As it’s been demonstrated in court, the other means had been exhausted,” said Phillippe Blouin, an anthropologist and interpreter for the Mohawk Mothers who

also researched evidence of graves on the site. According to Blouin, the Mohawk Mothers gave a presentation to the Office de consultation publique de Montréal (OCPM) and reached out to the Minister of Culture and Communications and the City of Montreal to express their concerns about the project.

When all of these avenues failed, they decided to turn to the courts as a last resort.

The lawyer representing McGill argued that it was necessary to “trust McGill” to conduct an archaeological

News

November 7, 2022 mcgilldaily.com | The McGill Daily

The few records provided were written in French, a language that many of the Mohawk Mothers don’t speak; this raised accessibility issues and added the extra costs of using an interpreter. When attending a consultation in Kahnawake, the organizers called the police on two Mohawk Mothers who questioned the claim that the Royal Victoria Hospital site was of no archaeological significance.

a conversation with the plaintiffs with humility and in good faith.”

Student Activism The Mohawk Mothers’ case generated a lot of public interest, evidenced by numerous solidarity actions leading up to the hearing.

When speaking with the Daily , Kahentinetha expressed gratitude to the McGill students who stood with the Mothers.

When the hearing began on October 27, the small courtroom was so packed that people were sitting on the floor, with many others joining virtually through Microsoft Teams. There was also a rally organized outside the Palais de Justice by Divest McGill in support of the Mohawk Mothers.

In the days leading up to the hearing, Divest McGill organized events to raise awareness about the case and its historical context

Emma Bainbridge | News Multimedia Editor investigation.

However, the Mohawk Mothers reported that McGill and the other defendants were uncooperative when arranging to meet with them and hesitant to provide records to help with their investigation.

The few records provided were written in French, a language that many of the Mohawk Mothers don’t speak; this raised accessibility issues and added the extra costs of using an interpreter. When attending a consultation in Kahnawake, the organizers called the police on two Mohawk Mothers who questioned the claim that the Royal Victoria Hospital site was of no archaeological significance.

Although McGill claims to have consulted Indigenous stakeholders, the Mothers argued that it was mainly through band councils, which they describe as a

“ward of the state [that] has been largely imposed on Kahnawake.”

However, in an interview with Kahnawake community newspaper The Eastern Door , Mohawk Council of Kahnawake (MCK) chief Ross Montour said that they are trying to stay out of this conflict. “It shouldn’t be presented out there that we approved the project,” he said.

Judge Moore’s verdict, published on Mohawk Nation News, ruled that the Mohawk Mothers and the defendants must work together to devise an appropriate archaeological plan before any further excavations can take place. These discussions will unfold using the process of the longhouse in accordance with the Great Law of Peace. When asked for comment by the Daily , the McGill Media Relations Office said they would “engage in

for McGill’s student body. “This is especially important because McGill’s strategy … has been to sweep things under the rug,” said Divest McGill organizer Maya Garfinkel in an interview with the Daily . “In order to combat that strategy of erasure, we need to

5

“After this case, anyone who sees their rights being infringed upon can “go to the court on their own, bring [a charge] into the court and use their own rights and their own laws that they use to deal with their situations.”

- Kahentinetha do the opposite, we need to raise awareness and bring people into the fold who may not be aware of what’s happening otherwise.”

“I was struck by the mentions of student activism and student voices, even within the courtroom,” said Garfinkel. “The Mohawk Mothers were able to leverage the fact that many students had spoken out against the issue … making it clear that although McGill argues that New Vic excavation was for the good of the public interest, in actuality, there are many in McGill’s public, including in the student body, who oppose the way the project has been moving forward.”

Setting a precedent Several elements of this case carry broader implications for the Canadian legal system itself. First of all, the Mothers refused to use a lawyer. “We won’t ever, ever let anyone represent us but ourselves,” said Kahentinetha, adding that in the longhouse, there are no lawyers and everyone is allowed to speak for themselves. She said that after this case, anyone who sees their rights being infringed upon can “go to the court on their own, bring [a charge] into the court and use their own rights and their own laws that they use to deal with their situations.”

