Many members of the McGill community know Short King Warsame from their Instagram Reels feeds. With thousands of views on each reel and just over 2,000 followers at the time of writing (though he’s aiming for 10,000 by the end of 2026), Warsame is well-known both on and off campus as a beacon of positivity on social media. His most popular posts feature light-hearted content, mostly football commentary and videos of him at house parties and social events like OAP. In each post, he wears his signature toothy smile; except, of course, in the videos where he’s lamenting his woes as a fan of Manchester United.

However, there is much more to Short King Warsame than having confidence and partying. For one, Warsame is a strong advocate for the empowerment of individuals with dwarfism. For another, he raises awareness in videos about social anxiety and the measures one can take to combat it. Warsame, for all the confidence he displays online, is no stranger to either of these issues — to him, they are largely intertwined.

On one of the last balmy fall weekends before the winter freeze is due to set in, the Daily sat down with Warsame over Zoom to hear about the trajectory that brought him to McGill; as well as the impact of social environment on one’s self- confidence (he described this as having been pivotal in encouraging him to “participate, lead, create, speak publicly and advocate”). By sharing his story, Warsame said, he wishes to demonstrate to students of all demographics that they too can accomplish their dreams as long as they believe in themselves.

Life in Kenya

Warsame Abdikadir Ahmed was born in January 1998 in Dadaab Camp, a UNHCR refugee camp complex in Kenya. Established in 1991 to shelter Somali refugees fleeing civil war in their home country, Warsame describes the camp as very “community-oriented,” although living there was “difficult”: families lived in tents together, and water and electricity shortages were not uncommon. However, these factors never affected his attitude — throughout his childhood, he dreamed of becoming a doctor.

These dreams, however, were often inhibited by the way in which he was perceived by his community. Because of his visible dwarfism, he was often subjected to bullying and hate from others. In a written memoir that he shared with the Daily, Warsame recounts how he had initially been barred from starting kindergarten at the same time as a friend of the same age. The principal had deemed him “too young” at a glance, without even bothering to ask him his age. “For the first time in my life,” he writes, “I began to understand that society often evaluates people by what it sees rather than by what they are capable of becoming.”

His family, well aware of the way people could treat him for his differences, barred him from going out and from attending school in his early years with other children around his age. “At that particular time, the community was still not exposed to as many [kinds of] people. [The fact that my] physical disability is visible made it difficult for [me] to go out,” he recalls. “My family would not let me go out in fear that I would be bullied or even beaten up by the other kids.” Despite their protective intentions, Warsame states that he “personally didn’t want to spend [his] life confined at home because of how others might treat [him … and] often wondered how long [he] could continue living that way.”

Eventually, intervention from a teacher managed to convince Warsame’s family to let him attend school. Warsame was overjoyed, describing the excitement and elation of putting on his first uniform. He was put in a class with other students with special needs and disabilities. Despite finally being able to find community, he and his classmates had to endure other students who would apparently walk by the classroom to laugh and shout insults at them. Warsame held his head high, but began to question his own self-worth amidst the immense bullying that he faced.

It soon became evident that Warsame was an academically excellent student, as he began to rank among the top students in his cohort — but this did little to stop the bullying. “Kids of all backgrounds were attending … so the environment was not welcoming and conducive for someone who was unique, because they would be the centre of attention. [I] worried more about people than academics,” he says. When he later joined a class of able- bodied students, the scrutiny, gossip and bullying only worsened, causing Warsame’s once-excellent grades to plummet and self-doubt to begin precipitating in his mind. “My performance was not that good because of the constant bullying. I [didn’t] even feel safe going out, [as] I had to be worried about other people,” he recounts, shaking his head.

Thankfully, one of his teachers had taken notice of Warsame’s struggles, and recommended that he be transferred to Joyland Special Primary School — a primary school for individuals with physical disabilities in Kisumu, a city in Kenya over 600 kilometres from Dadaab. Despite initial doubts regarding the distance from home and an unfamiliar city, Warsame was encouraged by his family to make the leap and enroll at boarding school there — a decision that would change his life.

“Joyland … was for the physically handicapped. So, like, you find your own people … People who share the same condition in one way or another,” Warsame explains, “so no one [could] remind [me] of my dwarfism or disability, [lifting] that load from my shoulders. Because I was in a different environment, I could focus on myself. I could focus on my academics.” He grins in fond recollection. “Fortunately, I found myself again when I went to Kisumu. I forgot that I was someone living with dwarfism at some point. The environment did not remind me constantly that I was different.” In turn, Warsame’s grades improved dramatically, and by the end of the year, he had become one of the school’s top- performing students. Financial constraints loomed as he went to secondary school, but thanks to more teachers who believed in and advocated for him, he was able to secure admission to Kisumu Boys’ High School — one of the most competitive high schools in Kenya. Despite fears that he would be overwhelmed, Warsame embraced the new challenge. One particular teacher’s advice stayed on his mind: “If you want respect, defeat them academically.” And so he did, seeking mentorship from top-performing students and consistently ranking high in grades among his peers.

In his memoir, Warsame writes, “I still remember an important lesson from that experience: [p]eople do not fail because they lack ability. Many fail because they are denied environments in which their abilities can flourish. … What began as a quest for acceptance had evolved into something much larger. I was no longer proving my worth to others. I was discovering it for myself.”

Eventually, his academic excellence led him to apply for the World University Service of Canada (WUSC) Student Refugee Program (SRP). Given the singular nature of the WUSC scholarship, Warsame says it was well-known amongst his peers and in Dadaab Camp. “I think it’s been [around] for two decades now? It’s still operating, so everyone knows about it. It’s one of the factors that motivates students.”

Warsame recalls being inexplicably optimistic about his application. There were only 23 people eligible for the scholarship in Dadaab during his application cycle, and only two of them had competitive grades — one of them being Warsame. Canada, though Warsame knew little about it until after eventually being selected for the WUSC SRP, was like a beacon of hope. “I knew it [w]as one of the developed countries, where [one has] so many opportunities. That’s what they used to tell us, [that] you [could] choose what you want to be.”

Before departing for Canada, Warsame served a brief stint as a Biology and Chemistry teacher in Dadaab Camp, which he described in his memoir as a “deeply meaningful” experience. “I taught in the very society that had once questioned my value … The same community that had once misunderstood disability was beginning to see possibility instead. Education had changed not only my life. It was changing theirs as well.”

Arriving in Canada

On 26 August 2022, Warsame arrived on Canadian soil to start his first year at McGill as a pharmacology student. Life here, including the way Warsame found himself being perceived and treated, was very different.

“The good thing with [Canada] is [that] everyone minds their own business. I’ve never come across anyone who said anything bad to me because of my dwarfism or how I look,” Warsame mused in our interview. “Sometimes, [I] can see people staring at [me] weirdly, but I don’t want to interpret it negatively … If anything, the people that I [have] interacted with [have been] positive, and they say, like, I’m a great guy, funny guy, things like that.” When it comes to group projects, for instance, he can pick whichever of his fellow students he wants to work with without fear of suffering social rejection because of his dwarfism.

According to Warsame, Canadian culture has taught him a lot about independence. “The individualistic culture in Canada is a bit different from the collectivist culture in Dadaab … [here,] you have to figure things out on your own. Nobody tells you something if you don’t ask, so I [learned how to] depend on myself. I learned how to cook; if I need appointments, I can book [them] on my own … That independence and [attitude of] going for what you want changed my life.”

‘Short King Warsame’

It was this independence and desire to reinforce his worth that led Warsame to begin participating in online advocacy. Despite having been on social media for a long time, Warsame only got serious about and consistent with posting content this past year. The alias ‘Short King Warsame’ was born from his quest for a unique brand that framed his short stature in a positive light.

“I used to fear people,” Warsame said, “because of the environment. If I even saw someone looking at me, I would automatically think that they [were] looking at me because I’m a little person [even if they were not]. But I asked myself, ‘How long do you want to live with these kinds of beliefs?’ … I wanted to expose myself to people. Some people will be extremely mean, others will be really nice. I wanted to challenge that — that’s why I joined social media.

“When I did my first video, I just [showed] half [of my body] because no one could guess that I was a little person like that. Then, I was like, let me just do full-body and see people’s reactions … There were so many comments. I remember that video got a thousand comments — some of them extremely mean, and some of them extremely good. Then I just kept on posting videos, and I got used to people being mean … My goal was like, ‘If they say something bad today, and something bad tomorrow, how long can they say something mean?’ After posting for five or six months, most of the people who used to be mean got used to me; some of them even became my fans! … [Posting on social media] boosted my self-esteem, and it doesn’t bother me when someone looks at me now. In fact, if someone looks at me, like, I’m gonna smile at them.”

Warsame’s audience ranges from members of Somali communities to McGill students. He has even been featured on BBC Somalia. When asked if he ever expected to gain as much attention as he has, Warsame shakes his head. “I [thought] I was gonna be [like] any other [person on social media. But I think after the first or second week, people were like, ‘Hey, I know your Instagram. Can I take a picture with you?’” He chuckles. “I felt good because I got positive attention from most of these students. [Now,] people who never used to talk to me come up to say hi, maybe because they know I have a good personality. It’s a good feeling.”

At first, Warsame would post simply for exposure. Now, in addition to his light- hearted content, Warsame has taken on a mission to advocate for individuals with dwarfism and people who suffer from social anxiety.

“There are people who are living with disabilities that are still dealing with the things that I once dealt with. So I want them to see me as an inspiration, like, ‘If Short King can do it, I can do it too.’ I don’t want them to focus on their disability only. I want them to see it as just part of them and not their whole identity.” He recounts fondly how a mother with a 12-year- old child living with dwarfism had sent him a DM, telling him how watching his videos had helped her child to develop a positive self-image and not to see his dwarfism as an obstacle.

In addition to his social media presence, Warsame also works closely with WUSC McGill as their VP Peer Support and SRP alumnus, helping to connect the club with scholars who had previously enrolled at McGill through the program. Moreover, Warsame has launched his own NGO, Rise Beyond Height, which aims to empower persons with dwarfism in Somalia and Kenya through advocacy, education, and inclusion. At the time of writing, he is working to launch his first awareness campaign. “A lot of people are not aware of the insulting nature of a lot of words they [commonly use] — words like ‘dwarf’ and ‘midget.’ People still use those in their everyday vocabulary.” He hopes to create awareness about people living with dwarfism, and spread the message that no one should be underestimated just because of their physical differences. Once he graduates from McGill in Fall 2027, he plans to take a year off to focus on getting Rise Beyond Height to stand on its own feet, then pursue a master’s degree in psychopharmacology (though where exactly is still unclear.)

