That’s the problem with Anarchists…It’s really hard to set up a meeting…
The past few years has been a really exciting time to be involved with the DSU no matter how you slice it. After last year’s students vs students, NSPIRG levy fiasco which usurped the attention of AGM goers, the DSU has probably had more attention than it has in a long time, both negative and positive.
Now the new topic du jour “Secret Contracts” has potential do the same. We’re one post into punditry and already it’s a hotter topic than who’s rumored to be running in the election. This is both a positive and negative thing. Positive in the sense that the drama starved Dalhousie student population is sure to show up in droves to the next AGM in order to be part of the chair challenging, vote counting, McInnes room action. (I hope the executive orders enough pizza.)It’s positive in the sense that these topics circulating around campus are certainly decreasing student apathy.
It’s negative in several other ways. Negative in the sense that if we go through another AGM (or two) without making other necessary constitutional amendments or without discussing other student issues and spend the whole time debating a single issue then I am sincerely worried about the future of the DSU. Productivity at these meetings is important. I’d say no single issue is more important than any other. For all I know there could be a multitude of other issues students feel strongly about but we may not hear them because of people on campus and grabbing on to the latest hot topic in an attempt to be radical. Not saying the issues here aren’t important but I also feel the real issues are being overlooked in favor of “Secret Contracts” for dramatic effect.
The real issue by the way is NOT exclusivity in the contracts. I actually think the real issues are diversity of student representation, communication and affordability and quality SUB food services. From what I gathered from the students who wrote me back after I replied to every single email I received about “Secret Contracts” last semester; communication is an issue in the sense that the services offered at the SUB are not what students want and the council and exec who have access to contracts and the ability to vote on them need to know how to represent this. Diversity of student representation ties into this in that there is a group of students on campus who obviously feel unrepresented; representation is always an ongoing uphill battle in the DSU. Affordability and quality SUB food services seems to be the main issue from which the other issues have stemmed, including the issue of exclusivity.
How can we avoid “Secret Contracts” overshadowing other important issues and still have the people involved with it heard? I think the key is communication. Not just in a “How should we vote?” way but also in the sense of how can we compromise and work on this in the future? The DSU exec is waiting for SMAC to come to them but I hope they aren’t holding their breath since SMAC doesn’t seem to be biting.
SMAC probably isn’t interested in a meeting even if they had a representative that could meet. They would much prefer to paint me and the rest of the councilors as cloak wearing evil masterminds who meet in secret and prefer to keep students in the dark.(insert self satisfying “Muuuhahahahaha” here) Most councilors enjoy feedback, I know John Doucette has gone so far as to talk to individuals until he found one that had an opposing point of view to his own. We want to accurately represent the students or we wouldn’t be there. Believe me, we stick it to the Exec on a regular basis. SMAC should talk to anyone on any of the execs of societies on my campus. If they haven’t met me in person they have certainly read what seems like a million emails from me. I even sent out the secret contracts motion for feedback. (PS Dear SMAC, I am not the Engineering rep as it says in your post about my CKDU interview I am the Sexton Campus Director, Stephanie Hagmann is the Engineering President and Rep)
As far as the elections go on this topic if I were running I would steer clear of the words “Secret Contracts” along the campaign trail. It’s like health care in politics; everyone knows there are issues with health care but it’s the best system we’ve got. It’s the third rail; if you touch it you die. It’s a complex issue with no clear solution, as much as “Secret Contracts” is. I wouldn’t build my platform on “Secret Contracts” but rather on the issues surrounding it like communication, diversity, quality and affordability of food services at the SUB. I would also try to nail down someone at the core of SMAC if you can find one and have a sincere discussion about secret contracts just to get some perspective. That would be the golden ticket; probably a pretty rare event that is not likely to happen but the most ambitious elections candidate should definitely try.
In case you were wondering, “third rail” analogies are the third rail of analogies: the only time you should be near them is when a homeless guy shoves you into one.