The case also brought attention to the limits of the legal system when dealing with unmarked graves. Julian Falconer, the lawyer for special interlocutor

Kimberly Murray, repeatedly emphasized these limitations during his statement, arguing that colonial courts are not designed to resolve these kinds of issues. Murray has recently been appointed Independent Special Interlocutor for Missing Children and Unmarked Graves, tasked with creating a new legal framework for dealing with unmarked graves. In an interview with CBC, she said that this would be a very significant case for the whole country, as the decision “expresses the importance of taking the time of talking to each other … so that we don’t continue to have these disputes moving forward.”

“Divest McGill is extremely proud to stand in solidarity with the Mohawk Mothers after this tremendous win that we witnessed,” said Garfinkel. “The importance of this win cannot be understated. Of course, it is only a first step, this is not the end of this story, nor did anyone expect it to be.”

Additionally, Garfinkel pointed out how the Mohawk Mothers’ case is linked to Divest McGill’s fight for climate justice. “In order to achieve true climate justice, there must be Indigenous sovereignty and decolonization alongside it,” they explained. “In fact, those processes are integral to one another.”

Kahentinetha agreed. “Everybody will eventually one day understand that it’ll be good for everybody. It’s the Great Peace, and it’s meant for the whole world, not just meant for us.”

“The Mohawk Mothers were able to leverage the fact that many students had spoken out against the issue … making it clear that although McGill argues that New Vic excavation was for the good of the public interest, in actuality, there are many in McGill’s public, including in the student body, who oppose the way the project has been moving forward.”

-Maya Garfinkel

6

news

November 7, 2022 mcgilldaily.com | The McGill Daily

SSMU Holds Accessibility Town Hall

Panelists and organizers share their experiences with student journalists

Frida Sofia Morales Mora | Social Media Editor Abigail Popple Staff Writer

T

he SSMU Ballroom sat almost completely empty on the evening of October 25, the date on which SSMU’s Accessibility Town Hall was scheduled to be held. A Reddit post promoting the event made by one of the event’s organizers, Fanta Ly, suggested student interest in the event – the post garnered 96 upvotes and received several comments about students’ negative experiences trying to access health care and accommodations at McGill.

However, boxes of pizza ordered for attendees went untouched and round tables remained unoccupied throughout the evening. As journalists from the Daily, The McGill Tribune, and Le Délit were its only attendees, the event essentially became an impromptu press conference rather than a Town Hall with group discussions and on-stage speakers.

Nonetheless, panelists and organizers had a productive conversation over the course of ninety minutes. “Maybe this town hall has taught us that students feel more comfortable communicating online in terms of what they want to see in terms of the advocacy from their representatives, and that’s okay,” remarked Sal Cuthbertson,

SSMU’s accessibility coordinator.

Ly added that the surveys conducted by SSMU have received “quite a few responses,” which will help advocates understand how to address students’ needs.

While the aforementioned Reddit post highlighted issues with the Wellness Hub and Student Accessibility and Achievement (SAA), formerly

While the aforementioned Reddit post highlighted issues with Student Accessibility & Achievement (SAA), speakers explained that accessibility issues include the obstacles which students face when reporting harassment and discrimination.

known as the Office for Students with Disabilities, speakers explained that accessibility issues include the obstacles which students face when reporting harassment and discrimination.

Ly, who is the Policy and Mobilization Researcher for the VP External portfolio, said that her introduction to accessibility advocacy came by way of research into McGill’s harassment, discrimination, and sexual violence policies.

Clara McGaughey, who is employed as a senior advocate at the Legal Information Clinic at McGill (LICM), also spoke about these policies.

The Student Advocacy Branch of the LICM helps students understand McGill’s policies and navigate conflicts within the university. “In terms of accessibility issues, that usually looks like us attending meetings

with SAA, or filing grievances on behalf of students whose rights have been violated,” she explained. She added that the LICM can help students file “discrimination reports, harassment reports, [and] any kind of violence reports” as well as accompany students to the ensuing meetings with administrators or faculty. The LICM can also assist in informal dispute resolution by speaking with the Dean of Students or the ombudsperson so that a student does not have to file a formal complaint.