Looking Forward

“Home, for me, is where I feel accepted.” Having just received his Canadian citizenship, Warsame is planning to stay in Canada post-graduation. “[Home] can be anywhere … can be multiple things. It’s just that home is a feeling of acceptance and being embraced for who you are.”

Warsame believes that our self-perceptions factor massively into the realities we deem possible. “If today, I had the belief in me that I am incapable — for example: [because] I am a short person, I should always be dependent — I would really be that person … If I believe that I cannot do anything on my own, I will act in a way that suggests that I cannot actually do something … The brain acts according to the beliefs that you have. Psychology plays a great role in what someone can do.” His pursuit of psychopharmacology, the scientific study of how medical substances can affect one’s nervous system and the processes associated with it, is only natural as an extension of his interest in investigating these beliefs.

“You don’t want to just sit back and hopefully do good. Hopefully I will feel good. Hopefully, you know, things will turn out. But things don’t just turn out on their own spontaneously.” When asked about hope and belief, and how those can translate to change, Warsame says: “You have to [act.] I am someone who believes in being hopeful, and at the same time, [thinks about] the steps I’m taking towards getting things done, you know?”

Warsame’s childhood dream of becoming a doctor has since evolved, though he affirms that he still loves the sciences. Now, to encourage people to believe in themselves and act on such with confidence, he plans on continuing down the path of content creation and advocacy in addition to his studies. “I want to be someone who impacts lives now, who touches as many people as possible, whether [they] have a critical disability or not.”

I would like to end this article with a quote from Warsame’s memoir: “My story is not exceptional because I overcame challenges. Millions of people do that every day. My story matters because it demonstrates what becomes possible when society chooses opportunity over prejudice, inclusion over exclusion, and belief over doubt. If there is one message I hope readers carry with them, it is this: [n]ever underestimate a child because of how they look. Never assume limitations where potential exists. And never forget that disability is not inability. Sometimes, the greatest strength is found precisely where the world least expects to find it.”

The post Larger Than Life: Short King Warsame appeared first on The McGill Daily.

According to its bargaining team, AMUSE represents approximately 1,300 to 1,600 casual employees, employees hired on a temporary or occasional basis, at McGill. Its collective agreement expired on May 31, 2025. The union developed its bargaining strategy through member surveys conducted in 2024 and 2025, as well as a special general meeting in September 2025. 

A subsequent meeting scheduled for October 27 was cancelled because of unforeseen circumstances on AMUSE’s side. October 5 therefore remained the most recent session at the time of its responses. 

With a new agreement in sight, wages that keep pace with inflation and stable employment are AMUSE’s main priorities, the bargaining team told the Daily. The team also stressed that the university should recognize and respect AMUSE’s role in representing workers and their rights. 

“We’re not a student group; we’re a certified union of workers recognized by the province of Quebec,” the team wrote. 

The team said negotiations are still focused on non-monetary provisions, including job security and workplace procedures, with monetary discussions yet to come. 

In written responses to the Daily, Neha Jhaj, AMUSE’s Grievance Officer and a bargaining team member, emphasized the union’s demand for protections comparable to those available to other workers on campus. “Casual workers shouldn’t be treated so differently than any other worker,” Jhaj wrote. 

Seeking consistency across departments 

Much of the disagreement concerns Articles 14 and 15 of the collective agreement between AMUSE and McGill, which cover disciplinary actions, administrative measures, and dismissals. In its published bargaining update, AMUSE reported that discussions were set aside on October 5 after the parties were unable to resolve several points of disagreement. McGill’s account also confirms that these discussions were deferred to a later date. 

According to AMUSE, employees’ experiences can differ depending on their department or supervisor, even though they work for the same employer with the same collective agreement. Josef Jakubec, AMUSE’s Labour Relations Officer and a bargaining team member, identified disciplinary procedures, shift scheduling, breaks, and paid hours as areas where inconsistent practices arise. He attributed these differences to McGill’s decentralized administrative structure and varying interpretations of the agreement. 

Jhaj explained that setting aside an issue allows bargaining teams to work through other articles before returning to unresolved proposals. She stressed that the precarious nature of contract work does not remove an employer’s responsibilities toward its workers. 

“However, this does not mean that a worker is disposable, or that an employer has no responsibility to provide not just stability and transition, but communication as to what’s going on,” she wrote.

The union is seeking clearer contractual language and greater access to workplace information to help identify inconsistencies. Jakubec argued that reducing ambiguity would benefit both employees and the university by limiting disputes over interpretation. 

Jhaj linked these demands to the financial uncertainty facing casual workers. She said reductions in working hours or the elimination of positions can directly affect members’ ability to cover basic expenses, which is especially pertinent given the rising cost of living. 

“We, the members of AMUSE, use this income to pay our rent, our food, our bills,” she wrote. “This is not novelty pocket change. It’s our livelihood.” 

Probation and hiring procedures 

Discussions about probation, the initial trial period of employment, have been more collaborative, according to Jhaj. She continued to explain that the current system can be difficult for both employees and McGill to track, as casual workers have irregular schedules and hours. According to AMUSE’s published update, members may be unaware that they have completed their probationary period.

“At the moment, we’re collaborating on something new that gives more members access to successfully passing probation,” she wrote. 

McGill’s October 5 update describes the discussion as exploratory and states that the parties exchanged ideas and agreed to continue discussions. However, the university reported that no full articles were agreed upon during the session. 

The parties also addressed the posting and granting of assignments. McGill’s bargaining update records AMUSE’s presentation of its proposal, with discussions to follow. AMUSE’s published account identifies clearer job postings, timelines, and hiring procedures as its priorities. 

For Jhaj, clearer employment information would help members understand their rights and recognize potential violations before disputes develop. “This proactively prevents labour disputes rather than creating more of them,” she wrote.

McGill did not respond to the Daily’s request for comment by the time of publication.

Solidarity with MUNACA 

AMUSE has expressed solidarity with the McGill University Non- Academic Certified Association (MUNACA), whose “Facts are Facts, McGill” campaign challenges McGill’s compensation and spending priorities. The Daily previously covered the campaign in its October 5 editorial. 

Jakubec noted that members of both unions often share workplaces. He said McGill’s spending decisions have affected both groups through changes to workloads, justified by the hiring freeze. 

“To AMUSE, solidarity means supporting workers’ rights across all bargaining units at McGill, because our struggles are intertwined,” he wrote. 

The bargaining team said agreement on improving job security and consistent workplace practices would help move negotiations toward monetary discussions. 

For Jhaj, the goal is to give employees greater clarity before decisions affect their livelihoods. “We deserve to understand how decisions affecting our livelihoods are made, what rights and protections we have, and what to expect from our employer before we find ourselves dealing with the consequences of those decisions.” 

Readers can follow the negotiations through AMUSE’s bargaining updates and learn more about MUNACA’s demands through its “Facts are Facts, McGill” campaign.

The post “It’s Our Livelihood”: AMUSE Pushes for Job Security at McGill appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Good People is a bi-weekly article series highlighting McGill students doing community-oriented work on and around campus. Because it’ s important to celebrate good people doing good things.

Why is it so hard to reach out? It is a simple question but one that resonated deeply with Aidan Licoppe, the co- founder and head of technology of the R3ACH app. With a background in coding and machine learning, Licoppe started to think about in-person social connection more seriously during the second year of his master’s program in experimental medicine at McGill. Licoppe realized it was becoming more difficult for young people to form new friendships as screen time and social media increasingly eclipse face-to-face hangouts.

R3ACH, founded by brothers Aidan and Zachariah Licoppe and their friend Josh Campbell, was born out of a desire to do something about this problem. Launched in September, R3ACH aims to connect users to third spaces in their community. Similar to a dating app, R3ACH suggests social events in Montreal that users can swipe on to join. If a friend or mutual friend swipes on the same event, R3ACH opens a group chat with the time, place, and location of the event. “No more ‘what are you up to’ texts; no more trying to figure out conflicting schedules,” R3ACH promises on its website. Currently based in Montreal and Boston, R3ACH is looking to expand to more cities as its following grows.

The Daily spoke to Aidan Licoppe about R3ACH. We talked about social isolation, the barriers to forming friendships, and how technology can be used to foster — rather than preclude — human connection.

This interview has been edited for clarity and conciseness.

Enid Kohler for The McGill Daily (MD): I want to start by asking about you. Why did you launch R3ACH? What is your background in technology?

Aidan Licoppe (AL): I did my undergraduate [studies] in bioengineering at McGill. Later on in my degree, I got more interested in the coding and machine learning side. For my master’s degree, I switched to experimental medicine. I remember we were doing a class on digital health innovation, when we were talking about digital health solutions. One of our group members brought up the idea of loneliness. With that in mind in the summer, I talked to my brother and my roommate at the time, Josh. [Loneliness] is something that affects all of us, and especially young adults. We’re living in a time that is isolating us more than ever. We started brainstorming, you know, ‘How can we create an app that makes us less lonely and builds community?’ And then it just went from there.

MD: How would you pitch R3ACH to a potential investor in 30 seconds?

AL: The way we like to say it in one sentence is R3ACH is like Tinder for events, but you match with your friends.

When you want to connect with people nowadays, there’s a bunch of barriers that get in the way, and R3ACH tries to address all of those together. There are a lot of apps that let you meet strangers, but we feel like that’s a band-aid to a broader problem of loneliness. We don’t think the problem is that you’re not meeting enough people, but it’s more that… you’re not building a community with them.

I find that the best way to meet people is through your friends. R3ACH helps you with that, in the sense that any event that you match to, your friends’ friends can match to it too. So really you only need one friend on R3ACH to be able to get started. There’s also a feature for people to go to events solo, but, ideally, you go with friends and naturally start building more connections the more events you attend.

