University of Guelph - Libranni Yearbook (Guelph, Ontario Canada)

Page 88 text:

Talent Shows ,nl

Page 87 text:

Council 's Future- Gloomy at Best The future of student government at this university looks gloomy to say the least, considering the amount of interest expressed in the vacant council seats two days before nominations will be closed. This apparent lack of concern, and the disillusion expressed by present Council members on the effectiveness of the council serves to raise grave doubts as to the ability of student government to fulfill its self-imposed role of mobilizer and leader of student action on the campus. A re-evaluation is perhaps in order, and the priorities of the union should be called into question. As we have pointed out before, the union is not an autonomous body in the legal sense, its existence depends on the co-operation of the university administration in collecting the fees on which the union operates. Without this co-operation the union dies, as recent events at Regina point out. Circumstances such as these are not conducive to any concrete form of political action. lf the aim of the union is to include political action, then it can only be accomplished in a meaningful manner if the union is outside the final control of any other body. This would imply dissolution of the union and reorganization on a self-supporting, voluntary basis. On the other hand, if the prospect of splitting the students on this issue seems too distasteful, then the sham should be dropped, and more concentration placed upon providing services for students in the form of big name entertainment or recognized lecturers in areas included in the university's fields of study. This kind of program would show some justification for the fee levy made each semester lthe highest in Canadal. Other university student governments function on a lower fee levy while still providing comparable or better services to their students. There is no use in continuing the facade on union independence and participation in meaningful political activity any longer. The inconsistencies between what council professes to want to accomplish, and what it actually does accomplish have been greatly responsible for the unhappy attitudes of some of the outgoing council members. This state of affairs can be recified only when the council defines its purpose and role. lf the union decides that its future is in political action, then we suggest that an independent source of finances is in order. lf on the other hand, the present system is to be retained, a more desirable and relevant program must be presented to the students at Guelph, and this can initially be accomplished by increasing funds available to such groups as council's own Social and Cultural Commission, which does a good job on a ridiculously small budget. The double standard has existed for several years and has been glaringly visible during the last semester. In all good conscience the members who will make up next year's council cannot allow the situation to continue. Compulsion - Coercion At the Special General Annual Nleeting of the Students' Union on Tuesday night compulsory unionism was ramrodded through by the questionable use of proxy voting over the protests of a small but vocal minority. Compulsory unionism is now approved by the student body: those present at the meeting were ex posed to the issues and given the chance to reconsider their stands: the 800 proxy votes were cast without the individuals bothering to hear the stand of the other side. It is unfortunate that those 800 people did not see fit to attend, for the percentage of people present who changed their minds on the issue was quite high, and at one point the voting on the floor was split between voluntarists and council supporters although the voluntarists only represented about a quarter of the audience at the start of the meeting. The 800 proxies were used as a weapon to force the measures through: not only was the manner in which this was accomplished somewhat less than tasteful, but the arguments presented justifying the compulsory stand evaded the basic questions posed by those who found themselves in opposition. The compulsory unionists did not address themselves to the question of morals and ethics at all, their justification came on grounds of expediencyp money rather than membership seemed to be more important. A student may resign from the union but not receive a refund of his fees: what hypocrisy! The move of Vice-President MacKay to provide aviable and just Opt-Out clause was vigorously condemned by supporters of the compulsory stand, and as soon as he moved out of the fold, the legality of his proxy votes was challenged. Although contrary to the provisions of the Letters Patent, MacKay's proposed ammendment to the membership by-law is the only way in which the union can set itself up to operate on moral and ethical grounds - a consideration which seemed to be sadly lacking. How does council justify its arbitrary confiscation of student fees and refusal to refund them if the member resigns. The issue is not the physical membership, but money. Council does not seem to be concerned with the individuals in the union as much as their financial resources. The implications of compulsory unionism were not appreciated by those who voted in favour of them, especially the 800 proxy voters. No matter what the eventual outcome of the situation will be, the entire question should be left up to the student body in the form of a referendum held next fall. Government by referendum is not the best state of affairs, but one on this issue would give a good picture of student sentiment without the issue being decided by one block of votes controlled by a small group of individuals.

Page 89 text:

Student and Faculty 8 l