In the Spring of 2023, the former President of the Students’ Society of McGill University (SSMU), Mr. Darshan Daryanani, initiated legal action against 19 defendants. According to the lawsuit, Daryanani is claiming damages for injury to his reputation, health, and earning potential, as a direct result of events that occurred during his presidency.

The McGill Daily and Abigail Popple have reached a settlement to the satisfaction of Daryanani. The parties agree that the settlement is to remain confidential and does not imply any admission of liability.

Daryanani believes that the resolution with The Daily is a positive step.

It is important that all actors in the student political process take into account fundamental principles of due process, procedural fairness and natural justice.

The post Statement about Former SSMU President Darshan Daryanani appeared first on The McGill Daily.

In October 2019, Jessica Rose, Chair of the TA Bargaining Committee told the Daily that, according to McGill’s Human Resources Department, the administration is not bound to consider a romantic or sexual relationship between a TA and their course supervisor a violation of the University’s Sexual Violence Policy (SVP). However, as Rose pointed out, the relationship between a TA and a course supervisor holds inherently unbalanced power dynamics, as “[TAs] may need letters of recommendation or other academic opportunities from the professor, and they obviously rely on the income.” She also noted that there have been “a number of allegations in recent years involving professors who targeted students who worked for them.”

In addition, Rose explained that protections for transgender, gender non-conforming, and non-binary TAs at McGill had been rejected by the University. Without this regulation in place, intentionally misgendering TAs is not considered to be harassment by the institution.  By refusing such a change, McGill is refusing to acknowledge or validate the experience0s of transgender, non-binary, and gender non-conforming TAs and is actively participating in their marginalization.

Further, the way that TAs are compensated often leaves them working without payment. This is because they are given a contract that covers only 45 to 180 hours of work for the entire semester; when they exceed those hours worked – which some of them inevitably do – they either have to work without pay, or their work goes unfinished, further disadvantaging students. According to surveys conducted by AGSEM between 2007 and 2017, there is a 40 per cent chance that any given TA will be working without pay by the end of the semester.

While these negotiations are ongoing for workers protected by the union, a unionization drive was announced to encourage all teaching support workers at McGill, not just TAs and invigilators, to join AGSEM.

“We are very, very tired of the elephant in the room,” AGSEM wrote in the Daily. “Many departments at McGill continue to create jobs that are similar in nature to Teaching Assistantships, with none of the job securities, basic protections, and better wages that McGill TAs are afforded through AGSEM.”

As the union explains on their website, “graders across campus are compensated as low as minimum wage ($12.50/hour), with no guaranteed protections for overwork.” In addition, AGSEM states that in certain programs that don’t receive external funding, some graders are required to work without pay.

Note-takers for the Office for Students with Disabilities are also severely underpaid, especially relative to the time commitment and expectations associated with the job and its importance to students who rely on their services. AGSEM explains on their site that note-takers have faced a gradual decline in compensation, from $425 in Winter 2017 to $50 in Winter 2019 to $0 in Fall 2019 (with ten community service hours on their co-curricular record and the chance to win a $50 gift card). This gift card lottery is another example of McGill sugarcoating of budget cuts, or budget reallocations, that directly affect students.

The working conditions that teaching support workers at McGill face are unacceptable. If the University continues to create precarious working conditions, not only will this affect the quality of the education it provides, but the stress put on its employees and workers will worsen. The McGill Daily and Le Délit stand in solidarity with AGSEM and its unionization drive, and we urge our readers to do the same. AGSEM will submit a certification for unionization to the Quebec Ministry of Ruling on December 3. A decision on certification by the Ministry will be announced in early 2020. If you are a grader, marker, tutor, note-taker, or work at any non-unionized casual academic job at McGill, you are eligible to unionize with AGSEM – undergraduates, graduate students, and non-student workers are all welcome!

For more information on eligibility and to unionize with AGSEM, visit www.agsem.ca/join.

—The McGill Daily & Le Délit editorial boards    

The post Fight for the Rights of Teaching Support Workers appeared first on The McGill Daily.