MD: R3ACH’s Linkedin biography reads, “Creating a world where technology strengthens human connection.” I think we often perceive technology as having the opposite effect by limiting, instead of encouraging, human connection. How, then, does R3ACH use technology to foster human connection?

AL: I think it’s such a counterintuitive thing that the technology we have now removes so many barriers associated withconnecting with people. At the end of the day, we have the most sophisticated algorithms ever, right? On top of that, we have all the technology to be able to message each other and to organize things easier [now more] than ever.

But for some reason, these things are all being used in a way that facilitates [socialization] on the app instead of off of it. I think now, especially with our [shorter] attention spans, it’s so easy to go on Instagram reels or something and get that dopamine fulfillment. Hanging out nowadays has to be so much more interesting for people to even get out of their house. We hope people can instead go on their phones and say, okay, I’m going to go on my phone to get off of my phone to build those relationships.

MD: What has the response to R3ACH been like since you launched two months ago?

AL: It’s been really great so far. We’ve been doing some work on social media, talking to a lot of different groups, and trying to connect with student groups. One thing I noticed the most through my own use [of the app] is how much more people want to hang out than you think.

MD: Have there been any challenges or obstacles that you’ve encountered during the development of R3ACH?

AL: Oh yeah. I mean, with running an app — this is my first business — there are a lot of things you discover initially that you didn’t even realize were a problem. I think one of the challenges for us has been just competing with the burden of short attention spans and all the other apps that are out there, but we’ve seen that once people get to experience the app and use it among their friends, they really love it.

MD: What is your vision for the future of R3ACH? In ten years, what do you hope R3ACH will look like?

AL: In terms of a broad goal, I want R3ACH everywhere where we can have it. North America is our first target. I would hope that one day R3ACH would be the default way in which people can actually connect and build community among each other.

MD: The tagline for this column is “good people doing good things.” In the context of your work with R3ACH, what does being a good person mean to you?

AL: In terms of my work and what motivates me, [it’s] just to use your gifts in a way that helps people. Just having an open- mindedness to helping others, having empathy, and being able to be a person that cares for others. I think thinking outside of yourself is the most important way to be a good person.

Learn more about R3ACH and opportunities to get involved on Instagram, @r3ach.app, through their website, r3ach.app, or download R3ACH on the App Store to experience it yourself.

If you know good people doing good things who you would like to see featured in this column, email news@mcgilldaily.com.

The post Turning Connections Into Community with Aidan Licoppe appeared first on The McGill Daily.

On October 23, Beth Lew-Williams, professor of history and director of the Program in Asian American Studies at Princeton University, won the 2026 prize for her book John Doe Chinaman: A Forgotten History of Chinese Life Under American Racial Law. Lew-Williams’ work was chosen from a pool of almost 400 international submissions, making the eight-book shortlist in September before earning top honours. Jonathan Cheng of The Wall Street Journal and Alexander Lee of The University of Warwick were named as the year’s two finalists.

Also on October 23, before the allocation of the awards, all three writers spoke in the Cundill Forum at McGill’s Thomson House, where the Daily was in attendance. Moderated by McGill History and Classical Studies professor Jeremy Tai, the discussion explored the motivating research questions and resulting discoveries key to the three books in competition. The Forum formed part of the October 22-23 Cundill History Prize Festival, which also featured a lecture by previous winner Lyndal Roper for her book Summer of Fire and Blood: The German Peasants’ War, the student-organized Cundill Fringe, and the awards ceremony.

During the forum, Lew-Williams explained that John Doe Chinaman began with questions about everyday life. After researching anti-Chinese violence and immigration restrictions in the 19th century American West, she realized how much was not known about the specifics of Chinese immigrant life in America. Could they enter a barbershop, for example? Where could they sit in a segregated theatre? These were things she did not know. “I wanted to understand the racial norms, the rules of everyday life,” she explained.

This line of questioning led to a shift in research, moving from her previous focus on American border restrictions faced by Chinese immigrants to studying the laws that governed those who successfully became residents. Combining a review of trial transcripts from the 1850s to the 1920s with digital research, she identified more than 5,000 discriminatory laws. Machine learning helped locate potential legislation, but she personally reviewed approximately 9,000 matches to determine their relevance.

Lew-Williams also turned to trial transcripts containing testimony from Chinese immigrants for research. From this angle, she was able to uncover a more personal side of the story. Despite restrictions on Chinese testimony, Lew-Williams found that some immigrants had managed to leave behind anonymity-defying accounts in the historical record. “When you’re given only fragments, you learn to make the best of them,” she said.

As a part of his discussion moderation, Tai asked the finalists to share the story of someone who stood out in their research. For her part, Lew-Williams introduced Ruby Tsang, a Chinese-American woman who filed a lawsuit in 1916 in order to challenge segregation at a theatre in Reno, Nevada. In response, the theatre threatened to lobby for segregation-permitting legislation, and Tsang subsequently withdrew her case. “[T]his is not a story where she triumphs in the end and desegregates all the theatres in Nevada,” Lew-Williams explained, but in her eyes that makes Tsang’s story all the more important. “[W]e get a sense of [the] pushback that those in power, state governments, ha[d] against Chinese communities.”

In the official winner announcement, Emily Greenwood, chair of the jury and a professor of classics at Harvard University, described the book as “a dazzlingly innovative and hard-hitting work.” She highlighted its combination of data analysis and storytelling to recover Chinese voices obscured in legal and bureaucratic records.

Fellow panelist and finalist Alexander Lee described a similar challenge of working with fragments in writing his book The First Ghetto: Venice and the Jews. He argued that scholarship often separates Jewish residents’ experiences from the surrounding Christian society, “as if the ghetto’s walls were also built around the archives.”

With his book, Lee examined how the Venice Jewish community’s position was continually negotiated. Alongside persecution, his account considers the relationships and institutions through which residents sustained community. He described studying architecture, commerce, and domestic space to understand experiences that government records alone could not capture.

Jonathan Cheng, the third co-panellist and other Cundhill Prize finalist, was honoured for his work, Korean Messiah: Kim II Sung and the Christian Roots of North Korea’s Personality Cult, about the intersections of religious influence and political power through a history of North Korea’s founding Kim family.

This project, Cheng explained, grew from his own curiosity about the Kim family’s Christian background, beginning as a newspaper article but eventually becoming the 768-page book in question. Cheng relied on missionary diaries and correspondence, alongside critically-examined North Korean publications, to investigate connections between Kim Il Sung’s upbringing and the political system that the leader established. “It is about personality cults. It is about the blending of politics and religion,” Cheng said.

When the panel discussion turned to the contemporary significance of these respective histories, Lew-Williams highlighted the continuing influence of nineteenth-century anti-Chinese legal cases on immigrants’ rights. Cheng, for his part, discussed the intertwining of politics and religion across contemporary societies. Lee cautioned that prejudice can persist by changing its form, even as historical circumstances differ.

Lee also emphasized the importance of empathy in historical research. “We seek to put ourselves in their shoes, to see what they saw, to feel what they felt, to know their hopes and fears,” he told the audience. Together, the three books show how recovering personal accounts and stories can deepen our understanding of the laws, communities, and political systems that shape history.

The post Princeton Professor Beth Lew-Williams Wins 2026 Cundill History Prize appeared first on The McGill Daily.

The Daily spoke with Kimberly Wong, current director general of SILK, and Gregg Blachford, former president of Gay Line (1993-1996) and director of McGill’s Career and Placement Service (CaPS), about CAEO Québec and the SILK program. We discussed queer education and services for English-speaking schools, volunteering and outreach, allyship, and counteracting shame with queer joy.

This interview has been edited for clarity and conciseness.

Justin Friedberg and Mara Gibea for The McGill Daily (MD): What facilitated the expansion of Gay Line to CAEO Québec and SILK? How did the shifting media landscape’s impacts on the dissemination of information from the ’90s to the 2000s affect Gay Line’s mandate?

Kimberly Wong (KW): Gay Line served an important role from the ’70s to the 2000s; however, there are plenty of resources on the internet now and not many people who love to talk on the phone anymore.

Gregg Blachford (GB): There weren’t many comparable organizations that existed at the time. The original goal of what they were doing, giving information to a lot of people, has changed. Over the decades, many organizations have sprung up to deal with the police, health, and AIDS. The phone line in Montreal was no longer unique […] eventually phones stopped ringing.

KW: The organization transitioned to new opportunities: […] workshops to talk about queerness and sexuality, [and] collaborating with Queer McGill to get volunteers.

MD: The theme of CAEO Quebec’s 50th anniversary celebration is titled “Queer Joy.” What does queer joy mean to you?

GB: Queer joy is about pride, excitement, and fun. It’s about lifting the shame and engaging more with the joy of being gay.

MD: How did shame manifest socially and politically in Montreal’s queer community during Gay Line’s operation?

GB: Near the beginning of Gay Line, in the ’90s, Montreal’s queer life was full of difficult conditions: unsolved murders which the police weren’t taking seriously, raids on saunas and bars, and an AIDs crisis hanging over people’s heads.

MD: In 1993 you, Gregg, delivered a testimony to the Quebec Human Rights Commission on the inquiry into “Violence and Discrimination against Gays and Lesbians in Quebec.” Have any of the issues in your testimony been addressed? What has remained consistent or shifted in terms of the needs of queer communities in Montreal?

GB: Quebec, to its credit, gave the opportunity for the queer community to talk about what was happening and what they think should be happening [with the referendum regarding police violence against queer peoples and spaces]. What’s it like today? On one level, it’s much better: laws have changed, and there are no more police raids — they’ve apologized for the raids in the 70s/80s. What is consistent is the shame that hangs over people’s heads, despite the turn towards positivity in the queer community. Still, the expectation of having to come out and have some reconciliation with your mind is still there.

MD: How has the CAEO Québec facilitated this reconciliation?

KW: Reconciliation is about facilitating that education — making people more comfortable and making spaces to work towards educating different kinds of populations and adapting to the changes they need on the front lines.

MD: One way that CAEO Québec is creating these spaces is through the SILK program, of which you, Kimberly, are a director. Could you tell us a bit about that?

KW: The SILK program provides workshops that are testimonial-based. Queer volunteers go into schools and share about themselves. One of the main ways to connect to students is through storytelling: everyone loves stories, whether you’re young or old.