After McGaughey explained her work at the LICM, VP University Affairs Kerry Yang made an appearance to discuss two accessibility-related projects he and Mental Health Commissioner Maya WillardStepan have been working on.

As of yet, McGill does not have a service animal policy, although

news service animals are permitted; Yang previously discussed his efforts to establish such a policy at the Fall Consultative Forum, and he elaborated on this during

November 7, 2022 mcgilldaily.com | The McGill Daily establish a policy comparable to those at Concordia and Western University – so far, he and Willard-Stepan have had preliminary conversations with

[A]lthough McGill could choose to provide accommodations without medical documentation, the university is leaving those decisions up to individual instructors – whether a student gets accomodation comes down to how sympathetic their instructor is. the town hall. “Compared to other Canadian provinces, [Quebec is] like decades behind [...] And as a result, McGill follows exactly,” he said in explaining the province’s strict definition of what counts as a service animal. Yang said that he is advocating for McGill to broaden its definition of service animals and adopt a service animal policy which allows psychiatric service animals. The second of Yang ’s accessibility projects is to improve shortterm accommodations.

Currently, students must ask their professors for short-term accommodations – for example, a last-minute extension or unexpectedly deferring an exam – which produces widely varying results from professor to professor. Yang is seeking to

a few administrators, and are hoping to present the policy to the Senate as soon as possible, Yang said.

Rine Vieth, a graduate student who has been advocating for improved mental health and disability accommodations since 2019, added that although McGill could choose to provide accommodations without medical documentation, the university is leaving those decisions up to individual instructors – whether a student gets accommodations comes down to how sympathetic their instructor is. They also recounted their work as the Mobilization Officer of the Association of Graduate Students Employed at McGill (AGSEM), which included advocating against imposing punitive measures on students experiencing a mental

health crisis. For example, AGSEM unanimously passed a motion discouraging members from using the Early Alert System (EAS) – a mechanism on myCourses that instructors can use to “express concern for a student experiencing difficulty,” per the Office of the Dean of Students. According to Vieth, the committee in the Office that oversees the EAS involved the SPVM. Rather than involve the police, AGSEM chose to recommend directing students toward mental health services provided on campus and in Montreal. That same year, Vieth also advocated against the drafted Policy on Involuntary Leave, which would have prohibited students who posed a threat to themselves or others from accessing university services with the aim of pushing them to “get support external to McGill.”

Speakers also shared their experiences sitting on various committees in the university and working at the Wellness Hub and Peer Support Centre.

Combatting burnout is a difficult part of advocacy work: “Something I’ve noticed is that a lot of disabled people also get very used to accepting less than what they’re actually entitled to [...] it feels like if you only have so much energy, it’s better to use it in other ways than to use it to try and improve,” said Zeke Bertrand, one of the External Affairs Commissioners.

Cuthbertson added that working on McGill’s Accessibility Strategy has been a “slow and inefficient” process, and

that communication between administration and students has been far from perfect. Although Cuthbertson has been working as the Accessibility Coordinator at SSMU for about a year and a half now – longer than McGill’s own accessibility advisor – they weren’t contacted about the Accessibility Strategy until recently. “It wasn’t until four months ago that I was mandatory to consult [as] a student representative for their EDI initiatives [...] it was only then that I actually found out that this Accessibility Working Group was even being put together and an advisor had been appointed.”

They continued to explain that while McGill organized a public relations campaign to tout the Accessibility Advisor, the university neglected to establish an infrastructure through which the advisor could connect with “the current accessibility

“Something I’ve noticed is that a lot of disabled people also get very used to accepting less than what they’re actually entitled to.”

- Zeke Bertrand

Sara Hashemi | Illustrations Contributor

7

framework that existed at McGill, and [which] existed from advocacy initiatives by student representatives.”