As September 27 approaches, many student associations at McGill University have come out to endorse the student strike for climate justice. We are incredibly happy to see this support, and with all this enthusiasm, we thought this would be the perfect moment to discuss where we can go from here and how we can channel this energy into meaningful change. There are a lot of ideas floating around about effective organizing strategies, and while we are constantly looking to improve ours, one strategy which we see as effective as students in today’s context is the student strike. In order to discuss the importance of organizing strikes, we should probably discuss the theory of student strikes. So what are strikes, how do we get them, and why are they useful?

A strike is a collective withdrawal of labour so as to interfere with the proper functioning of society and create enough pressure for decision-makers to listen to our demands. Originally, this was done by workers in order to pressure their employers to improve working conditions and wages, to show solidarity to other workers, or to address any number of economic or political grievances. Since the strike would halt production, and their employer would therefore lose their source of income, they would be forced to comply with workers’ demands in order for production to resume.

Student strikes, admittedly, are a somewhat different creature. Many are dismissive of student strikes and argue that a collective withdrawal of labour doesn’t make sense in a student context. After all, what do they care if we go to class? Haven’t we already paid tuition? What do we really have to bargain with? These are strong points. Maybe we should distance ourselves from the labour analogy for a hot sec, since we are not threatening our day-to-day labour in quite the same way. Instead, we are threatening escalation and collective failure. The economic system, as it stands, requires a constant influx of new workers in order to keep functioning. If, however, we continue fighting across the province and country and eventually declare an unlimited student strike – which threatens that an entire generation of students will not graduate – we could cause an enormous labour shortage and clog up our universities, who won’t have enough room for the first-years. By striking and taking the streets, we also have the opportunity to block and interfere with the normal functioning of the fossil-fuel economy. This escalation is what we are threatening with a one day strike, and this is what we are bargaining with.

You may ask, why does this matter? What does any of this have to do with strike endorsements? Let’s go back to our labour strike analogy and imagine a scenario where there’s a workplace of 100 people, but the union decides that instead of calling for a strike, they’ll put out an endorsement of workers’ grievances and suggest that people should decide individually if they want to join a strike. The day of the “strike” comes, and 30 people walk out since no one really talked about it. So what happens? If most people decide to continue working, what happens to the collective withdrawal of labor? Well, nothing. The workplace continues functioning, the bosses don’t cave, and when those who are striking begin to suffer financially, and go back to work without winning anything. They cannot succeed with just an endorsement, and that’s the key point – we can’t either. Endorsements from student executives are important and appreciated, but we’ll need more to win and win justly. If we don’t do this all together, if we don’t don’t enforce our strikes, if we act individually and not collectively, it’ll never work.

Convincing people to go on strike is, admittedly, pretty tough. Strikes are risky, and we need to make sure that we are all on the same page. If people don’t see the strike as legitimate, they’ll end up going back to work or school (read: scabbing), and the strike will fall apart. So while strikes cannot be done by a small minority, we also cannot expect to simply declare them and achieve success. We need to ensure that everyone we are asking to strike is able to discuss and participate in the decision to strike through direct and participatory democracy. Many student associations have general assemblies (GAs), where all members of the association can collectively discuss and vote as individuals instead of through representatives. There are some upcoming strike GAs up for Arts undergraduates, French literature, and philosophy students. Unfortunately, most departments associations at McGill do not make it easy to organize a GA unless you yourself are an executive, and without GAs, we cannot hope to create an effective movement.

So what are we asking of you? Endorsements are a great first step, but what we need now is to change our bylaws to allow for student-led GAs that can be called by petition. Our movement and our associations would become profundly more powerful and democractic with these in place. In the short term, you can call for strike general assemblies yourselves and allow students to lead the discussion. We are all wondering what on earth we can do about the climate crisis, and there are many people offering many different answers, all of which (including ours) are limited. As students, our options feel limited, but striking has huge potential to force the hand of decision-makers. For any student reading this, we need to pressure our executives into building these structures and letting us lead the strikes. Email them, meet with them, petition them, and, if necessary, run for their positions and vote them out.