The program is about getting students to think about other perspectives that they haven’t thought about before. People may not realize their values have come from parents or religion, and some haven’t been exposed to the queer community. As a result, we strive for a safe learning environment where people can ask their questions, even if they’re uncomfortable or antagonizing. It’s a cool way to be able to enact social change through education and young people: if we can plant these seeds at a young age, they can carry that forward for the rest of their lives.

MD: Considering the organization is a non-profit, how vital is volunteering?

KW: CAEO Québec and the SILK program are all volunteer-run, which is very rare. Because we don’t have a specific funding body, there are positives and negatives. We don’t receive money (i.e. grants), but we’re also not beholden to a governing body’s priorities.

GB: The program is inter-generational too! We recently had a party at my house with past volunteers. Volunteering meant so much to them: it teaches active listening, which they’ve used in other areas of their life, making change. “New gay” volunteers get something out of it too… it’s a two-way street. Often students come who are exploring their own gender, sexuality, and identity.

KW: Something nice about the program is that the CAEO Québec takes time to train people and make them more comfortable. It can be a one-time thing, low stakes. Many volunteers feel a lot of satisfaction after speaking to students. We poll anonymous feedback about the workshop, and 95 per cent of it is positive. It is so rewarding to see that, as the workshops are something we would’ve wanted when we were in high school. They can be life- saving in some contexts. The whole thing feels very special, making space for volunteers, community — magic comes from it.

MD: That’s how both of you met working for Gay Line. Would you say these relationships foster lifelong contacts?

KW: Many people become long-time friends. You have Gregg, who volunteered from 1984 to 2007 — truly intergenerational. The program includes very passionate people who want to provide community support, using the privilege they have in their lives. It’s free; it’s volunteering.

MD: Considering Gay Line’s historic ties to McGill, how can students and allies get involved?

GB: The dances run by Gay McGill in the SSMU building were not just for McGill students, but for the whole community. People talked about how vibrant it was and how it made them feel. I was involved with admin to move the university towards better relationships with queer community, including starting the annual return of the Rainbow Reception.

KW: For volunteering, something notable about our organization is that we accept allies in our volunteer pool.

GB: Allies were important then, and allies are important now too.

KW: For SILK in particular, allies can demonstrate why community [exposure is important for] students who may not be able to relate to having close ties to the community.

MD: Would you like to share any parting wisdom after 50 years?

GB: The reason it’s lasted 50 years is because of Kimberly. She held it together when it could’ve fallen apart, which shows how individuals can keep things going. Being so upbeat, positive, and cheerful really helps.

KW: We don’t expect people to come in with perfect skills. Because we work with a marginalized group of people, there has to be more understanding and flexibility. The organization is as strong as the volunteers that make it up. We want the space to be an encouraging sandbox for people to learn, grow, and gain new skills.

CAEO Québec is currently hiring volunteers and SILK workshop facilitators. The next training will take place on November 7, 8, and 14 from 10:00 AM to 6:30 PM in downtown Montreal. Students can follow @caeo.quebec on Instagram for more information.

The post Celebrating CAEO Québec’s 50th Anniversary appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Good People is a bi-weekly article series highlighting McGill students doing community-oriented work on and around campus. Because it’ s important to celebrate good people doing good things.

Finn Jacobsen was in his first year of law school in the fall of 2025 when he and his colleagues formed a community of transgender students at McGill’s Faculty of Law.

The Trans Law Collective — a volunteer-run organization that provides free legal information, education, and advocacy support for trans, non-binary, Two- Spirit peoples, and individuals questioning the gender binary in Quebec — was born out of this group of peers. The Trans Law Collective offers monthly legal clinics, free of charge, on McGill’s downtown campus to help students and Montreal residents navigate the legal process for changing their legal name and sex designation. Beyond clinics, the collective also hosts social events, a pre-law mentorship program, and conducts legal research with an eye towards using the law as a tool of liberation.

The Daily spoke with Finn Jacobsen, second-year law student and the Trans Law Collective’s Vice President of Communications, about the organization. We talked about making legal information accessible, building community, and their organization’s vision for growth and continuity.

This interview has been edited for clarity and conciseness.

Enid Kohler for The McGill Daily (MD): To get started, I want to learn more about you. How did you get involved in this organization? What drew you to it?

Finn Jacobsen (FJ): I’m a second year law student, and this club started up last year, when I was a freshman. A bunch of my first year colleagues and I reached out to the trans community in our first year law class. We were really lucky to have a ton of trans people in our 200 person class. We ended up with twelve people in first year and we made this club. We’re building it from the ground up.

MD: How would you pitch the Trans Law Collective to a student who has never heard about it before in 30 seconds?

FJ: We have three main arms. We do legal research, social events — connecting the trans community and students at McGill — and then we provide services as well. The main service we do is legal clinics, like for name and gender marker changes. But in general, we’re just trying to support any initiatives that involve the intersection of the trans community and the law.

MD: From your perspective, why is the Trans Law Collective important? Why is there a need for these kinds of services for the trans community in Montreal?

FJ: When it comes to legal transition issues, I find the process in Quebec is actually really great. It’s pretty open, but it’s so hard to understand, especially if you don’t have a legal background. It can just stump people when it really doesn’t need to; it can be really confusing. Our clinics get people to feel confident to make the changes that they really need. It’s nice to talk to someone who has done it all before and who can just get you sorted and connected.

Generally, trans people are facing a lot of struggles right now. There’s a lot of laws trying to be put into place that make it harder to be trans. So it’s important that we keep on top of that, stay aware, and take control of the rights that we do have as trans people and as people generally.

MD: Since you launched last year, what has the response been like, particularly to your legal clinics?

FJ: Weve had some pretty great moments. It’s been really cool. We worked with one person who was nonbinary and who didn’t always feel seen in their gender. And then they got to submit all these things [paperwork] to get an X marker on all their IDs and to have their chosen name reflected on all their legal documents. At the end of their time at the clinic, they were super emotional and just really excited to have this done. When you see stuff like that, it’s really moving.

MD: What do you have planned for this school year? What’s in the works for your team.

FJ: We’re having a clinic right now, actually. I just left it to come here. For this year, we’re running bi-weekly clinics off campus in Verdun, at the Centre des Femmes. And then we do monthly clinics on campus to try and be as accessible as possible to McGill students. We’re doing social events too. Trans Tuesdays will be starting up soon, just fun social events for people to hang out.

MD: Imagine a student sees a post for Trans Tuesday but feels nervous about attending the event alone. What would you say to them?

FJ: I’d say it’s probably a lot less intimidating than you think. Everyone in the club is really nice. And everyone who’s ever been to these events is always friendly and happy to chat.

Feel free to bring anyone, like a friend if that will make you feel more comfortable. We just want to give people an opportunity to meet other trans people, queer people, or supportive allies on campus.

MD: What is your vision for the future of the Trans Law Collective?

FJ: We’re just focused on continuity right now. We want to make sure the service stays available, especially on campus. Hopefully, the further we go, we can get more funding, provide more support, and do more legal research, too. The sky’s the limit.

MD: The tagline for this column is “good people doing good things.” In the context of your work with the Trans Law Collective, what does being a “good person” mean to you?

FJ: I think for a lot of trans people, it’s just nice to be able to be seen and supported. I feel like the trans community often doesn’t ask for much, it’s just, “let people be who they are and then see them for who they are.”I think that’s what we’re trying to do. Let’s make sure people get access to that.

Learn more about the Trans Law Collective’s services, social events, and opportunities to get involved through their Instagram account, @translawcollective or via their website, translaw.info.

The post Trans Law Collective Dismantles Legal Barriers for Montreal’s Queer Community appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Four years ago, McGill announced that it would begin the first stage of underground investigation on the site of the former Royal Victoria Hospital (RVH). Sustainability Park, formerly called the New Vic Project, was described by provost, Christopher Manfredi, as “the most significant project our university has undertaken since its inception.” The Société québécoise des infrastructures (SQI) is responsible for the entire site, and has been working with McGill on the project since the site was vacated in 2015.

However, the project has been stalled by fierce resistance and battles in court. The Kanien’kehá:ka Kahnistensera, also known as the Mohawk Mothers, allege that the site holds unmarked graves of Indigenous children. The Indigenous solidarity collective has been fighting the construction since it was proposed, arguing that McGill continues to deny and infringe on the group’s right to investigate those responsible for abuses against Indigenous peoples. “We deserve the opportunity to honour our loved ones and grieve them properly,” the Kahnistensera write on their website.

The group is also committed to searching the grounds for undiscovered evidence related to the CIA’s MK- ULTRA medical program, a series of illegal psychiatric experiments conducted at the Allan Memorial Institute between 1948 and 1964 under Dr. Donald Ewan. Victims were given drugs and psychologically tortured for the purposes of manipulating the psyche: speakers at the vigil detailed the program’s use of electroshock therapy to erase victims’ memories and the ubsequent use of “psychic drilling” to reprogram the mind. Activist and Kanien’kehá:ka nation member, Kahentinetha Horn, described the experiments as “sheer scientific cruelty.”

The Kahnistensera held their first vigil behind the Allan Memorial Institute on May 23, 2025. The event serves as a way to hold space for ancestors, says organizer CJ, as an answer to the questions of how we can educate and commemorate the site. They held 12 vigils throughout the summer of 2025, and returned Friday, Palestine to North America, known as Turtle Island by many of the continent’s Indigenous peoples. “The same thing is happening in many different places,” a participant shared on the “present-day perpetuation of colonialism” that the Kahnistensera describe.

Horn described the series of vigils as an invitation to pay homage to the people who may be buried there. The vigil began behind the Allan Memorial Institute next to the Morgan pool, which was constructed at the height of the MK-ULTRA experiments. “You can’t just take children and throw them in a mass grave and cover them up,” Horn said during the vigil. She expressed that the vigils are part of the responsibility to take care of those children. “When we’ve completed our mission here, we will come back and have a closing ceremony for them,” she promised.

The general sentiment of the vigil was that non-Indigenous residents in Montreal, known as Tiohtià:ke in the language of the Kanien’kehá:ka, are living on stolen Indigenous land. “This whole island of Montreal is Mohawk,” Horn stated. “This land is Mohawk land. [Tkaronto] is Mohawk land too. Ontario is a Mohawk name.” She reiterated that McGill is built on Mohawk land, echoing the Kahnistensera’s statement that “McGill is a gravesite,” and that “it’s all built on blood,” as written in their handout. “I hope some day you take the time to learn the history,” Horn said, urging attendees to listen to Indigenous voices.