Ly had a similar experience in her work. “I think with a lot of the Black Student Associations that I was involved with, it’s kind of like, ‘Okay, we never expect McGill to take the lead on anything, so we’ll do it ourselves,’” she said while detailing her experience in advocating for improved mental health support for racialized students. Ly said that in 2020 she and other student advocates were told they would receive funding for a Black student wellness initiative that would fund therapy sessions for students who experienced trauma. However, Executive Director of Student Services Martine Gauthier expressed opposition to the initiative and directed students to use telehealth services instead, per Ly. Later, Vieth remarked, “Black students need support, and to me, everyone wins if Black students get more support, right? [...] I feel like getting more students involved and making sure there isn’t just one type of student representative is so, so important.” Ly added that while her experience working as a consult for the Black Student Wellness Plan was one of the best she’s had, the implementation of the plan was disappointing. “They can say they did that consultation, right? It’s in their report, but nothing follows through.”

Another factor which may hinder the efficacy of McGill’s EDI plan is the limited extent to which various positions within McGill’s massive bureaucracy can advocate for students. For example, the Black Student Affairs Liaison and the Office for Mediation and Resolution report to the Provost’s Office, Ly said.

So, if a student raises a concern to the Black Student Affairs Liaison about the provost’s response to a harassment and discrimination report, that puts the Liaison in a tricky spot: “Is he going to call out his boss and be like, ‘Oh, you didn’t do this investigation properly?’” she asked.

Despite the notorious inaccessibility of the Wellness Hub and difficulty of accessing academic accommodations at McGill, advocates in the VP External portfolio and elsewhere are continuing to push for a more accessible university. For students who would like to get involved, the VP University Affairs and VP External can be contacted at ua@ssmu.ca and external@ssmu. ca, respectively; a list of SSMU advocacy committees with open positions can be found at https:// www.mcgill.ca/engage/campusadvocacy/ssmu-advocacy .

8

features

November 7, 2022 mcgilldaily.com | The McGill Daily

The Proof Is In The Points Evaluating McGill’s performance in the 2022 Sustainable Campus Index

Genevieve Quinn | Photo Editor Catey Fifield Copy Editor If you were reading The McGill Reporter in September, you might have come across an article titled “McGill ranks high in Sustainable Campus Index.” If you were surprised by the title of that article, you were not alone.

As the research and activism conducted by Divest McGill has revealed, McGill doesn’t exactly have the best track record when it comes to sustainable investment.

According to Divest estimates, 5.4 per cent of the university’s direct equity and fixed-income investments in corporate entities – an amount totalling $65,702,440.37 CAD as of November 30, 2021 – is invested in oil and gas. The universityorganized Committee to Advise on Matters of Social Responsibility (CAMSR), meanwhile, has stated that “the beneficial impact of fossil fuel companies offsets or outweighs injurious impact.”

Given our university’s

reluctance to divest from fossil fuel companies, it struck me as odd that it would score highly in any test of sustainability. I decided to do some digging. I read through the reports of the Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education (AASHE), the organization that publishes the Sustainable Campus Index.

Sure enough, I found that the data on which McGill’s sustainability scores are based is misleading

advancing sustainability, issued a call for AASHE to develop a campus sustainability rating system. Following an “extensive stakeholder engagement process,” AASHE introduced Sustainability Tracking, About the Sustainable the Assessment & Rating System Campus Index In 2006, the Higher Education (STARS). STARS was designed Associations Sustainability to provide a framework for Consortium (HEASC), a understanding sustainability in network of higher education all sectors of higher education, to associations committed to enable meaningful comparisons within and between postsecondary institutions using a common set of measurements, and to create incentives for improvement in sustainability. It evaluates the performance of postsecondary institutions across the globe in 17 sustainability impact areas, including Air & Climate, Energy, Investment & Finance, Research, and Waste. These impact areas are not weighted evenly, and each may not apply to every institution. For instance, while a school may earn up to 40.00 out of a possible 100.00 points if it has a Curriculum – and, in some cases, incorrect.

They paint a false picture of a sustainable campus, and they obscure the need for progress in important areas.

The data on which McGill’s sustainability scores are based is misleading – and, in some cases, incorrect. They paint a false picture of a sustainable campus, and they obscure the need for progress in important areas.

that promotes sustainability, it can earn only 6.00 points for sustainable Water practices.

