Author: The Concordian

The people in the ivory towers over at McGill University must think they are pretty special. According to an article published Jan. 19 by The McGill Daily, McGill’s administration is seeking a motion to be exempt from answering access to information requests filed by select student journalists.

Publically-funded, government-run institutions are required by Canadian Law to release documents like reports, budgeting information and much more. McGill has no right to pick and choose which requests to honour and which to reject.

Now, student journalists who are using this resource as it was meant to be used are being targeted for allegedly overloading McGill with “systematic” requests in “retaliation” against the university. What’s more, not only have 14 respondents been named in the motion filed with the Commission d’accès à l’information, it goes on to claim that The Daily and The Link have been abusing the system, perhaps for some nefarious purposes of their own.

If we weren’t up in arms about that, imagine our reaction to the news that The Concordian is also being named as a source which provides evidence to support the university’s case.

Contrary to whatever the authors of the motion believe, The Concordian has never indicated in any way that ATI requests were being made “as a retaliation measure against McGill in the aftermath of the 2011-2012 student protests.”

The very idea that the university is requesting the right to deny legal ATIs filed by certain individuals and accept others is astonishing.

What’s laughable about this whole situation is that if, and this is a big if, the motion is allowed and the people and organizations mentioned are no longer allowed to make requests, what stops anyone from filing under a different name or having the request filed for them?

How dare the university even consider putting journalists in a position where they have to intentionally misrepresent themselves in order to gain the same access to documents that any person off the street is entitled to?

Without a doubt, McGill is behaving like a spoiled child and we only wish to offer our most sincere condolences to the public relations department. This is a vastly unfair move by the university, it’s illogical and based primarily off of conspiracy theories.

From here, it looks like McGill is scrambling for any excuse to avoid releasing sensitive documents they would rather not see made public.

And what of the university’s claims that the amount of requests received are straining their “limited resources?” If McGill can’t logistically handle the incoming ATIs, fine. We accept that this type of paperwork takes time and money. So hire another person to do the work. We’ve seen your landscaping, McGill, we’re pretty sure you can afford it.

After a slew of missteps, Concordia has finally done something proactive to address the problems within the Concordia China Student Recruitment Partner Program. It shouldn’t be news to anyone who reads the papers or listens to the water cooler talk that allegations of mistreatment were flooding in from international students against CCSRPP director and head of Orchard Consultants Ltd., Peter Low.

If indeed this name is not familiar by now, we’ll summarize by telling you that Low was accused of misrepresenting services at Concordia and improperly transferring and managing student funds. While these claims remain informal and unsubstantiated, we’re pretty sure it’s safe to say these issues stem from more than a simple miscommunication as the university would have us believe.

In announcing this week that Concordia will be ending its relationship with Orchard Consultants Ltd. and seeking proposals from new recruitment agencies, the sky ahead begins to look a little clearer. It seems obvious to us that a company who is accused of taking advantage of vulnerable students coming to study in Canada is not one which this university, or any for that matter, should be associated with. Perhaps it took Concordia a while to come to this conclusion, but they did come to it and that is what’s important.

While part of us wishes Orchard would be investigated for their alleged crimes and left out to dry by the higher ups, we are faced with the sad reality that this is not likely to occur.

Then again, is it really enough that Low, if he is in fact guilty of the things we’ve heard, get out of this one scott free? Yes, his company will lose the business of Concordia and it may suffer financially for it, but what of his personal situation? Will he be made to apologize or repent in any way for the damage and hurt that the students coming forward feel he has caused them? Probably not.

So what can we do about it? Who will lead the charge to bring justice where there is none? Key members of the Concordia Student Union executive have made a point of taking these concerns seriously and doing their best to follow-up, but the organization as a whole is nowhere near the level of strength and competence needed to chase the answers. The university administration is not offering any more explanation about Orchard or Low and the man himself isn’t about to come forward and confess.

For the time being it looks as though the smoke has cleared and Concordia’s recruitment problems are on the mend. The only questions that remain are: how do we ensure that this type of violation doesn’t happen again? Who will hold the responsible parties accountable? How do we as concerned citizens keep students safe when no one seems to be willing to drop everything to pursue the truth?

For some, New Years resolutions have become synonymous with failed gym memberships and two-week-long self-improvement kicks, but we like to view this time of year more as an opportunity to kick the old habits and move on.

When it comes to Concordia, old habits die hard and sometimes come back to haunt future generations for years. With a fresh face at the helm and a new cycle of students filing through the hallowed halls year after year, there’s really no reason why the university can’t start improving its image. The old girl has waited long enough and may she rise like a phoenix from the ashes. Or at least, when it comes to scandal, may the powers that be finally realize that in this case less is indeed more.

From the cramped Concordia Student Union offices to the spacious upper floor board rooms in the GM building, we want to see change on the horizon. We aren’t asking for a miracle, simply offering some friendly advice that Concordia should take this opportunity to lay low and keep its proverbial nose to the grindstone.

