Carleton University - Raven Yearbook (Ottawa, Ontario Canada)

Page 24 text:

And as ever, the non-representative nature of the C.U.S. structure was questioned. Andrey Voice, defeated presidential candidate, suggested that C.U.S. merely cloaked radical policies in the virtuous semantics and altruism of educational reform. She said, this just isn't good enough. She added that educational reform at Carleton could be done by Carleton students and not imposed from outside. lan Kimmerly, C.U.S. finance commissioner, put down C.U.S. detractors in blunt terms. lf these critics are completely satisfied with the present educational system, completely satisfied with the present society, and can see no place where improvements can be made, they are both blind and stupid. ln the referendum, C.U.S. was rejected by a vote of 1656 to 881. Schmidt, a longtime advocate of concerted student action on social issues. later said, The blame lies on the shoulders of C.U.S. supporters who did little or nothing to show their side of the case. He added, I hope that the idea that Carleton students aren't ready for C.U.S. is all wrong. Audrey Voice characterized the C.U.S. referendum results as a fundamental vote of non-confidence in Lorenz Schmidt. The rejection of C.U.S. was the first of many issues to plague Schmidt's fledgling administration. Meanwhile, in other universities like Toronto, students voted to opt out of C.U.S. Columnist Gerry Neary wrote a C.U.S. obituary notice. The Canadian Union of Students passed away quietly this week at its national headquarters in Ottawa. ln attendance were the University of Toronto and Carleton University .... No flowers by request. And early in the summer of '69 Martin Loney said that C.U.S. supporters could either work together for a strong national union or watch it decay. Carleton watched. '

Page 23 text:

Carleton students were l-given one more chance to become involved. After having narrowly voted to pull out of C.U.S. in the last academic year, they were confronted by the C.U.S. referendum which became the first in a series of issues throughout the year. Early in the term Lorenz Schmidt, interim council president, called for a new approach to issues - one in which all students should become involved. .He rejected the possibility that students were incapable of comprehending the issues. Het said, Rather it is. the case that they have never heard substantive debate on the problems that face them. l After becoming council president in a close by-election, Schmidt worked along with other committed council members to promote the cause off the Canadian Union of Students. They charged that C.U.S. had fundamentally changed its extreme radical image of the previous year and was now primarily concerned with issues directly affecting the Canadian student. ' During the debate, Rod A Manchee, external vice-president, stressed the need for student involvement and the need for the development of a critical university. h l 1 ' X He said, There is some analysis in the 'university but what there is deals with things many years and miles away. As students, as Canadians, as people living in the here and now of 1969 we face specific problems that must be dealt with. And we are here in the university . . . the university should be dealing with these problems. Nlancheeadded, The program of the Canadian Union of Students is aimed at creating this critical university that analyses our world and our problems. Anti-C.U.S. sentiment was nurtured by one student who noted that with the money saved from C.U.S. membership fees, the Carleton students could buy 33,600 pints of beer. ' H.

Page 25 text:

1 'fi- .' -x' fm V e K ff, ? is l 1 C 5 . E . s EET 'T T ix , H ,bl '-' Q g I S 'P- ' Q Y L ' i X Q ,. gf' 1 I x 'F hw' Q A fn' .5 if Qs, w