THE INDEPENDeNT STUDENT NEWSPAPER OF THE UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO FACULTY OF LAW
ULTRA VOLUME 12, ISSUE 6
SLS discovers massive surplus
VIRES March 30, 2011
www.ultravires.ca
Remember Law Ball? We kinda do too
Estimates $30-$40K in previously neglected funds By UV Staff
In a stunning development that comes at the tail end of a school year with unprecedented scrutiny on the SLS budget and subsequent club funding, the SLS has discovered a balance termed as “a substantial surplus of cash” that had previously been neglected in the SLS’s annual budgeting. Although the exact amount of the surplus discovered in the sole bank account of the SLS will not be definitively determined until the organization’s income statements are released in May, an initial estimate from an SLS executive member at a recent SLS Affairs meeting suggests that the neglected surplus ranges from $30,000-$40,000. According to SLS co-treasurers Eileen Rhein (3L) and Azim Remani (2L), the surplus may have gone ignored due to a deficiency in past accounting practices. Rhein noted that the SLS acquired accounting software for the first time just two years ago, and prior to that, accounting was done by hand, making it difficult to track what has been done in past years. This difficulty was exacerbated with the many accounts receivable and payable throughout the calendar year - outside of the academic year - making it difficult
Patric Senson (3L) was in awe of the spectacle at Law Ball at Atlantis Ballroom. Check out our Law Ball spread from pages 16-17 for more!
Rankin ascends to SLS presidency UTSU connection ignites debate
CONTINUED on page 9
UV
INDEX Financial aid upDate.........3 water polo recap................5 mooting madness!...........6-7 Prez farewell & hello...8-9 The learned band........10-11 quick #winning.................13 bill graham interview...14 law ball photos...........16-17 law skul reflection....19-21 election excitement!..22-24 dubber tweets....................25 upper year tips....................26 UV Crossword....................29 personal statements........30 poetry....................................31
By Todd Brayer (1L)
The ides of March have now seen the charismatic Aaron Rankin (2L) ride the crest of roaring victory to the triumphant position of SLS president. It was a hard-fought battle as the three other candidates Atrisha Lewis (2L), Dan Bertrand (2L) and Sam Green (2L) made valiant but ultimately fruitless efforts to decisively snatch the reins of power. Such was evident no better than on the March 16 debate, in which the candidates fought tooth and nail to win the hearts and minds of U of T law students. Rankin’s was a platform of moderate reform. He promised to increase SLS transparency and better accommodate student clubs by allowing them to use the SLS office, which often sits empty and locked. Perhaps mindful of the groans relating to certain Thursday Pub Night choices, he was also a proponent of a “people’s choice” system. He also promised to work with the faculty to improve the curriculum. “They have criminal procedure every
year. We need a yearly civil procedure too,” he said. “We need to let the faculty know we want these courses.” The most significant issue in the eletion was the University of Toronto Students’ Union, spurred by an article written by Bertrand, who was acclaimed for a 3L caucus position, in UV last month. All law students are members of the UTSU, whose stated mission is to represent its members to the university, paying almost $300 into their coffers. About $225 of that goes to the medical/dental plan, with the rest going to club funding and UTSU projects. The problem is that while the UTSU spent lavishly on undergraduate OWeek events and undergraduate clubs, law school O-Week and clubs received nothing. “It’s not that they refuse to fund law clubs — they simply created a bureaucratic nightmare,” said Atrisha Lewis. Part of her platform included appointing a student to liaise with the UTSU so that law school clubs are not excluded
next year. The UTSU also uses our student fees to pay for highly politicized projects. In 2009 they paid $1,000 towards the legal bills of a woman arrested for being involved in the Tamil Tigers protest that blocked Gardiner Expressway for five hours. The woman was not a U of T student and she wasn’t representing U of T in protesting. (They also seem to be involved in a campaign to reform copyright law.) UTSU campaigns also may be at cross-purposes with law students. One of their campaigns centres on protesting that undergraduate students are “subsidizing” professional degree programs, including law, implicitly arguing that tuition fees for law students should increase, rather than those for undergraduate students. Since only about 9% of eligible voters voted for the current UTSU president, some students voiced concerns that the UTSU was not representative of the
CONTINUED on page 8