Commentary | GA voting recommendations

The Editorial Board's voting recommendations for the upcoming GA motions

Resolution regarding the society’s investments

This motion is procedural, meant to bring SSMU (as a corporation) into compliance with Quebec law by explicitly stating its corporate investments code. Some have reservations about the absence of checks and balances in the motion, and the degree of power it grants the VP Finance and Operations. However, SSMU does already have certain checks and balances built into its investment policy, and The Daily supports this motion as long as the Society adheres to its mandates regarding the Financial Ethics Review Committee (FERC) and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). These shortcomings need to be addressed with amendments at the GA.

Vote: YES, with amendments.

Resolution regarding biking on campus

This motion would mandate that SSMU investigate the dangers associated with bikes on campus that led to the ban on bikes (and supposedly on all vehicles) in the fall, a decision made with no meaningful regard for student consultation or feedback – even after the Town Hall meeting held about the ban in the fall by Associate VP (University Services) Jim Nicell. It also asks that SSMU executives and councillors lobby the Administration to allow biking on campus, and to devise alternatives to the old framework if biking is indeed dangerous, like establishing a bike path.

Vote: YES.

Resolution regarding the improvement of the SSMU

This motion would seek out students to research and write a report that would make recommendations for how to “improve the efficiency of SSMU” through institutional reform. The resolution leaves the question open for a contract with a third party consulting firm at a future date, and it asks that this be ready by fall 2011. Though this is the right spirit, it is unclear what standards would be used to evaluate SSMU, how these evaluators would be chosen, and what would actually happen as a result of such a report.

Vote: Sure… whatever.

Resolution regarding the appointment of McKinsey and Co. as McGill’s consultant firm

This motion resolves that SSMU opposes the appointment of McKinsey as an external consulting firm to help with McGill’s Strategic Reframing Initiative (SRI). McKinsey is known for its poor reputation, recently having been involved in the policies enacted in the U.K. that have led to austerity measures in education. It further mandates that SSMU question the appointment of a director at McKinsey – Claude Généreux – to the Board of Governors, and to, in the future, ask that any such decision involve the input of SSMU members and the McGill community.

Vote: YES.

Resolution regarding the use of the McGill name by clubs, services, and independent student groups of the Students’ Society of McGill University (SSMU)

This motion is in response to the recent actions taken by the administration toward the use of the McGill name by student clubs and organizations, such as TVMcGill and McGill First Aid. It asks that SSMU work to stop the admin from forcefully removing its name from the students that make up McGill, as well as defend groups who are being asked to disassociate from the University, in part through the removal of “McGill” from their name. It further mandates that, in the case of a refusal to negotiate by the administration, SSMU prevent the University from using its own images, name, or clubs and organizations in advertising and other promotional material.

Vote: FUCK YES.


Comments posted on The McGill Daily's website must abide by our comments policy.
A change in our comments policy was enacted on January 23, 2017, closing the comments section of non-editorial posts. Find out more about this change here.