In the 2022 announcement of the archaeological investigation of the former RVH site, the McGill Reporter wrote that “the university is mindful that in recent times there have been troubling discoveries in parts of Canada linked to the Residential School System, and that many members of our campus and broader community are deeply impacted by this. Hence, in the spirit of reconciliation, McGill’s work with the SQI is and will always be grounded in caution, and will involve ongoing conversation with local traditional and elected Indigenous leaders.”

The legal battle between McGill and the Kahnistensera has been long and ongoing. In March 2022, the Kahnistensera filed a lawsuit against McGill and the SQI alleging that the former hospital grounds contain unmarked gravesites. An October 2022 court decision from the Superior Court of Quebec granted the Kahnistensera with an injunction that halted development until a proper archaeological investigation could be conducted. Both parties agreed to appoint a panel of three archaeologists, which was mandated to assess and identify the archaeological techniques to be used on the site for the detection of human remains and unmarked graves.

“McGill is destroying evidence and making it harder for people to find their lost family members as we speak,” the @takebacktekanonontak Instagram account, dedicated to solidarity with the Kahnistensera, wrote in a March 2024 post. “McGill is continuing construction regardless of the damage it could cause to those searching for their lost family members and to those wishing to find more evidence regarding the CIA’s MK-ULTRA medical program.”

Nonetheless, McGill maintains that there are no human remains on the site. They deny that Historic Human Remains Detection Dogs (HHRDD) detected remains, and claim that the bone fragments found during the investigation are from animals and hold “no relation to or indication of clandestine human burial.” During a tour of the site at the vigil, the Kahnistensera claimed that many of the fragments were too small to identify, and that the university never performed the lab analysis that they claimed to have conducted. They write in a flyer that several pieces of evidence of human remains have been found, and that McGill, Quebec, and the SQI refuse to respect forensic practices. In the Instagram post advertising the vigil, @takebacktekanontak lists the “results of three remote-sending technologies” used near the Morgan pool, confirmed by Askîhk Research Services (run by the SQI) as “three separate lines of evidence supporting the presence of human remains.” These include ground penetrating radar, HHRDD, and “subterra grey probe, [which identifies] burials by detecting fatty acids resulting from soft tissue decomposition and changes in soil compactness from digging burial shafts.”

The overall cost of the project, including planning, restoring, and construction, is projected to be 870 million dollars. Amid budget cuts over the past two years, the university has described the Sustainable Park project as “a top priority for McGill…[that] will continue.” “Where is this money coming from?” the Kahnistensera asks. “Where is your tuition going? What are you paying for?”

McGill writes that the allegations that there may be unmarked graves on the RVH site are currently being investigated. “They just don’t know what to do, because we can’t stop,” stated Horn. “We have our duty, we’re not going to stop, we’ll never stop.”

The post “McGill is a Gravesite”: Kanien’kehá:ka Kahnistensera Hold Vigil for Indigenous Children appeared first on The McGill Daily.

It happens to the best of us: a neglected sleep schedule, long hours at the library, or too many house parties can quickly turn a stubborn cold into a serious health risk. In the face of a medical scare, it can be challenging to know where or how to access care, especially for international or out-of- province students. 

That’s where HeyDoc comes in. Launched on July 31, 2026, HeyDoc is a free online resource built to guide students through Montreal’s healthcare system. In partnership with GTR Santé, a Quebec-based private healthcare network, HeyDoc’s “speak-with-a-practitioner” function allows students to text or call nurses in real time. 

The Daily spoke with co-founders Ella Durno and Shoshana Iny, fourth-year McGill students studying General Management and International Development respectively. We talked about the sources of strain on Quebec’s healthcare system, the importance of accessible and affordable care, and how empathy can change people’s lives for the better.

This interview has been edited for clarity and conciseness. 

Enid Kohler for The McGill Daily (MD): I want to start with the basics. Imagine you’re at a house party and a student asks you about HeyDoc. How would you describe it to them? 

Shoshana Iny (SI): We’re a startup to help students access care as easily as possible, especially for out- of-province or international students. We both have recognized the difficulties trying to access free, same- day healthcare in Quebec. That’s our goal — just to help as many students as possible. 

Ella Durno (ED): I would paraphrase it as their Montreal healthcare concierge. It’s a healthcare … one-stop shop to help navigate the system, no matter their background, their language, their insurance coverage, their age, or gender identity. On top of that, we have an opportunity for them to speak with nurses directly, because sometimes it’s a lot easier and more comfortable to speak to a real human. 

MD: Why did you start HeyDoc? What prompted the idea? 

SI: We initially became friends through the Integrated Management Student Fellowship (IMSF), which is a year-long program through the Desautels Faculty of Management that brings together students from a variety of faculties who are broadly interested in social impact and positive change-making. 

As a part of the fellowship, you have to create a sustainable startup related to one of the UN Sustainable Development Goals. We came up with the idea of wanting to be aligned to SDG 3, which is good health and well-being. 

Ella and I built on that vision. We reflected on our own experiences as out-of- province students who have really struggled when … [accessing] different kinds of healthcare in Quebec. And we realized that there would be a real opportunity to help students in Quebec access healthcare more easily. That was when HeyDoc was born. 

ED: Coming to a new city and a new province, it can be so overwhelming for so many reasons. When it comes to healthcare, that’s just another thing that you don’t know how to navigate. 

MD: You already touched on this a bit, but can you describe your observations about challenges when it comes to access to healthcare among McGill students more broadly? 

SI: Looking more broadly at the system, some of the current pain points that we identified during our research is a huge lack of family doctors in Quebec. International student population aside, even people that are already living here are struggling to access family doctors, which is burdening the system. There are huge strains on ERs as a result of that. Because of the family doctor shortage, coupled with the fact that walk-in clinics aren’t really common here, that creates this pervasive issue where there are not a lot of accessible, free same-day health care options. 

MD: In the process of launching HeyDoc, were there any challenges that you encountered?

ED: We launched this summer, when we were both working full-time jobs, which was one of the biggest challenges. Initially, it was also a challenge that neither of us had any technical experience in web development.

SI: I think the other part that we both struggled with was just navigating creating a real business, especially as undergraduate students. I’m not in Management; I felt as though I didn’t have any substantial background on the start-up scene or in entrepreneurship. It can be a bit daunting launching this new venture, putting yourself out there, especially on social media, without knowing how people will react. 

But it’s been amazing to see the overwhelming support from both friends and family, and also people that we don’t know who come up to us, saying that they wish they’d had this in their first year. That’s really given us the encouragement to keep going forward and trying to grow the platform.

ED: Adding onto that, just the uncertainty of pouring everything we have into an idea that we believed in and not being sure how the community would react was stressful. But since launching, it’s [been] nice to see that there is a big demand for it. 

MD: Looking five or ten years down the line, what is your vision for the future of HeyDoc? 

ED: I would love for HeyDoc to be known as the go-to resource for students, maybe [students from] other universities as well, trying to navigate the healthcare system in Montreal. 

SI: Right now, our focus is as much growth as possible, because that’s how we can positively impact as many students as possible. 

MD: The tagline for this column is “good people doing good things.” In the context of your work with HeyDoc, what does being a “good person” mean to you? 

SI: I think just leading with empathy and having that guide both your personal values and your professional aspirations. That’s always been really integral to my life and what I see for myself in the future. I’m really grateful to have the opportunity with HeyDoc to be putting that into real-world practice. 

ED: I was going to say something very similar about being very intentional about your values and how you choose to follow them on a day-to-day basis. That looks different for everyone, but I think if you have strong values and stay true to them, you can make a positive impact. 

You can learn more about HeyDoc via email at info@heydocmtl.com, their Instagram page @heydocmtl, or their website, heydocmtl.ca, to make a free account and use HeyDoc’s services. 

If you know good people doing good things who you would like to see featured in this column, email news@mcgilldaily.com.

The post Student Start-Up Provides Free Healthcare Resources for McGill Students appeared first on The McGill Daily.

By September 8, this decision was challenged in the Superior Court of Quebec. Justice Sylvain Lussier ordered Elections Quebec to send voter reminder cards in both French and English eight days later. The ruling came after an English-language rights advocate, Geoffrey Chambers, argued that French-only communication limited voter access to essential electoral information and risked skewed participation. 

French-only to Bilingual 

Bill 96, formally known as the Act respecting French, the official and common language of Québec, states that French is the official language of the Québec Nation. Correspondingly, the legislation requires that civil administration exclusively use French. 

Elections Québec stated that Bill 96 indicated the organization could no longer mail election information in both French and English. According to Global News, the agency had previously sought an exemption from Bill 96 that would have allowed it to continue mailing bilingual documents but that request was denied. 

As a result, the agency planned to provide information in English through other means, including a QR code that directed voters to online resources. During the court proceedings, Elections Québec argued that the information itself remained available in English and that instead the issue was whether voters had a right to receive it specifically by mail. 

Accordingly, Chamber’s legal challenge against Bill 96’s provisions for Eléctions Québec focused on whether alternatives provided “sufficient” access. The prosecuting lawyer representing the challenge argued that relying on a QR code could create difficulties for people without smartphones or reliable internet access. 

The court ultimately ordered Élections Québec to produce bilingual voter reminder cards. Although the ruling did not eliminate the broader language requirements established by Bill 96, it did change how those requirements apply to voter information for this specific election.

What Is at Stake for the Parties? 

The dispute also falls within an election in which Québec’s parties hold fervent positions on language and Québecois national identity.

For Parti Québécois (PQ), led by Paul St-Pierre Plamondon, French-only voter materials fortify a campaign built around affirming Quebec’s national identity, preserving the French language, and protecting the province’s sovereignty. The party primarily appeals to a francophone electorate, and its leader has pledged to pursue a sovereignty referendum whether the PQ forms a minority or majority government. A policy that normalizes French as the sole language of government communication therefore aligns closely with both the party’s message and much of its political base. 