Depending on the number of points an institution earns in each category, it may be awarded a STARS Bronze (minimum 25 points), Silver (minimum 45 points), Gold (minimum 65 points), or Platinum (minimum 85 points) seal or be recognized as a STARS Reporter.

The information collected and published by AASHE is entirely self-reported. It is up to colleges, universities, and other postsecondary institutions themselves to measure their sustainability efforts and submit – or not submit – supporting documentation to AASHE. Without a third party to corroborate the information it provides, there is ample room for the desiring institution to misreport its numbers and misrepresent its progress. While AASHE provides incentives for institutions to have their data internally reviewed or externally audited, this is only optional.

features McGill’s 2022 Performance The 2022 Sustainable Campus Index relies on the most recent valid report of each participating institution, with reports valid for three years after review. McGill’s

The information collected and published by AASHE is entirely self-reported [...] Without a third party to corroborate the information it provides, there is ample room for the desiring institution to misreport its numbers and misrepresent its progress. last report was submitted in December 2020 and will be valid through February 2024. It was compiled by Karen Oberer of McGill’s Office of Sustainability and audited by Cassandra Lamontagne of Concordia University’s Office of Sustainability.

Competing against more than 900 institutions from 40 countries in 2022, McGill ranked within the top ten for three categories: it ranked fourth in Purchasing, tied for fourth in Grounds, and tied for tenth in Transportation. Based on its December 2020 report, McGill was awarded a score of 76.69 points and a Gold seal. By comparison, Concordia scored 72.00 points, the Université de Montréal scored 54.78 points, and the Université du Québec à Montréal scored 45.28 points. Only twelve schools, including one with an expired rating, have a Platinum seal; two of these, Thompson Rivers University and Université de Sherbrooke, are in Canada.

In what follows, I break down McGill’s performance in the Purchasing, Grounds, and Transportation categories with the aim of discovering what each point means and what each point can reveal – or not reveal – about McGill’s sustainability efforts. I also comment on our university’s performance in the Diversity & Affordability

November 7, 2022 mcgilldaily.com | The McGill Daily category and highlight areas in only case of discrepancy between which McGill needs to see the the numbers Oberer provides and her explanation of those numbers. most improvement.

In the Transportation category, Purchasing, Grounds, and McGill receives 4.57/5.00 points for its Commute Modal Split.

Transportation Under Purchasing, a category Here, McGill can take credit for worth 6.00 points overall, McGill the fact that 94 per cent of its awards itself complete or near- students and 80 per cent of its complete marks for Sustainable employees use “more sustainable Procurement (3.00/3.00), commuting options as their Electronics Purchasing primary mode of transportation.”

(0.96/1.00), and Office Paper Due to McGill’s prime downtown Purchasing (1.00/1.00). It doesn’t location, however, most members fare as well in the Cleaning of the McGill community can and Janitorial Purchasing live within walking distance of subcategory, earning 0.67 out of the university or within easy a possible 1.00 point; this is on access of public transport. It is account of the fact that it spends no coincidence that nine of the only two-thirds of its cleaning other ten schools joining McGill and janitorial products budget in the 2022 Index’s top ten list for on “products that are third party Transportation are also located certified to meet recognized in major cities, with three other sustainability standards.” I note schools located in Montreal. This that many of the points awarded is not a measure of effort but a in this category are for sustainable measure of advantage.

McGill’s high Commute Modal purchasing guidelines rather than proof of sustainable purchasing. Split score compensates for a Oberer provides ample evidence staggeringly low Campus Fleet of such guidelines, but AASHE’s score: 0.06/1.00. In 2019, the requests for documentation to most recent year for which data support the financial figures she are available, McGill maintained provides are often declined, the a campus fleet of 142 vehicles, relevant boxes filled not with of which 84 were gasoline-only, 49 were diesel-only, and just links but “---.”

There’s some suspicious eight were fully electric. This is a activity going on under Grounds, measure of effort, and six per cent for which McGill receives is not nearly enough.

