Toban editor should focus on strengths of CFS

Amanda Aziz

On November 8-10, U of M students voted over 86 per cent in favour of membership in Canada’s national and provincial students’ organization, the Canadian Federation of Students (CFS). Voter turnout, at 5,137 (or 18.4 per cent of U of M students), was among the highest in UMSU’s history. Those numbers speak to the interest and excitement among U of M students about working together with over 500,000 of our peers across the country.

Unfortunately, rather than addressing the merits of working together with students from coast to coast, Manitoban Editor-in-Chief Regan Sarmatiuk chose instead to focus on process in her November 10 editorial, “Referendum procedures a cause for concern.” There are a number of assertions she made that I think need clarification.

When U of M students elect their representatives to UMSU Council, or when an organization such as the Manitoban holds a referendum to levy fees, it is UMSU’s obligation to ensure that the election/referendum is conducted in a manner that meets certain standards. This is to ensure that the process is fair and that key democratic principles are upheld.

As most readers are aware, the referendum held last week was to join the Canadian Federation of Students. The other students’ unions that comprise the Canadian Federation of Students have an understandable interest in ensuring that any vote to join their organization is conducted in a just manner, just as it is in UMSU’s interest to ensure the same.

As is required by UMSU’s bylaws, UMSU Council voted to suspend UMSU’s referendum rules in favour of developing a joint set of regulations with CFS to govern the referenda. This motion required a two-thirds majority at UMSU council, unlike most other motions which require only a simple majority. The negotiation of a joint set of regulations allows all parties an equal role in setting the rules for the vote. A referendum oversight committee was formed composed of two representatives from UMSU and two from CFS. These individuals were charged with developing regulations that respected the referendum practices of both UMSU and the CFS.

The UMSU representatives were selected following the public posting of the positions by UMSU Council, and despite what the editorial might have appeared to imply, I was not a member of the committee. UMSU was represented on the committee by Darryl Drieger, who last year served as the Elections, Discipline, Interpretation and Enforcement (EDIE) board chairperson, and Cathy Anstey, UMSU’s executive director. Both individuals have experience applying and enforcing UMSU’s bylaws in a completely unbiased way.

The UMSU representatives were selected with the understanding that they were impartial, including a staff person who has no political involvement in UMSU whatsoever. To say that the oversight committee was unable to make “fair and unbiased rulings” during the referendum is an insult to those on the committee who worked tirelessly to ensure that the referendum was held to the highest standard.

In addition, had the Editor-in-Chief glanced at the referendum rules that were jointly developed by the oversight committee, she would have noticed that the majority of the rules were taken directly from the UMSU bylaws. To report that there was an “absence of bylaws in the current referendum” is simply untrue, as the rules in place for this referendum were extensive and thorough.

There were very few differences between UMSU’s past practices and the rules governing this membership referendum, and that includes financial regulation and campaigning during voting days. While UMSU bylaws do prohibit campaigning during voting days, it often occurs anyway. Rather than ignoring a problem that creates an inequity among the sides in a referendum, the oversight committee recognized that campaigning occurs during voting days (like many UMSU council members have pointed out in the past), and decided to regulate it.

Sarmatiuk also argues graduate students should have been disenfranchised from voting in the referendum, since they are already members of the CFS through the Graduate Students ‘Association. However, it is completely inappropriate for UMSU to disenfranchise a large part of our membership and take away their vote. Doing so would be undemocratic.

Every member of UMSU has a right to participate in all elections, referenda and governing aspects of the students’ union by virtue of their membership. It is strange that in an editorial about democratic principles and scrutiny in governance, Sarmatiuk would argue to disenfranchise a significant group of fee-paying UMSU members.

Instead of misrepresenting the process by which the referendum was held, the Manitoban would do better to report on the fact that 18.4 per cent of students, one of the highest voter turn-outs in years, actively participated in the referendum by exercising their vote, and thereby their voice. It should also be reported that over 86 per cent of students voted in favour of adding our voices to a provincial and national student movement in the betterment of student lives, and in strengthening our position in the province as a united front of students.

In the end, the results of the referendum send a strong message to the university and provincial and federal governments that students are united. Those who took the time to learn about the issues, inform themselves about the process, and exercise their right to vote should be proud to be involved in the democratic process and know they have contributed to the betterment of student representation and advocacy in Manitoba and all of Canada.

Amanda Aziz is president of UMSU and the Manitoba National Executive Representative for the Canadian Federation of Students.