The incumbent Coalition Avenir Québec (CAQ benefits from presenting itself as a defender of the province’s language-law framework. During the campaign, leader Christine Fréchette defended the French-only cards put forward by her party by arguing that English-speaking voters could still find election information in English elsewhere. 

The Quebec Liberal Party, whose support includes many English-speaking voters, has taken the opposite position. Liberal leader Charles Milliard, called on Fréchette to change the CAQ’s stance, arguing that equal participation requires equal access, not a system in which one linguistic group receives election information at home while another must search for it. 

The controversy also gives the Conservatives an opening to distinguish themselves from the sovereigntist PQ. Leader Eric Duhaime has presented his party as an alternative on the question of Quebec sovereignty and the mail-out dispute. 

The policy of French-only mail-out information, put forward by the CAQ, therefore aligns with the interests of any party whose electoral base is less dependent on English-speaking voters, given the inaccessibility of information regarding where, when, and how to vote. Consequently, the PQ and CAQ bear a potential advantage over the other parties that cannot afford uninformed English-speaking voters, namely the Liberals, the Conservatives, and Québec solidaire. 

The voter card therefore has become a small but visible example of a much broader debate about how Quebec defines the role of the French language in its public institutions and where the limits of policy should lie when it intersects with access to democratic participation.

The post Language Laws Meet the Ballot Box  appeared first on The McGill Daily.

The motion called for “the SSMU General Assembly to compel the President and Vice President of University Affairs to advocate against renewal or reinstatement of the exchange program consistent with SSMU’s existing Policy Against Genocide in Palestine and the Policy on Harmful Military Technology.” While the current exchange agreement, signed in December 2023, is set to renew in 2028, both McGill and HUJI are required to negotiate renewal terms nine months prior, which would be late 2027. 

In order for this motion to be voted on at the GA, a quorum of no less than 350 McGill undergraduate students needed to be satisfied. If passed, the motion states that the SSMU President and VP University Affairs will be called on to present “a motion mirroring the language of [the GA] motion” at the Senate meeting, scheduled for January 13, 2027, per the motion. 

James Thomas Reid, the SSMU Speaker, called the GA to order and opened the assembly with a brief overview of the agenda. This included various summaries of reports including the SSMU executive committee summer report and the Board of Director report both presented by President Hamza Abu-Alkhair, and a report presented by the accountability commissioner Lounes Azzoun. 

Following these announcements, discussion was opened for a finite time, where students were able to ask Abu-Alkhair questions regarding the reports as well as current SSMU activities. The queries ranged from an update on the sudden closure of Midnight Kitchen last year, where Abu-Alkhair answered that SSMU had launched a new Free Lunches program, to questions regarding how to get involved in SSMU. As the questions progressed, more students entered the SSMU ballroom. Reid periodically gave updates on how many more people were needed to meet quorum, causing students in the ballroom to text friends and peers, encouraging them to attend the GA. Reid also clarified that meeting attendance as well as voting was in-person only, standing in accordance with clause 4 in the 2026-2027 SSMU standing rules, which said, “Meetings shall be in person, unless the Steering Committee deems it necessary to be hybrid (in-person and Zoom) for extraordinary reasons.”

At 7:25 PM, quorum was finally met, which led to the end of the question period. A 15 minute recess time was scheduled before the motion was presented, however, this was soon asked to be suspended by a student. The student body voted in favour of this suspension by a large majority, which allowed for the GA to move on to the presentation of the motion. Reid explained how the mover, Sumayya Kheireddine, will be given five minutes to present the motion. 

Similarly to last year’s GA, where her motion on the one day strike for Palestine was passed in, Kheireddine opened her speech by stating that, as of September 28, 2026,  it has been 1086 days since the beginning of the genocide in Gaza. Kheireddine went on to specify that the motion was not about any particular McGill student or faculty member, but rather about the significance of interuniversity institutional relationships. Kheireddine hence encouraged students to vote “yes” on the motion asking McGill to terminate the agreement between the school and HUJI for two reasons; the first being that through its training of Israeli defence and intelligence, HUJI is a part of the Israeli military complex, and the second being that the campus is located on the ruins of the illegally occupied Jerusalem. She encouraged students to recall McGill’s rich history of academic boycott, arguing one cannot treat partnerships as neutral when connected to a military involved in occupation, genocide, and denying Palestinians’ right to education. She further emphasized that by partnering with this institution, McGill normalizes these violations of human rights. 

The time allotted to deliberate this particular motion was 5 minutes. This was followed by a 5 minute question period and a 10 minute discussion period. Both of these periods were quickly suspended by individual students, and passed with a ⅔ majority vote, suggesting that students were eager to move onto voting. Correspondingly, Reid announced the voting period at 7:47 PM. During this time, no one could leave or enter the building. After a few minutes of voting, it was announced that the vote in favour of the motion was passed by a simple majority, and it would thus move on to an online ratification process opening within 7 days of the GA. The room erupted in cheers, chatter, and clapping. 

After the GA, the Daily spoke to a few students about the meeting and the passing of the motion. One student told the Daily, “I’m just really happy everyone showed up tonight and demonstrated substantial support for the movement.” They added, “We show up because we deeply care, and this [voting at a GA] is just one avenue we can add pressure [to the university].”

The Daily also spoke to the Speaker, James Thomas Reid about the importance of student politics. Reid said it was his first time speaking at a General Assembly. When asked if he expected the GA to meet quorum, he replied “I did, yes, because it’s a very pertinent affair. It was a very important meeting and I thought a lot of the student body was very much interested in showing up. So it wouldn’t surprise me that we did.” However, he added, “Did I expect the actual suspension of questions and discussions? I didn’t expect it, but also it wasn’t very surprising.”

Regarding the cheers and clapping after the motion was passed, Reid commented, “It’s unsurprising how people reacted. As I said, this is a very pertinent issue and people are very passionate about that. I’m not surprised of the reaction that happened in the General Assembly, but it was my job to make sure that even though that reaction did happen, we [had to] continue to support order. That was part of my job.”

The ratification was sent to the student body on Friday, October 2 and students will have until October 13 to vote. To pass, the ratification must meet the quorum of at least 10 per cent of the SSMU constituency and receive a simple majority vote. 

The post McGill Students Pass Historic Boycott Motion appeared first on The McGill Daily.

The cost of groceries, access to healthcare, and Quebec’s constitutional future were prominent issues discussed during the first two televised debates of the provincial election. Throughout discussions of affordability and public services, party leaders returned to a recurring disagreement: whether another term of Coalition Avenir Québec (CAQ) government or a referendum on independence would bring greater uncertainty.

The September 15 TVA Face-à-Face brought together CAQ leader Christine Fréchette, Liberal Party leader Charles Milliard, Parti Québécois leader Paul St-Pierre Plamondon, Québec solidaire co-spokesperson Ruba Ghazal, and Conservative leader Éric Duhaime for an initial debate in French. They returned the following evening for the Noovo-Crave debate, also in French, with a third debate scheduled for September 23.

François Legault was absent from the stage, but his name was not absent from the debate. Fréchette began by distinguishing herself from Legault, her predecessor. However, her opponents repeatedly brought the discussion back to the CAQ’s past record. After nearly eight years in power, the CAQ faced criticism from opposition leaders over its management of public funds and the state of Quebec’s public services, with its rivals arguing that costly government projects had failed to deliver the improvements Quebecers needed.

St-Pierre Plamondon posited that a change of government could be a chance to reduce waste, while Milliard challenged the CAQ’s economic management. Fréchette disputed criticism from all four of her colleagues of the SIFA health-sector technology project, rejecting the cost figures raised as evidence to dispute her performance.

On affordability, the leaders disagreed over which costs the government should absorb and which revenues it could afford to lose. St-Pierre Plamondon defended removing Quebec’s sales tax, or TVQ, from used goods. Fréchette opposed this proposal, arguing that it would deprive the government of approximately $700 million annually.

Even the grocery aisle became a dividing line over the role of government. Ghazal proposed state-operated grocery stores, while Duhaime challenged the idea of government involvement in food retail, touching on his broader criticism of Quebec’s welfare model. In their opening statements, Ghazal had called for a stronger economy after what she described as poor decisions by previous governments, while Duhaime had identified the model itself as the problem.

The topic of housing also revealed differences in candidate opinions over which campaigns could realize their promises of building more homes. The Liberals’ housing plan aims to eventually build 100,000 new homes annually, through measures including wider use of prefabricated construction and faster permit approvals. However, during the TVA debate, Ghazal questioned whether the party’s proposed funding plan could support its ambitions. This exchange put the practical challenge of financing and delivering new housing on the construction agenda.

Discussions around healthcare brought up a related disagreement over the public versus private provision. During the first debate, Milliard opposed Duhaime’s proposal to expand access to private treatment by using public health insurance cards, arguing that taxpayers should be able to rely on the public system they already help fund. Duhaime maintained that the existing system could not stay the same. This disagreement continued the next night. As reported by 24 Heures, St-Pierre Plamondon argued that greater reliance on private care was not an automatic solution and advocated for strengthening local community service centres (CLSCs), while Duhaime continued to defend the private provision as having the potential to be more efficient.

The future of Santé Québec was another point of contention. Ghazal pressed St-Pierre Plamondon on how quickly he could fulfill the PQ’s promise of abolishing the agency, while the latter maintained that efficiency would not be an issue. Their exchange highlighted the practical question behind institutional reform: how soon would changes to the healthcare system actually be able to reach patients?

The Noovo-Crave debate also included a segment devoted to young people. According to student newspaper Quartier Libre, Milliard and St-Pierre Plamondon discussed youth distress, screen time, education, and artificial intelligence. When asked about taking legal action against major digital platforms’ harm to adolescents’ mental health, Milliard supported the idea, while St- Pierre Plamondon proposed examining its legal feasibility.

Even in the discussion surrounding young people’s mental health, the referendum found its way back into the conversation. Milliard suggested that a sovereignty vote could add to young people’s anxiety; St-Pierre Plamondon argued that it was a constitutional question separate from the issue under discussion.

Immigration generated a particularly sharp divide in the first debate. St-Pierre Plamondon defended the monitoring immigration levels, while Ghazal challenged his comments about second-generation Quebecers putting pressure on schools. Duhaime argued that Quebec’s capacity to receive newcomers had reached its limits, but Ghazal maintained a welcoming approach. Environmental policy also divided Ghazal and Duhaime. In the second debate, Duhaime promoted exploiting Quebec’s natural gas resources, arguing that this could replace other fossil fuels. Ghazal favoured developing clean energy instead.