Student strikes are a potentially powerful way to enact change, but in order for them to work, we need to make our decisions collectively and directly, we need to enforce these decisions, and we need to make sure that everyone sees these decisions as legitimate. Barring some miracle where the climate crisis ends this Friday, the climate strike movement will have to continue fighting, and we will have to fight harder. This we very much intend to do. Student executives, this is where we need your help. We are excited that so many of you are supportive of the climate strike movement, but we will not win with words on paper. We need more than endorsements – we need strikes.

Solidarity,

Climate Justice Action McGill (C-JAM)

The post Strike Endorsements Are Not Strikes (Yet) appeared first on The McGill Daily.

The Neskantaga First Nation declared a state of emergency for the second time this year on September 14, the day after both their primary and back-up water pumps broke. The damage to both pumps led to the contamination of the community’s tap water. Even after being boiled, as recommended by a federal advisory, the water has reportedly caused headaches, fevers, and skin infections. In light of the health risks posed to the community, the Chief of the Neskantaga First Nation, Christopher Moonias, called for an evacuation notice, which the Canadian government has rejected. 

The lack of access to clean drinking water in the Neskantaga First Nation is a clear human rights violation, indicative of the government’s purposeful disregard for Indigenous peoples in Canada. The First Nation has been under a boil water advisory and without access to safe tap water since 1995, which has fundamentally altered everyday life in the community. Prior to the elementary school’s closure on September 15, its filtration system had been a key source of safe, clean drinking water for Neskantaga First Nation residents alongside a temporary Reverse Osmosis Unit on the nearby Attawapiskat Lake. While the school was open, it was a normal part of the children’s day to fill water bottles and containers to take home to their families. This not only took critical time away from their education, but put the responsibility on children to provide safe, drinkable water for their families. 

Both the government and the media are characterizing boil water advisories as the results of “challenges [in] infrastructure,” as opposed to clear displays of racism and colonial violence through the government’s failure to provide basic life necessities to Indigenous communities. Despite having been promised a new water treatment facility by 2018, the First Nation is still waiting for an operational facility nine months after the deadline. 

On September 13, the Neskantaga First Nation made an emergency evacuation request to Indigenous Services Canada (ISC) for 188 of the residents most directly impacted, which included individuals with chronic illnesses, infants, and elderly people. Over 18 hours later, ISC rejected Chief Moonias’ evacuation request, which he announced to members and residents of the First Nation via Facebook. 

Kevin Deagle, Press Secretary for the Minister of Indigenous Services, stated that the Ministry had a “firm commitment to resolving this issue and ensuring access to clean water for [the] Neskantaga First Nation,” despite not having sent pump repair technicians to the community until 48 hours after the original request. The Neskantaga First Nation remains reliant on bottled water just months after Trudeau announced plans to ban single-use plastics. 

Following the rejection of their evacuation request, Chief Moonias called for a self-evacuation. As a result, the community is faced with financial uncertainty: residents are staying in hotels at their own expense in order to access safe drinking water. Councillor Allan Moonias stated that “it’s probably going to cost [the community] half a million dollars.” Seamus O’Regan, the Minister of Indigenous Services, told The Globe and Mail that the Ministry respects “Chief Moonias’ decision to evacuate his community and [is] focused on ensuring that community members […] have the health and wellness supports they need.” He vaguely added that the Ministry of Indigenous Affairs “will work to minimize any financial impacts that result from the self-evacuation,” with no clear indication of how much of the financial burden will fall back on the community. Indigenous Services Canada has also claimed that a new water treatment system will be ready in October, but community members are skeptical, given that the project was promised to be completed by 2018.

As areas across Canada are impacted by disparate water crises, it is important to keep context in mind. Chief Moonias expressed that he “will not involve [himself] in any discussion that will compare [the Neskantaga First Nation] with other First Nation communities.” He added, “our issues and crisis is unique and should be treated as such.” There are currently 56 separate areas in Canada affected by boil water advisories, each facing their own struggles and their own issues – all caused by the same government’s violence. We must condemn such violations of human rights and the Canadian government’s dismissal of people in crisis. In light of the upcoming climate march on September 27, we must recognize that sustainability practices which do not include Indigenous realities are counter-productive. While it is important to reduce plastic waste, the Prime Minister cannot call for a blanket ban on single-use plastics while the government’s willful inefficiency leaves many communities with no choice but to rely on them.

