Campus: Students to decide CFS’s future at SFU
Iain W. Reeve, Associate News Editor
SFU’s continued relationship with the Canadian Federation of Students was called into further question at last week’s meeting of Forum. Members of the body, which contains representatives from both the SFSS Board and individual department student unions, voted heavily in favour of asking the students if they believe SFU should separate from the national organisation. The question will be put to students as a non-binding referendum during the SFSS elections on March 20 to 22.
The SFSS recently organised a working group which looked into the relationship, both currently and historically, between our school and the CFS, a group formed, according to their website, to give students “an effective and united voice, provincially and nationally.” The group lobbies government, at the provincial and federal levels, for lower tuition fees and other education-oriented concessions. They also provide a variety of services including health services, and deals on travel, phones, and other products.
The working group attempted to assess whether our relationship with the CFS was worthwhile, or if it was in need to being reconsidered. It looked at three possible options: the first was retaining the status quo, the second was reforming the CFS from within, and the third was separation. The working group noted the above advantages of being in the CFS, but cited many costs, both practical and perceived.
First, membership in the organisation cost the SFSS $439,204 this year, making some wonder if we are getting our money’s worth. There are also questions over the fact that the SFSS was denied their vote at the CFS national meeting. However, this was explained by CFS-BC Chairperson Scott Payne as being a result of the pending lawsuit which left in question who constituted the rightful Board of the SFSS. Other criticisms came in lack of fiscal faith, as CFS-BC has yet to file a 2005 auditor report. This report is for the period where they granted significant loans to the Douglas College Student Union during the period that their funds were being withheld from the school’s administration, citing financial irregularities and lack of proper bookkeeping. Some also question the effectiveness of the lobbying of the CFS. As Applied Sciences Representative Bryan Ottho put it, “You can’t gage the efficiency of lobbying unless the premier brings someone out.”
Payne, as well as Shamus Reid, B.C. representative for the national CFS, appeared briefly at the meeting to make a case for the CFS. They handed out binders filled with glossy presentations of CFS benefits to Forum members and gave a brief presentation. They pointed to the long-standing “historic involvement” that SFU has had in the CFS. They also said they would be more than happy to address questions about the CFS posed by Forum members or regular students. However, soon after their presentation, the two left without answering questions from Forum. Payne stated that it was impossible to have a “valid debate” if they were just reacting to and debunking accusations.
The discussion evolved in several ways. Several members spoke out against the CFS, often citing past problems they have encountered. Both SFSS President Derrick Harder as well as Internal Relations Officer Sean Magee indicated that the CFS had either offered to or had done work for their society election campaigns, such as designing posters. This service was apparently extended to pro-CFS slates in elections. University Relations Officer Andrea Sandau said that, contrary to what the CFS representatives had said, she has repeatedly had questions and e-mails seeking clarification and explanation go without response.
Some suggested that SFU could, if separated from the CFS, create a B.C. coalition to focus on issues specific to our region. Magee suggested that “$400,000 goes a long way,” and that SFU could go out and “connect with unions all across the country.” Harder said that the SFSS could continue “working with them collaboratively on issues of mutual concern.” Ultimately an appeal was made to simply let students decide, and the vote eventually carried with 30 votes for, five against, and four abstentions.
There was, however, some opposition to the motion. Geography Representative Tommy Thomson said he detected an “anti-CFS” atmosphere at the meeting, and that the society should find a more reasoned way of dealing with grievances, insisting that they should not give up our primary provincial and federal lobbying apparatus.
It is unclear how the non-binding referendum, which the SFSS will be able to use if so motivated, could be used to separate from the CFS. Their process for separation includes a petition signed by 10 per cent of the student body, a six-month waiting period, followed by an official referendum requiring a five per cent turnout. There is some concern that attempts to use this referendum as a tool for separation will result in a lawsuit.
The Referendum Question:
Do you agree that the Simon Fraser Student Society should do the following:
i. Cease to be a member of the Canadian Federation of Students and the Canadian Federation of Students, British Columbia Component, as well as cease to be a member of the Canadian Federation of Students Services;
ii. Cease collecting student fees for the Canadian Federation of Students and the Canadian Federation of Students British Columbia Component (at present $7.50 per full-time student per semester; $3.72 per part-time student per semester; $23.50 for a full time year; $11.16 for a part-time year; for a total of $435,204.72 for 2006);
iii. Instead, collect $7.50 per full-time student per semester and $3.72 per part-time student per semester, and put said fees towards improving student services such as departmental student unions, club infrastructure, online student services, affordable student housing, staffing at satellite campuses, a publicly accessible indexed archive of SFSS documents, and lobbying the government for SFU student interests.