2.00/2.00 points for Landscape Diversity & Affordability Management and 2.00/2.00 The Sustainable Campus points for Biodiversity, too. For one thing, Oberer reports that the Index considers not only the sustainability total area of the McGill campus environmental measures 1,723.96 hectares, efforts of institutions but their but the total area of “managed social sustainability efforts, too. grounds” on which she reports The Diversity & Affordability measures just 37.35 hectares. category, for instance, evaluates While most of the area not institutions’ equity and diversity included in Oberer’s report is part strategies, the support they of natural reserves – the Gault Estate covers 1,000 hectares, the Molson Nature Reserve 51 hectares, and the Morgan Arboretum 245 hectares – I’m concerned as to why she didn’t include data on the 110 hectares of “[e]xperimental agricultural land on Mac Campus.” How is this land being managed, and what kinds of “experiments” are being conducted on it?

Further, Oberer reports that all 37.35 hectares of McGill’s “managed grounds” are managed organically, “without the use of inorganic fertilizers and chemical pesticides, fungicides and herbicides,” and that none of this same land is managed “in accordance with an Integrated Pest Management (IPM) program that uses selected chemicals only when needed.” In a later description of McGill’s land management program, however, Oberer admits that “[c]hemical rodenticide bait boxes are used outdoors around buildings when necessary as per the IPM plan.”

This, as we shall see, is not the

In 2019 [...]

McGill maintained a campus fleet of 142 vehicles, of which 84 were gasoline-only, 49 were dieselonly, and just eight were fully electric. This is a measure of effort, and six per cent is not nearly enough.

provide for underrepresented and marginalized groups, and the extent to which they make education accessible and affordable for all. Diversity is a hot-button issue at McGill, as at other universities, and given the controversy surrounding the lack of Black and Indigenous faculty at McGill, I was interested in hearing what Oberer had to say about equity and diversity.

To no surprise, McGill awards itself full marks for Diversity and Equity Coordination, but in at least one area, these marks are based on misleading data.

Oberer reports that all students, academic staff, and nonacademic staff have completed training in “cultural competence, anti-oppression, anti-racism, and/or social inclusion trainings and activities.” This is only half true. While it is mandatory for all students, academic staff, and non-academic staff to complete the “It Takes All of Us” education program – and it is to this program that Oberer points when asked for a description of McGill’s “trainings and activities” – that program addresses only the issue of sexual violence. The other programs Oberer highlights are: Equity in the Academic Search Process, a mandatory two-hour training session for members of academic search committees; various programs organized by McGill’s Equity Education Advisors, including the SKILLS21 workshop series; and the Indigenous Education Program, an initiative of the First Peoples’ House. These programs are not all mandatory, they are not all widely known, and they certainly do not cover all aspects of “cultural competence, antioppression, anti-racism, and/or social inclusion.” I do not mean to suggest that McGill should institute mandatory training in these areas – the effectiveness of It Takes All of Us is up for debate – but for McGill to suggest that all of its students, academic staff, and non-academic staff have been adequately trained in them is far from the truth.

McGill Misses The Mark What that McGill Reporter article from September doesn’t tell you is that, as impressive as McGill’s performance in Purchasing, Grounds, and Transportation might appear, these are not the most heavily weighted categories in the Sustainable Campus Index.

This means that they are not – at least according to AASHE – the most important markers of an institution’s sustainability efforts. McGill is missing more than ten points in the Curriculum category, worth 40.00 points. It

9

achieves just 0.11/8.00 points for Buildings, 3.40/10.00 points for Energy, and 2.98/8.00 points for Food & Dining. Instead of congratulating McGill for its easy As in Purchasing, Grounds, and Transportation, we should be protesting its poor Building Operations and Maintenance (0.00/5.00) and demanding more Clean and Renewable Energy (0.00/4.00).

Going Forward When it comes to painting an accurate picture of McGill’s sustainability practices, there is only so much proof these STARS points can provide. What they reveal beyond a doubt, however, is that our university cares about its reputation – about what it means for a school to look sustainable regardless of whether that school can be sustainable. McGill aims to achieve a Platinum seal by 2030, but if it does succeed in making the jump from 76.69 points to 85 or more points in the next eight years, we will have to ask ourselves how much of

We must continue to push McGill to make good on its promises [...]