According to Chief Moonias, no GoFundMe page is affiliated with the Neskantaga First Nation at this time. You can support the Neskantaga First Nation by donating to the Gathering of Rivers for Community Care, a charity the First Nation is affiliated with through Matawa First Nations Management.

The post Still No Clean Water in Neskantaga First Nation appeared first on The McGill Daily.

The news coverage and rhetoric around Hurricane Dorian have been largely focused on the impact on the tourism industry, rather than on human lives and the material loss for the inhabitants of the islands. Even within the media’s misguided discussion of the country’s economy, the coverage remains classist. More than 70,000 Abacoans and Grand Bahamians who commute to Nassau, where they largely work on cruise ships or in the homes of the rich, are now displaced from their homes. This attention to tourism focuses on the wealthy foreign tourists, rather than on the racialized working class, whose labour upholds the tourism industry.

Hurricane Dorian is a direct manifestation of the climate crisis. However, the devastation caused by the hurricane is rarely linked to a larger discussion on who is impacted first and most severely by climate change. Natural disasters in the Caribbean must be contextualized and addressed as a result of environmental racism. While the US leads the world in greenhouse gas emissions, it is racialized populations who are primarily affected by “natural disasters,” and who are denied adequate disaster management response. Racialized climate refugees are then denied entry in countries like the US and criminalized should they manage to enter.

Great Abaco, one of the main islands hit by the hurricane, has large informal housing communities where Haitian refugees, who fled from the 2010 earthquake, have settled. Those housing communities are now gone as a result of the category five hurricane. “Everybody says, ‘Leave.’ Leave and go where?” said Jackson Blatch, one of the 20,000 residents of Great Abaco living in informal housing. With over 60,000 people in need of food and water, the Abacos and Grand Bahama are now left unlivable for thousands of Haitian refugees, who were already victims of environmental racism.

It will cost an estimated seven billion dollars to repair the damage in the Bahamas caused by Hurricane Dorian. Instead of providing aid to Grand Bahama and the Abacos, some people are encouraging tourism in Nassau as a means of offering support, while totally dismissing the crisis in Great Abaco and Grand Bahama. This means of “support” does not include resources that help communities in the Abacos or Grand Bahamas. Informal housing communities were already fighting for the state to fund the construction of permanent housing even before the hurricane’s damage. At the same time, the government was actively tearing down informal settlements and surveilling inhabitants with drone technology to prevent them from building new necessary housing. Making these islands livable again will take much more than tourism campaigns which bolster areas that mostly serve wealthy vacationers, not permanent residents. According to the UN, there are several communities that already do not have access to clean drinking water or sanitation. Effects of an oil spill, reported to have reached over 70-80 kilometers into the open ocean, render any remaining clean water unusable, and leave citizens needing both food and water assistance. Getting these islands back to a livable state will take immense combined efforts to rebuild homes and infrastructure, provide basic necessities, and clean up the environmental disasters in the hurricane’s wake. The burden of these efforts should not just fall on countries affected by the hurricane, but should include international aid, especially from former colonial countries.

We must reorient how we talk about climate change, recognizing that it disproportionately affects racialized populations and former colonies. We can support the Bahamas by donating to local funds such as the National Association of the Bahamas, and the Bahamas Red Cross.

The post Hurricane Response in Bahamas is Environmental Racism appeared first on The McGill Daily.

To make up for the removal of the permit requirement, the bill includes compensation for drivers with taxi licenses, but this is not enough. An elected representative from the Bureau du Taxi de Montreal, Hassan Kattoua, says that the formula used to establish compensation rates is punitive: “Transport Minister Francois Bonnardel […] wants to pay the value that the owners paid for their permit,” regardless of when they bought it. Taxi drivers are demanding to instead be compensated for the market value of their permits in 2014 – sometimes more than $200,000 – which has since plummeted with the arrival of ride-hailing apps in Quebec. Taxi drivers who took out large loans to pay for their permits years ago, or bought them as an investment to compensate for the extremely low wages they make annually, are now unable to resell them. Bonnardel’s compensation plan does not take this into account, and would unfairly offer compensations as low as $5,000 for those who purchased their permits 15 years ago. Moreover, the compensation offered by the provincial government to the taxi drivers is being paid for through royalties. A 90-cent royalty fee has been applied to each ride, meaning the government offloads the responsibility to the consumers.