On Quebec’s relationship with Ottawa, St-Pierre Plamondon said during the TVA debate that he would collaborate with Mark Carney and other provinces as long as Quebec’s interests were respected. Milliard challenged that position, although he defended cooperation within Canada.

By the second evening of debates, Fréchette repeatedly questioned whether the PQ’s referendum plans would create economic instability. Yet she herself faced questions about how she would vote in a referendum. Ghazal supported independence, while Duhaime argued that a referendum would weaken Quebec. The divisions therefore concerned both Quebec’s constitutional future and whether reopening that question should be a priority.

McGill political scientist Daniel Béland observed in his Policy magazine article that crowded stages and interruptions during debates limited how fully leaders could explain their proposals. Across the first two debates, questions about grocery bills, housing, and healthcare repeatedly became questions about Quebec’s political future. Their proposals also invited a more immediate question: what will change for the people paying those bills and waiting for care?

The post The Debate on Quebec’s Next Chapter appeared first on The McGill Daily.

The 25th Annual McGill Powwow was held by the McGill Office of Indigenous Initiatives and John Abbott College at the McGill MacDonald Campus on Friday, September 18. For McGill students on the downtown campus, the day started out grey and cold, the feeble rays of September sunlight blocked by the tall downtown buildings. However, on the Macdonald campus, summer was still in full swing; the powwow took place on Watson Field, where the surrounding trees allowed the sun to shine down on spectators in full. This joyful reminder of summer weather was the perfect preface to the powwow.

In the middle of Watson Field, a white tent reflecting the sunlight served as the centre for activities. Spectators and participants alike lined the perimeter of the tent standing or sitting on the grass and in chairs. Among the spectators were students, various members of the community, local vendors, and dancers.

The powwow was kicked off by the Grand Entry, a traditional opening ceremony, which began with all the dancers entering from the eastern corner of the tent to pay symbolic respect to the Eastern Door. The Kanien’kehá:ka (Ga-niyen-ge-HAA-ga) or Mohawk people, are the Keepers of the Eastern Door due to their traditional eastern territory spanning over parts of Quebec, Vermont, and New York. The dancers moved around the tent in a counter-clockwise circle, as per Mohawk tradition, led by four flag-bearers, including Tom Dearhouse. He carried the Hiawatha Belt Flag, a deep purple banner set with five interconnected white shapes after a wampum belt design representing the five nations of the Haudenosaunee (Hoh-DEE-noh-SHOH-nee) or Iroquois Confederacy. Carried alongside it was the modern version of the Mohawk Warrior Flag designed for the Rotisken’rakéhte (Mohawk Warrior Society), an LGBTQ2S+ flag, and a POW/MIA flag honouring veterans. All four flags were hoisted on two centre poles under the tent. To conclude the ceremony, several different prayers were said and songs were sung.

Following the Grand Entry, participants and spectators settled into the tent for the rest of the day. One side of the tent was allocated to the emcee’s table along with four drum circles, each comprising between five to ten men around a large drum. Throughout the competitions, the different drum circles alternated synchronized performances while singing. The host drum was Black Bear, co-hosted by Spiritwolf Singers, and accompanied by Ottawa River and Eagle River Singers. The different drum groups were there to accompany the different dances during the day. The host drum is the drum group that is responsible for playing during the important events, such as the Grand Entry.

Ahead of the anticipated competition dances, the emcees of the event — Lance Delisle, in English, and Marie-Céline Charron, in French — opened the floor of the tent to all present for an inter-tribal dance. A large group of schoolchildren on a field trip made up the majority of the dance, following the lead dancers in a simple movement pattern where they hopped twice on each foot to the beat of the drums.

The competitions themselves were short, but there were 12 categories in total that were divided by type of dance, gender, and age. The categories for men included Traditional, which encompasses traditional sharptight movements emulating battle-like dancing steps; Fancy, which is a non-traditional dance with more elaborate dramatic movements dance moves and regalia; and Grass, which is meant to mimic the movement of grass in both the regalis and the steps. Women have a similar Traditional category with sharptight steps; the Jingle category, which uses dresses with metal cones hanging from the ress to add more auditory and visual elements; and finally, Fancy Shawl, which is meant to emulate a butterfly through the use of the dancer’s shawls as they dance to a fast beat.

Each category began with around three to ten dancers spread out in the tent as the three judges went to each corner to observe. Once the drum went off, the dancers gave their all. For about one minute, the dancers moved all around the tent, keeping time, and showing off their tricks to the judges until the drum stopped, at which point the dancers held their finishing pose. This cycle continued about three to four times per category. After the dancing was done, the performers lined up in front of the judges.

Once it was time for the Men’s Traditional category, Dearhouse— 63 years old, stepped into the circle with two other dancers. He discussed how he had chosen his regalia to honor his Ojibwe heritage and its traditional teachings. His outfit incorporated the four colours traditionally used by Ojibwe people to represent the cardinal directions: red, black, white, and yellow. Dearhouse also mentioned incorporating the concept of following the sun into his outfit. In Ojibwe culture, the sun is thought of as an elder brother. This idea resonated with Dearhous, as an elder brother himself, and as someone who has many responsibilities as a social worker and an educator of traditional teachings. Dearwood’s regalia consisted of a bustle headpiece made of deer and porcupine, as well as bells around his legs to help him dance in time.

After the competitions ended, a short break was taken to allow dancers to rest and gave the audience the opportunity to look around at the vendors. Observers were able to browse a series of stalls set up outside of the tent that featured Indigenous craftsmakers, McGill associations, Indigenous organizations, and food.

After the break, the performances continued with the Hoop Dance. Hoop Dancing originated in the 1930s, and involves a performer who uses hoops to create shapes to tell a story. In this particular performance, the dancer recreated the motions and shapes of birds using the hoops. This was the only non-competitive performance in the powwow, so the emcees put out a rug and encouraged people to leave tips.

The powwow concluded with the announcement of the winners for each category and the closing ceremony. The 25th Annual McGill Powwow was a beautiful event that celebrated and fostered a place for learning more about Indigenous culture. Instead of looking through the colonial lens of a textbook, take the time to go to a powwow and see for yourself what some aspects of Indigenous culture looks like. To attend, check out the McGill Annual Powwow or stay up to date with the Office of Indigenous Initiatives.

The post McGill’s 25th Annual Powwow appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Content warning: death, violence

September 13 marks twenty years since the 2006 shooting at the Dawson College CEGEP, where one student was killed and 19 others were injured. Two decades later, families and survivors are citing the anniversary to argue that Canada’s legal approach to gun control remains unresolved.

In an open letter, families of survivors and victims called upon the federal government to act on three commitments: completing the ban and removing assault-style firearms, closing the large- capacity magazine loopholes, and strengthening the oversight of handgun exemptions. Their demands ensued decades after major shootings in Quebec triggered debates over firearm regulations. Debates that have been reignited by thousands demonstrating against federal firearm restrictions in Quebec City earlier this year.

The gun control debate precedes the Dawson tragedy. A debate that came to the forefront nationally after the 1989 École Polytechnique massacre where 14 women were killed in a misogynist attack. In its aftermath, the Coalition for Gun Control was formed. In 1995, the federal government adopted Bill C-68 which established the Firearms Act and expanded requirements surrounding licensing and registration.

By the time the Dawson shooting took place eleven years later, Canada already had a significantly broader federal firearm regulation. However, the attack renewed questions about what kinds of firearms could legally circulate in the country and whether further restrictions were necessary.

In 2023, the federal government made the handgun freeze permanent. Under the measure, new handgun registration certificates cannot be issued to individuals. This prevents most new purchases, sales, and transfers, while allowing people who previously owned handguns to retain them. The legislation also expanded the Criminal Code’s definition of prohibited firearms and introduced additional measures related to illegally manufactured firearms and licences in cases involving domestic violence.

Quebec also maintains firearm regulations of its own. Since 2018, the province has operated the Quebec Firearms Registration Service (SIAF). Most firearm owners in Quebec are required to register their firearms with the provincial system, in addition to meeting federal licensing requirements. Prohibited and restricted firearms, however, are registered federally rather than through the SIAF. The distinction means that what is often described broadly as “Quebec gun law” is actually a combination of provincial and federal regulations.

One of the largest ongoing disputes concerns assault-style firearms. The Assault-Style Firearms Compensation Program was created to compensate eligible owners who surrender prohibited firearms. Owners who did not participate must dispose of or permanently deactivate affected firearms by October 30 of this year.

For gun control advocates, the removal of these firearms is one of the commitments that remains incomplete. For opponents of the program, however, it has become a symbol of what they view as unfair restrictions on legal firearm owners.

Moreover, this disagreement came into public view on February 28, when several thousand protesters from Quebec and the rest of Canada gathered outside the National Assembly in Quebec City to oppose the federal program. At the demonstration, Sophie Béland, the provincial director of the Canadian Coalition for Firearm Rights, argued that the program unfairly targets legal firearm owners who are not involved in crime. Other participants described themselves as hunters and sport shooters concerned about losing legally acquired property.

PolySeSouvient, a gun- control advocacy group formed by survivors and families affected by the École Polytechnique massacre, criticized the movement opposing the removal program. The advocacy group argued that the firearms covered by the ban had been prohibited for public safety reasons.

The February protest also raised another question about the shifting discourse of firearm politics in Quebec. Some arguments made around the demonstration emphasized owning firearms for self- defence. This framing is particularly associated with gun politics in the United States, where firearm ownership is constitutionally protected. La Presse investigative journalist, Tristan Péloquin, argued that American political discourse surrounding firearms has increasingly influenced Canadian gun owners, particularly on the idea of possessing firearms for personal protection. This does not necessarily mean that Quebec’s gun regulations are becoming comparable to that of the United States; however, the language used to defend gun ownership in Quebec may be starting to change.

Twenty years after Dawson, the anniversary arrives in the middle of an ongoing debate. This debate that has shifted as Canada and Quebec have introduced layers of firearm regulation that did not exist at the time of earlier mass shootings, while the federal government continues to determine how some of the newest restrictions will be implemented.