“Diversity of student representation, communication and affordability and quality SUB food services” are the same issues that have been plaguing the union for four years. Representation and communication are correlated to lack of accountability amongst representatives and apathy amongst students for the whole DSU political process.
“How can we avoid “Secret Contracts” overshadowing other important issues and still have the people involved with it heard? I think the key is communication. Not just in a “How should we vote?” way but also in the sense of how can we compromise and work on this in the future” Whoa, there are two issues here that you are confusing into one. First, students should not have to compromise with their representatives or employees of their union. In this case, food contractors are essentially employees of our union. Granted there are expectations that are unreasonable, but I have yet to hear a student say “we should by a jumbo jet”. Second, the issue of how students should vote should never be stated in the same sentence as the word compromise. With yearly voter turnout of less than 15%, it is safe to say that students are already compromising. If we were not compromising, we would be asking for our fees back. I know I sure could use the $100 back that was forced from my pocket.
“SMAC probably isn’t interested in a meeting even if they had a representative that could meet. They would much prefer to paint me and the rest of the councillors as cloak wearing evil masterminds who meet in secret and prefer to keep students in the dark” SMAC appears to be an organisation that does not institute “leaders”; they possess a very horizontally wide & vertically short organisation structure. I am sure there are individuals within the core whom possess greater weight in opinion then other members, but they do not appear to have executives and “bosses” such as our union. The derogatory comment regarding cloaks and masterminds will only serve to alienate members of SMAC further from their union representatives. The self importance that voting members of union carry themselves with is the real issue here. Time to get off your high horses and realise that one student should be equal in opinion and privilege as the next when it comes to the operation of the union. It would be a great disservice to union reform if SMAC folded in the coming years.
“It’s like health care in politics; everyone knows there are issues with health care but it’s the best system we’ve got.” I can only pray that most Canadians do not have such a defeatist attitude towards healthcare reform in this country. Otherwise, we are all carrying huge tax burdens in the future or a lot of seniors will live in a hell called Canada. The Canadian healthcare system can hardly be compared to any operation within the union without making huge fallacies of composition.
Regards
I promised myself I wouldn’t comment back but I just want to clarify something not respond to comments, you are after all entitled to your opinion. Just be clear this isn’t my attitude, I would love to get into health care policy and change it for the better. My entire senior design project revolves around the health care system. Unfortunately, this is a reality, there haven’t been significant strides in the health care system really since it was implemented. There has been tweeking but no significant changes. People literally die in hospital due to poor wait time strategy and capacity planning. Current projections estimate that even with the health care system we have in Canada we are only about 10 to 15 years behind the Americans in terms of percentage of GDP spent on health care. We need change but no one is brave enough to do it and this is not a new issue. -Really this is a whole other topic that has nothing to do with DSU elections, I simply paralleled it because I see similarities. On that note if you would ever like to privately discuss health care reform I would be happy to oblige.
I know you’ve only been around for 4 years, but rest assured those issues predate you by quite some time. The SUB opened in 1968; I imagine the bitching about the food started shortly thereafter. Anyone else remember the old SUB cafeteria from 10 years ago? Anyone feel a sense of nostalgia? No? Sense of nausea? Ah, there we go.
So you chastise Zhindra for something derogatory that she didn’t say (she just characterized the comments others were making about her, it wasn’t conciliatory but it also wasn’t derogatory). Then you turn around and paint all members of Council, past and present, with the same derogatory brush. In literally the very next sentence. Nice. If as you say all students are equal, why do you say some students get name-calling privileges and others don’t?
I couldn’t disagree with your comments more. In my decade+ of interacting with student leaders on councils, I have found that for the most part, the people are genuinely concerned about their constituents. They don’t think of themselves as better or more important, they just happen to be the representative in the room. They put in time and energy to meet and speak with anyone who wants to meet with them. They volunteer for social events, fundraisers, and student advocacy. They take the issues of the DSU back to their constituents to find out what they want. They advocate for their constituents in committees, council meetings, and in separate meetings.