Through this bill, the Quebec government is supporting ride-hailing apps like Uber. These apps, in addition to negatively impacting the taxi industry, are known for their poor treatment of workers. Because Uber has maintained that they are a “technology company” that hires “independent contractors,” Uber drivers are not able to unionize and obtain benefits, nor are they able to protect themselves against unsafe working conditions and biased rating systems. This is a legal maneuver that enables the company to then dismiss workers’ rights, including health care, work hours, and safety standards.

While it is important to be critical of ride-hailing apps, the taxi industry is itself monopolized by a few companies and investors who buy most of the set number of government-issued taxi licenses. Taxi drivers are then consequently forced to buy these licences at grossly inflated prices and rent them out to other taxi drivers to compensate for these costs. The added costs of monthly plate rent or loan repayment already render the taxi driver’s work precarious, which Bill 17 does not take into account. Many taxi drivers are thus pressured to leave the taxi industry and seek employment at ride-hailing companies with fewer regulations and fees, such as Uber.

We must be critical of both the taxi industry and ride-hailing apps, while also supporting labourers. Taxi drivers and ride-hailing app drivers are often pitted against each other. However, in both industries, workers are forced into precarious labour conditions for the profit maximization of their employers. Bill 17 deregulates taxi drivers’ work, privileging ride-hailing apps without any care for fair working conditions.

You can support the taxi strike by refraining from both ordering a taxi during the strike and using ride-hailing services as an alternative. We encourage you to think about the impact that you have when you use ride-hailing services like Uber and Lyft. The reliance on taxi services also comes from a lack of public transit in the province; we must push for massive investment in public transportation infrastructure. If you are travelling at night, keep student-run services in mind, including Walksafe (514-398-2498) and Drivesafe (514-398-8040), which are free services offered through SSMU to McGill students.

The post Support Striking Taxi Drivers, Oppose Bill 17 appeared first on The McGill Daily.

According to Brazil’s National Institute for Space Research, over 76,000 fires are currently burning through the Amazon, which represents an 80 per cent increase compared to last year. The Amazon is the largest rainforest on the planet, and its ecological cycles regulate both regional and global climates. The destruction of even a small portion of this rainforest is accelerating the climate crisis and posing devastating environmental consequences that ultimately impact marginalized groups and Indigenous peoples the most

Conversations about the climate crisis tend to frame it as an unstoppable force, and the discourse surrounding the Amazon fires is no different. The blame is put on individuals to adopt different lifestyles and diets, ranging from veganism to the ban of single-use plastic. While these should be encouraged, we must keep in mind that only 100 corporations are responsible for 71% of global carbon emissions. The companies who produce and directly benefit from these fires, mainly within the agribusiness and mining sectors, should be the ones held accountable. These companies work hand in hand with the farright Brazilian government and have a shared interest in not only the destruction of the rainforest, but in the theft of land from and killing of Indigenous peoples.

Bolsonaro’s policies, which encourage deforestation for the development of agricultural land, are directly responsible for the spread of fires in the past few weeks. The fascist and antiIndigenous agenda of the government was made explicit in documents recently leaked by openDemocracy. According to the documents, Bolsonaro is promoting specific construction efforts and propaganda campaigns that serve to stop conservation efforts in the Amazon. The leaked presentation expresses the Brazilian government’s opposition to “globalist” efforts working with Indigenous peoples to “relativiz[e] the National Sovereignty in the Amazon basin,” and asserts the need for efforts including “psychological oppression” to oppose this movement. Under Bolsonaro, environmental regulations were also loosened, cutting penalties for breaking regulations and giving greater freedom to deforest. His environmental minister, Ricardo Salles, has also amended the Forest Law to expedite the granting of licenses to clear-cut the rainforest.