For the families and survivors of the Dawson College shooting, September 13 is not only a day of remembrance but also a time to make distinctions between the passing of legislation and its implementations. This renewed distinction places the question facing governments in the present, twenty years later: not only regarding how much gun control policy has changed since 2006, but how much of it remains unresolved.

The post Two Decades After the Tragedy appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Jahn recently published an opinion piece in The Globe and Mail, entitled: “Universities should stop treating AI as a cheating problem.” She cites a 2026 study from the Higher Education Policy Institute at Oxford, which found that 94 per cent of UK undergraduate students use generative AI to aid with school work. Moreover, KPMG Canada found last fall that 73 per cent of students in Canada now rely on generative AI for schoolwork, an increase from 52 per cent two years ago. Of the Canadian students surveyed by KPMG, 45 per cent say their first instinct is to use AI when drafting written assignments, a practice of which 48 per cent attribute to the decline in their critical thinking skills.

Academic institutions have begun providing widespread access to specific generative AI models, which Jahn described as a more coordinated approach. For example, McGill’s Max Bell School of Public Policy provides all students and faculty with access to Claude Pro. However, as Jahn wrote in her article, “[Claude Pro] is a subscription and a training program. It is not a rethink of what a degree is for.” Moreover, certain Canadian professors, for example Jonathan Malloy (Carleton) and Daniel Silver (UofT), have partially opted for assignments that require and engage with AI. Malloy and Silver have similar approaches, essentially having students use AI to produce papers or assignments and then analyze AI’s response.

When asked if she had noticed the impacts of AI on syllabi this year, Jahn acknowledged McGill’s more proactive approach this fall. However, she also stressed the absence of an up-to-date, consistent AI policy across McGill and other post- secondary institutions. Additionally, she noted a move away from take-home papers and a pivot towards in-class assessments. This is echoed in a key piece of feedback from the Max Bell Center’s cohort last year: students need to monitor their use of AI.

This summer, the Max Bell School administration, including but not limited to Director Jennifer Welsh and Associate Director Manuel Balán, presented their faculty with a framework for professors to use when drafting AI policies in syllabi. The framework provided faculty with concrete categories and language, so that these policies (no matter the professors’ individual stances on AI) can all be slightly more cohesive.

Jahn breaks down AI regulation into three possibilities. Option one is an AI-free environment with measures like in-class evaluations and digital locking softwares. Option two is a hybrid model in which students aren’t technically allowed to use AI but have no parameters in place unlike the digital locking software in option one. The school is looking to avoid his as the model as this is what Jahn describes as the “least effective.” Option three is freedom for students to use AI. What is essential is not mixing the models, but using them in tandem, as, according to The Globe and Mail, “the mass lecture model has been failing students long before ChatGPT arrived.” Though this is a newly mplemented framework, the results of which we have yet to see at the Max Bell Center, Jahn notes that professors have greatly appreciated the guidance and structure provided by the Centre thus far. When asked about different approaches to AI use across McGill’s faculties and programs, Jahn emphasized how each program has a distinct disciplinary culture and, therefore, fundamentally different modes of evaluation, with some more challenged by AI than others. The Faculty of Arts in particular, with their heavy reliance on the take-home essay, has been targeted; however, not all arts classes are equally affected because there is no unified approach to regulating AI use. When asked about this, Jahn’s response was clear: “This is ultimately where universities and professors need to step in and clarify the rules.”

Moreover, Jahn was able to tell us more about an AI policy initiative specifically highlighting Canadian students’ voices. This past spring, the Centre for Media Technology and Democracy gave voice to young Canadians on AI policy at Gen(Z)AI: Canada’s Youth Assembly on Artificial Intelligence. Over eight months, thousands of youth crafted policy recommendations concerning AI regulations in Canada and presented them in parliament. I asked Jahn what surprised her most about the responses from post-secondary participants of Gen(Z)AI. Without hesitation, she described the manner in which post-secondary Gen Z students balance hope with realism, as seen in Gen(Z)AI’s role as “the democratic voice of [a generation that has] the most to gain or lose, speaking clearly and in their own name.” According to Jahn, Gen Z cannot afford to not think about AI in the same way other generations do.

Ultimately, what Jahn drove home most was that higher-level administration needs to be specific about the main skills they’re trying to instill in their students. “The fundamental question AI is pushing on us is ‘what are the real skills and learning outcomes we are working towards and how do we…[allow] our students to explore them?’” For Jahn and McGill faculty, exploring looks like moving toward AI-safe examinations. However, this elicits another question of how students can explore newly acquired knowledge if not through cognitive exercise, research, and the process of writing. Jahn has emphasized both in her article and speaking with the Daily the necessity for McGill to formulate a comprehensive AI policy. As we begin to see the impacts of AI usage on Canadian post-secondary students and their syllabi, the Max Bell School of Public Policy has been taking initiative, creating a framework for professors to tackle the troubling waters of AI use.

The post AI and the ‘Syllabus Effect’ appeared first on The McGill Daily.

As the city prepares for the UCI Grand Prix Cycliste and Road World Championships, ongoing street closures are raising concerns among locals, businesses, and individuals with reduced mobility. The Grand Prix Cycliste is a competition between commercial world and pro teams whereas the Road World Championships is a competition between national teams. These cycling events are among the most internationally prestigious, bringing the best cyclists to the streets of Montreal to compete for international recognition. 

Road closures began on September 5 in preparation for the Grand Prix Cycliste, which occurred on September 13. With the Road World Championships occurring from September 20 to 27, accessibility barriers and mobility challenges have become a topic of discussion. 

The road closures for the Road World Championships will affect 36 kilometres of Montreal streets, including major pedestrian pathways, and will last until October 4. According to the Ville de Montreal website, roads near McGill will face closures, either until October 4 or on select race days. These roads include Avenue du Mont Royal Est, Avenue du Parc, Rue Saint-Urbain, Avenue du Docteur-Penfield, and Boulevard Saint-Laurent. Moreover, students living near the Berri- UQAM metro station will experience closures on roads such as Rue Sainte-Catherine Est and Rue Berri. Those who frequent Parc Mont Royal should also prepare for closures on parts of Chemin Olmsted and Chemin Remembrance. 

On Sunday, I briefly watched the UCI Grand Prix Cycliste from the Plateau and had the opportunity to see many excited Montrealers doing the same. That being said, those with reduced mobility remain concerned about transit access. The CBC reports that during a recent meeting between Ville- Marie borough council officials, wheelchair user France Martin brought up concerns surrounding the inaccessibility of the STM’s paratransit due to the closures. According to CTV News, accessibility advocates have argued that these closures will also affect people’s access to medication, groceries, and homecare. CTV spoke with Steven Laperrière, executive director of Regroupement des activistes pour l’inclusion au Québec (RAPLIQ), an organization which advocates for Quebecois people with disabilities. Laperrière stated that because of the month-long duration of the closures, accessibility barriers are “very complicated.” He argues that the effects of these closures could be detrimental, calling for greater effort from the city to reduce barriers. 

In addition to transit barriers, there are multiple pedestrian bridges where people must climb flights of stairs in order to cross. This includes the bridge at the intersection of Avenue du Parc and Avenue des Pins Ouest. As a result, those in wheelchairs or with mobility challenges can only cross the course with on-site assistance at designated times. This challenge may require significant planning and flexibility from people with disabilities. 

On top of these accessibility concerns, there is a growing conversation among local business owners on how to adapt to the challenge of reduced access for their consumers. CTV reports that businesses on Avenue du Parc have expressed concerns of closures deterring suppliers from reaching their businesses. That being said, some businesses are looking forward to the expected increase in foot traffic from championship watchers. 

The road closures are also sure to obstruct recreational running and cycling routes near McGill and in other parts of Montreal. With the closure of parts of Chemin Olmstead near Avenue du Parc, students will have to find different points of entry to access Parc Mont Royal. One alternative entry is at the top of Rue University near the Upper Residence dorms. Moreover, those who run or cycle near Parc Jean-Drapeau may experience inconveniences as roads such as Circuit Gilles-Villeneuve and Pont de la Concorde will also experience closures from September 19 to 21. The city has established multiple measures to respond to accessibility concerns. According to the CBC, Mayor Soraya Martinez Ferrada stated that “Accessibility for people who rely on services like paratransit is indeed going to be a major issue during these championships because — let’s be honest — it’s going to be a nightmare.” Consequently, the city and event coordinators have agreed that the STM will be permitted through blocked areas to ensure paratransit access. Urgences-santé spokesperson, Geneviève Poirier, told CTV News that there will be “two dedicated ambulance crews, as well as paramedics on bicycles.” 

Bixi has also announced an expansion of bike access to improve mobility around the city. According to the CBC, from September 13 to 27, the maximum duration of rides for monthly Bixi subscribers will increase from 45 minutes to one hour. There will also be a total of 120 stations within 500 metres of racing routes. In addition, the Bixi team plans to adapt their services, by either adding additional bikes or ensuring space at docking stations, to create alternative means of transport in response to the increase in traffic and road closures. Bixi has also created daily maps which show the bike stations and race routes, which are accessible at their website. 

Despite the city’s modifications, students, commuters, and people with disabilities are sure to confront challenges to their daily routines. As race routes change daily, closures remain somewhat inconsistent. In order to stay up to date, monitor the 2026 UCI Road World Championships interactive map on the Ville de Montreal website. It details daily road closures, including changes to local-traffic-only roads and pedestrian crossings from September 19 to 27. Commuter students should also plan their routes on the STM website, which has a detailed travel guide, outlining the disruptions and modifications to regular transit routes. Students should also make use of apps such as Transit or Chrono as these will display live transit schedules and delays due to the Road World Championships. 

While accessibility remains an ongoing concern, the Road World Championships are also an opportunity for McGill students to attend a world-class sporting event for free. The official Fan Village located in Parc Jeanne-Mance is only a short walk from McGill campus. Moreover, all the races have the same finish line on Avenue du Parc. While students can observe the races along race routes, they can also watch the races on giant screens, participate in contests, and buy food and drinks in the Fan Village. These Fan Village perks and race schedules can further be monitored on the UCI Road World Championships website.

The post The UCI Road World Championships: Where Excitement Meets Inconvenience appeared first on The McGill Daily.