Representative democracy is the model of the DSU; you might not like that, but don’t attack the individuals who are doing exactly what the governance model expects them to do.
“So you chastise Zhindra for something derogatory that she didn’t say (she just characterized the comments others were making about her, it wasn’t conciliatory but it also wasn’t derogatory). Then you turn around and paint all members of Council, past and present, with the same derogatory brush. In literally the very next sentence.”
How is stating voting members of council carry themselves with self importance derogatory? It is an observation that has subjective interpretations. Self importance can be viewed negatively or postively based on personal belief. I implied that I was talking about all voting members when I should have said most.
AND WHOA! Are you serious Mr Smit?!? “…individuals who are doing exactly what the governance model expects them to do”. We definitely must agree to disagree on your last two paragraphs.
To be fair, I know very few DSU councilors personally. Though the ones I know I can assure you are exceptional individuals, I have no first hand experience being one of their constituents.
So I am willing to grant the possibility – however remote – that DSU Council has in fact been replaced by power-hungry self-important fascists.
I am glad you are willing to concede that this characterization does not apply to 100% of the Council, though saddened that you still believe it is a majority. That such people exist is not surprising; the nature of student organizations is such that they will always attract some number of people who seek attention, or seek power, or seek to advance their own personal agendas at the expense of their constituents. In my experience, however, those that base their decisions on these motivations are a minority.
What attracts you, Mr. Debogorski?
“What attracts you, Mr. Debogorski?”
In this union, you gotta make the money first. Then when you get the money, you get the power. Then when you get the power, then you get the shitty vegan food in the sub.
CB has an uncanny take on life.
“…some number of people who seek attention, or seek power, or seek to advance their own personal agendas at the expense of their constituents.”
In my opinion, this descibes our executives for the last four years, and many other representatives & officials. *cough* vp finance & ops *cough*
I remember I was alarmed to read that students felt “caring is creepy”.
I was amused when a student once asked me “why don’t you go suck Marx’s dick?” Hahahaha! that still makes me smirk.
I was bewildered when LARK ran around with a t-shirt that said “lounge lizard” at the election results party two years ago. If she only knew what that phrase implied.
What attracts me to “student politics”, if it can be called that, is the tragedy I see occuring at an educational institution that was arguably once the best in the world for social sciences. Dr Osberg & Dr Braybrooke are both academics who will not be properly honoured for their work until well after their deaths, but I digress. I am attracted by a need for a strong contrarian veiwpoint in all our unions actions. I am attracted by the need for students to feel that they are not alone in their criticism of the status quo that is occuring. I am attracted by a feeling of being both duped and ripped off by a union in which I must be a member of in order to attend Dalhousie. I am attracted by the pure lunacy I hear every year from our executives. I am attracted by the opportunity to guide our union towards its potential output of welfare. I am attracted by the opportunity to put theory into practice in an environment that has remained relatively static in culture and organisation for almost half a decade.
Perhaps, maybe I am just a do-gooder who wants to create a better union, university, and education system for all.
Maybe I am simply attracted because my critics are right- I’m nuts
I am sorry to hear you believe that of so many past DSU executives and councilors.
I was interested to see you think some of your critics would answer the “what attracts you” question with “he’s nuts”. At various times on punditry.ca, I’ve seen “critics” describe your motivations as being attention-seeking, trolling, you just like to fight/oppose things and this is the cause du jour, and so forth. The reasons you give are obviously different. At the end of the day, the only one who truly knows your motivations is you (or perhaps your subconscious). (Which is not to say the reasons you give, or anyone gives, should be trusted).
In the same vein, your perception of what brings DSU executives to office is just that – perception. (as is mine and everyone else’s).
I have known DSU executives who I believe wanted power (such as it is…). I have known DSU executives who I believe do it for the social status (not understanding that the social status isn’t that great). I have known DSU executives who I believe ran because it looks good on a resume.