Push it to close the gap between appearance and reality. this increase came from effort and how much of it came from advantage.

None of this is to suggest that McGill is not making real progress toward a more sustainable campus and a more sustainable future. Its STARS score is impressive, and its Climate & Sustainability Strategy is extensive, thoughtful, and achievable. My intention is only to remind any who might be impressed by McGill’s high scores, ranks, and ratings that our university has more to gain from the appearance of sustainability (or any other marker of success) than sustainability (or any other marker of success) itself. We must continue to push McGill to make good on its promises.

Push it to turn away from scores, ranks, and ratings and toward its student body. Push it to close the gap between appearance and reality.

10

commentary

November 7, 2022 mcgilldaily.com | The McGill Daily

Xi’s Reelection and the Political Voice of Chinese Candians The importance of open channels for political discourse

Genevieve Quinn | Photo Editor Cleo Chuying Cao Commentary Contributor

O

n October 23, waves of protest erupted from Western leaders when Beijing announced the re-election of Xi Jinping as the President of the People’s Republic of China. In mainland China, the statement of Xi’s cementing his grasp on power until 2027 was mostly welcomed with open arms.

Even amid growing discontent with strict COVID-19 policies, Chinese social media such as Weibo and WeChat have been flooded with congratulatory messages and praises for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) ruler. Whether those were propaganda bots or enthusiastic netizens, the political system seems to remain credible to the population at large. In contrast, the Chinese overseas population has stayed eerily silent. Most conversations about the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) were whispered privately, with the news of Xi’s third term arousing neither public approval nor dissent amongst the ChineseCanadian community. This selfcensorship from overseas reflects an unwillingness to be associated with the draconian policies of the CCP, but as tensions with China and antiAsian hate rise, it is crucial to bridge

the gap in understanding to raise Asian American voices in the West.

Many first-generation immigrants of the past 20 years left China amid a period of extraordinary economic growth. They perceive the centralized power of the CCP as the unequivocal drive behind China’s rise as a major world superpower. Those who received an education in China acknowledge the social contract between the government and the people; in a “country-first” mentality, personal freedoms and individuality were sacrificed for economic prosperity.

Further, as most first-generation immigrants and recent arrivals are fluent in Chinese, they receive their news from Chinese state-run newspapers or social media. China’s government-controlled media is often obsequious in the portrayal of its leadership during pivotal moments. Meanwhile, the children of those same immigrants have been brought up in a completely different institutionalized learning environment. The emphasis on the West’s definition of democracy and populism is irreconcilable with the CCP’s doctrine. Younger generations who have not spent significant time in China gain insights into Chinese society, its norms, values, and traditions through the lens

of Western media. Nonetheless, Western media can also be highly biased, with some failing to recognize their double standards and hypocrisy concerning human rights and democracy.

First-generation immigrants may view Xi’s re-election as a stabilizing reinforcement of the Chinese market dominance on the world stage, whereas second-generation immigrants are more concerned with the CCP’s authoritarian abuse.

Ultimately, many parents encounter intergenerational acculturation differences with their children.

They face a communication barrier and lack a common language to share facts and opinions. The divide is also clear between international students from China and local students of Chinese descent. Those who were educated or have spent significant time in mainland China might closely correlate their ethnic identity with patriotism while those who grew up abroad can retain a strong heritage identity without apparent loyalty to the government. The two groups are highly segregated within their social circles, creating an ideological echo chamber. Moreover, both circles are mutually afraid of sharing their views for fear of being stigmatized by one another.

Regardless of political affiliation, the two groups can see eye to eye when it comes to the mistreatment of Asians in Canada. Asian-Canadians have long been an underrepresented group in the economic and political sphere. With the onset of COVID-19, negative sentiments about Asians have surged by over 700 per cent.

