Against the SGM
Paul N. McCulloch
I have just returned home from the Special General Meeting of the SFSS, and I am not happy. Before anyone jumps to any conclusions it must be said that I do indeed think that some of the people in the “Group of 7” should have been impeached, Hunsdale especially. But I voted against every resolution for impeachment at that meeting, that is, every resolution that I heard until I could not tolerate being there any longer.
Over the course of this controversy I have not run into any forum where true debate on the subject had ever occurred. Instead, I have been bombarded with rhetoric and accusations from one side to the other, with The Peak being the main grounds for the petty squabbles. The fact that no serious effort to fully inform the members of the society made me believe any meeting to impeach any member of the Group of 7 pointless.
At the SGM, the voting was overwhelmingly in favour of the resolutions to impeach these Board members. This is not surprising because the majority of the people there had only one goal in mind — to impeach. Why was this? Was it because of an informed population going to get their voices heard? No. It was because the signs for the meeting all said “impeach” in big bold letters; it was because they had been bombarded with people saying that ones to be impeached had done something wrong; it was because many of them wanted to impeach somebody for the sheer value of impeaching somebody. There was never any true education.
The simple fact is that the SGM was nothing more then a witch hunt, the members would even laugh at the people who voted against the resolutions. But what really drove home the fact that people were not there to make an informed choice was that the speakers who were for the motion would only allow one person to speak in defense of the Board before calling for the vote. The voices of those who wanted to speak against the motion were not heard; the voices of those who wished to further speak for the motion were not heard; the voices of those who wanted more answers before making such a decision were not heard; my voice was not heard! One of the Group of 7’s only ‘crime’ was that she was not there when the controversial event transpired, and that upon her return from vacation decided to side with the Board after examining the evidence provided. For this she was impeached. This alone stands out to show that the people at the SGM were not there to vote with their conscience in an educated manner, they were there to vote as the most vocal told them to, evidence be damned.
This whole situation has put a black mark on this university. It shows just how much the vocal minority can get their way at the expense of the silent majority. The people at the SGM should feel ashamed of themselves for the contempt that they showed for the democratic ideals they claim to espouse. A contempt they showed by refusing to allow fair debate, and a fair defense for those who they were impeaching. This whole situation has made me seriously consider leaving SFU, because I want no part in an institution that would allow people to be railroaded in such a manner. Even though I will stay, from this point on I will refuse to have anything to do with the SFSS, or any other arm of the ‘student movement.’ This was not democracy in action, this was a farce; and I will have no further part in it.