The difference is to me, these are the exceptions, rather than the rules. I have known far more DSU executives who have toiled, sweated, cried, bled, and in general devoted at least a year of their lives to doing what they with the best of intentions believed was best for as many Dalhousie students as possible. Are they human and fallible? Yes. Do they make mistakes? Absolutely. Do I bitch and moan about those mistakes? Hells yes I do. (see previous post where I refer to them as “fucking nuts”.) At the end of the day, though, I have respect for good people.
I’d like to add for the record that defending DSU execs bores me. I’d really like to get back to picking out the problems with the DSU, the candidates, and the platforms. Please?
Creative destruction?
Exploding Plastic Inevitable!
pfft! that’s nothing compared to Infinite Inebriation of Idleness
Haha, beat that one ICSWTT.
I think Zhindra raises many valid points and concerns here, and I think her ideas about communication are bang on.
I am, however, a bit concerned about the less-than-warm tenor towards SMAC. She mentions desire to compromise and then in the very next breath paints SMAC as a group who probably isn’t interested such a dialog. Presumptions about ‘the other’ (in the this case SMAC) only lead to further misunderstandings and tension.
Wouldn’t it be a better use of our time to try to build consensus rather than actively creating a bifurcation and lining up on either side of it? There are many successful negotiation processes that take a step beyond the ‘us Vs. them’ mentality.
Unfortunately, I think this piece, even in its very title, serves to widen the rifts between student groups.
We’re all students, and we all want a better union. Let’s start from there.
@Alice
I agree whole heartedly.
@Alice
I want to make one thing abundantly clear, this is an opinion piece stemming from my own concerns and involving my own opinions about secret contracts and how the situation has gone so far. This is not reflective of any other councilor except me.
First, I had seen no attempt for people involved with SMAC or even people directly involved with the petition to come to me or other councilors or the exec to discuss this issue. That is of course with the exception of dropping the petition on Glenn and asking him to take it to council. For the record if they had come to me with a petition with 1500 signatures I would have brought it forward to council as well.
They still have not tried to discuss it with the exec or councilors. I understand they are a decentralized group of equals and they don’t want to send a representative and they don’t have a leader so why can’t they arrange an open meeting with as many people as want to be involved to meet with the exec and discuss this. Perhaps it doesn’t have to be a one side versus the other battle over a single motion, perhaps we can all come to an agreement.
Instead they encouraged people to email councilors which I completely agree with. Unfortunately all of those people copy and pasted the same email and mass emailed the whole council. While I’m sure they agreed with many of the things in the email I would have preferred to hear how an individual felt themselves, not how SMAC felt over and over. Even then I was conflicted in how I should respond since most of the people who emailed me were not in my constituency. I tried to consider all these things. I emailed everyone back with a response.I started emailing people in my constituency and talking to people about it and tried to get a general feel for what was going on. Does that sound like I am depriving people of their rights or trying to shut them up or ignoring student? However people who don’t know me and don’t really know the issues in MY constituency which is Sexton Campus wrote the following:
– If I don’t represent your point of view it doesn’t mean I am ignoring students.
- From what I gathered from my constituents that I talked to at Sexton Campus Advisory and at a multitude of other meetings and even just in general, they were ok with confidential contracts so this view doesn’t represent all of my constituents.
- I believe we have a democracy in that we have elected officials that are appointed by constituencies to represent them. I answer to the students of Sexton. Implying that if we disagree with SMAC we are against democracy is not fair.
So I apologize if I seem to be widening the rift but I am honestly frustrated. I will be honest I meant to show that frustration in this post as at council and in other cases I usually try to be open to all views. I was intentionally stirring the pot because I was hoping it would open some dialogue, I don’t believe this should be such an extremely polarized debate. I believe what I said about this boiling down to many other issues and honestly as far as campaign strategy goes it’s far better to focus on those issues than on the exclusivity of contracts. That’s what I want to see.