New Years is not a clean slate maker by any means, but it does come with a certain inclination for reflection and re-evaluation. Changes need to be made, attitudes adjusted and dated ways of management tossed aside. Out with the old, in with the new.

The point of all this, we suppose, is to say that there is hope for Concordia yet. Institutional change like the kind we hope to see does not happen overnight nor does it happen as a result of some silly resolution made at 12:01 a.m. after ingesting one too many glasses of cheap champagne. Change like that happens because everyone wants it to and everyone works for it.

Universities are undergoing a period of uncertainty and believe it or not, times are changing. The way people think about post-secondary education is changing. There is a movement towards new, youthful innovations and transparency where before there was facade. This is the right time for things to get better and that will absolutely require effort on the part of every group and individual who is part of this community.

Students and faculty cannot have a pride in an institution which they feel is untrustworthy or out of control, and the perception and reception of Concordia’s public image will not improve unless those fears are put to rest.

In the university community, people like to toss around terms like “good faith” and that is exactly what is needed in this instance. A university is not a business, it is a place of learning. There may be an awful lot of men in suits and books to balance, but that does not change the core nature of what a university is and what it ought to be.

The Concordia Student Union byelections have come and gone and in the wake of it, we can’t help but feel that students really couldn’t care less.

A grand total of 465 Concordia students voted in the blessed event which took place Nov. 27 to 29. Needless to say, the turnout wasn’t ideal. Six candidates were elected from Arts and Science of the seven who ran, three from John Molson School of Business and zero from Fine Arts.

While council has now bulked up some in numbers, the complete lack of interest showed by the majority of the undergraduate student population is really disheartening. There were a number of problems with this round of byelections, namely the fact that it was not advertised nearly enough and the information out there wasn’t much to go on.

While candidate posters could be seen on bulletin boards around campus, it’s hard to believe the CSU put much effort into getting students out to vote. The one candidate who didn’t make the cut lost by three votes. We imagine he’s feeling pretty short-changed right now.

Besides the polling itself we worry about the lack of information available to students about the people they were electing. Seeing someone’s face on a poster and seeing their name on a ballot is not a good enough reason for them to be chosen as the right person for the job. In fact, it makes for decisions based on all the wrong reasons.

Voting for someone purely based on their attractiveness, or the heritage of their last name, or their gender or the glossiness of their poster is not okay. This isn’t the kind of behaviour that should be encouraged or allowed in a society full of disengaged voters. And yet, what other information was given to us?

Where were we supposed to read about their platforms and goals, who they were as people and what they wanted to accomplish on council? Where was the candidate debate or speeches put on by the CSU for students’ benefit? If the CSU has the attitude that students don’t care about elections and won’t vote anyway, then yeah, no one is going to vote.

If people who actually care about student politics can’t even find information about the candidates, how are students with a passing interest supposed to? The CSU has more power than one might think and the sad truth is that there were likely hundreds if not thousands of students who didn’t even know elections were happening last week.

What can be done about this, you ask? We offer no magical solution, but if the union which is supposed to represent students is content to be composed of people who get voted in based on their looks or the catchiness of their name then we have a bigger problem than poor voter turnout. But hey, we’ll have the most attractive student union in town.

Over a year has gone by since the historic day that truly kicked off the student movement in Montreal: Nov. 10, 2011. The remarkable display of social engagement from the youth seen throughout this past year has really made an impact not only on policy, but on the way many people think about our demographic.

Students did not accomplish the toppling of a government and the reformation of policy all on their own. The tuition hike would never have been repealed without the support of Quebec citizens who marched alongside us, who donated to our cause and who turned out to vote in the election.

For many, the fight is over. But walking through the streets of downtown Nov. 22, that’s certainly not what it looked like. On that day many students and supporters marched in solidarity for the global accessible education movement.

Right now tuition is frozen, the provincial government has come through on its promises and students appear to be relieved and to some extent, proud that their efforts have paid off. Despite the victories achieved so far, we are quite concerned about the prospect of tuition fees increasing for out-of-province and international students.

The government has already stated that this is an option and McGill University hasn’t bothered to refund these students in question because they expect an increase. It’s no secret that out-of-province students pay a hefty sum for tuition, but milking them for more money after all that’s happened doesn’t sit right with us.

If and when these increases come, who will be there to stand up for these students? If the student movement has indeed begun to die down, will this increase sneak by unnoticed? Do officials think that since students who aren’t from here are so used to paying more, they won’t complain when they get slapped with additional fees? Out-of-province students are still students and being treated differently because of status is unjust and unfair.

Quebec has been criticized in the past for creating an unwelcoming environment for newcomers. Raising tuition for this demographic alone will only contribute to the feeling that non-residents are “outsiders.” Is that really the impression Quebec should be giving in this day and age?

We think not. Non-Quebec residents already pay more than everyone else. When the provincial government froze tuition, no one said anything about it possibly being a selective freeze. Quebec residents weren’t the only ones fighting the hike last year and they shouldn’t be the only ones to reap from the movement’s success.