Asians in North America have been plagued with degrading stereotypes such as “easy” or “model minority” who never voice their opinions. The history of Asian Americans and Asian Canadians as the model minority dates to the 1960s, when newspapers often glorified them as “complacent law-abiding citizens who never complained.” Asian Americans were often used against other races in the

United States’ political agenda of leading a racialized democratic free world. With multiple accusations of land gentrification, perpetuating the housing crisis, and corporate espionage, the continuing tensions between North America and China are inadvertently fostering ethnic divisions.

The debate surrounding Xi’s reelection may appear dichotomous, with a clear line separating advocates and critics. However, digging deeper into the issue shows a variety of beliefs shaped by education, family ties, language proficiency, travels, cultural relations, and so much more. When overseas Chinese stay silent on the political and social reality of China, there is no platform to nurture different points of view.

Whether or not an individual supports Xi’s re-election, there are many advantages to building your own critical and nuanced perspective on the subject. Critical thinking can help limit the spread of misinformation and decrease instances of racial discrimination.

The community must foster a culture of tolerance, the mutual sharing of knowledge, and an open channel for political discourse. We must navigate our ideological divide and support the broader Asian community in Canada. As students, we can raise awareness by joining or volunteering with political and civil organizations. We can publish in local Chinese or English newspapers that our parents or grandparents read. We can promote Anti-Asian hate platforms such as the Chinese Canadian National Council for Social Justice or mental wellbeing networks such as the Asian Mental Health Collective. It is time for us to become a driving force to actively shape our society the way we envision it. And only through better communication can we raise the Chinese voice in North America.

The emphasis on the West’s definition of democracy and populism is irreconcilable with the CCP’s doctrine. Younger generations who have not spent significant time in China gain insights into Chinese society, its norms, values, and traditions through the lens of Western media.

November 7, 2022 mcgilldaily.com | The McGill Daily

compendium!

“Open House”

Mitchell Sullivan | Compendium Contributor

Randa Mohamed | Staff Cartoonist

11

November 7, 2022 mcgilldaily.com | The McGill Daily

compendium!

12

HOROSCOPES Aries

Taurus

Gemini

(Mar 21 Apr 19)

(Apr 20 May 20)

(May 21 Jun 20)

your emotions are like Diana Ross 1980’ hit: upside down.

Cancer (Jun 21 Jul 22) everything hangs in the balance of this week. if you don’t discover a good pair of winter boots on sale it may be too late.

mercury-neptune trine has you feeling creative. submit to a campus journal or just write a poem on the bathroom stall.

Leo (Jul 23 Aug 22) sun-mercury conjunct has you at last understanding microsoft suite software. maybe even importing calendar events from outlook.

mercury-saturn square is bringout out all the little annoyances in your life, try a larger sized shoe. your life might be better.

Virgo (Aug 23 Sept 22) nothing interesting is going on in your life. try something crazy.

Libra

Scorpio

Sagittarius

(Sept 23 Oct 22)

(Oct 23 Nov 21)

(Nov 22 Dec 21)

mars retrograde will slow you down. run a bath and languish for a bit.

Capricorn (Dec 22 Jan 19) people are jealous of your drive. they don’t see how exhausted you really are.

you are at the peak of your powers. embrace it ...

Aquarius (Jan 20 Feb 18) you are intensely in tune with the present moment.

you are getting in touch with how love positions itself in your life. you may not like what you discover.

Pisces (Feb 19 Mar 20) venus-neptune trine will save a relationship that is hanging on by a thread,

crossword answers! down: 2. robert 3. nas 5. rainbow 6. soup 8. actup 11. uhaul 13. alan 14. camp 15. tinkywinky 16. gayicon 18. ethel 19. itoo 21. prosecco 22. bea 23. glaad 24. women 26. mother 27. audre lorde 28. lavender 31. fierte 32. euphoria 33. sophie 35. purple 37. paris 40. gay across: 1. art 3. nyc 4. frida 6. sun 7.sfo 9. elliot 10. aclu 12. jazz 16. giovanni 17. pieta 19. inn 20. pink 23. grindr 25. orlando 26. mado 27. alexanderthegreat 29. ymca 30. fierce 34. cutsleeve 35. pussy 36. dutcher 38. ernie 39. lword 41. sappho 42. slay