On August 26, Trudeau announced at the G7 Summit that Canada was pledging “$15 million and water bombers” to help combat the fires. This announcement was received with praise, as Canada remains seen as a leader in environmental protection. However, Trudeau’s government has simultaneously refused to halt negotiations with MERCOSUR, a South American, Brazilian-led trade block. Other countries, such as France and Ireland, decided to postpone the ratification of any agreement until Bolsonaro takes action to stop the fires, and NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh demanded Canada halt the negotiations in an effort to apply international pressure on Brazil.

Trudeau said at the G7 summit that it is imperative for world leaders to “act for our planet,” and joined other Western leaders in publicly criticizing Brazil for its lack of action. Canada’s blatant hypocrisy not only enables Bolsonaro’s eco-fascist agenda, it also supports it by maintaining trade negotiations that directly concern the same companies that are destroying the Amazon forest. Furthermore, Canada’s actions render it complicit in the theft of land from and killing of Indigenous peoples, whose voices are being deliberately stifled by the Brazilian government.

Indigenous peoples who are voicing their criticisms and resisting occupation of their land are being criminalized under Bolsonaro. As a result of the loosening of environmental regulations, farmers and loggers, who are encouraged to seize Indigenous land for profit, have threatened and attacked Indigenous groups. Máximo França, a member of the Baré Indigneous people from the Amazonas state, explained, “we are facing a process of genocide with this government, also a process of ecocide.” “They are killing us every day; they are killing us with the fire that is happening, they are killing us when they displace us from our territories, when they invade our territories.”

Any discussion of the Amazon fires should be centred around Indigenous peoples’ struggle for liberation. The theft of land from, displacement, and intentional killing of Indigenous peoples in the region is directly connected to its destruction. Raoni Metuktire, an Indigenous Brazilian environmentalist and chief of the Kayapo people, states that the fires started by farmers across the region are a direct response to Bolsonaro’s fascist propaganda. He calls for international pressure on Bolsonaro and eventually for the deposition of the president through Congress and denounces “the anti-indigenous government of Jair Bolsonaro, who normalizes, incites and empowers violence against the environment and against us.”

The most effective way to help combat the destruction of the Amazon is to give space to Indigenous voices who have been relentlessly opposing the eco-fascist actions of the Brazilian government. Further, anti-colonial and environmental activism are inherently linked. Groups have already been organizing protests in front of the buildings of some of the major corporations investing in the Amazon. You can research what complicit companies are in your area and mobilize to pressure them into divesting from projects within the Amazon. You can also donate to Indigenous groups, rather than international NGOs like Greenpeace and the Leonardo DiCaprio Foundation, whose funds are rarely allocated directly to the communities affected.

The post Blame Fascism and Colonialism, Not Straws appeared first on The McGill Daily.

By banning the wearing of religious symbols and limiting access to public services, the bill explicitly targets Muslim people who wear the hijab, burqa, and niqab, Jewish people who wear the kippah, and Sikh people who wear the turban.

Proponents of Bill 21 hide behind the guise of secularism to push for this Islamophobic, anti-Semitic, and racist bill, arguing that it would strengthen the separation between church and state. This discourse around the need to create rules “to ensure secularism” only serves to perpetuate Islamophobic ideas. Secularism at a state level should not infringe on an individual’s right to religious expression. As the author and activist Arundhati Roy writes, “when an attempt is made to coerce women out of the burqa rather than creating a situation in which a woman can choose what she wishes to do, it’s not about liberating her, but about unclothing her. It becomes an act of humiliation and cultural imperialism. It’s not about the burqa. It’s about the coercion.”

The settler-colonial Québécois and Canadian states have been interested in forced assimilation since their foundation, and Bill 21 is nothing but another step in this project. By targeting these groups, the bill aims to erase the identities of those deemed “other” by a white, supposedly secular, French-Canadian society. Beyond religious discrimination, the fact that the bill will predominantly affect people of colour makes it a part of Quebec’s racist and colonial assimilation project.

In the aftermath of the Christchurch massacre, Quebec Premier François Legault stated, “I don’t think there is Islamophobia in Quebec.” This shows his complete disregard for the Quebec City mosque shooting in January 2017, and for the harassment that Muslim women across the province regularly experience on the basis of their religion and race. Bill 21 forces Muslim women to unveil themselves in order to use state services and limits their economic opportunities. Bill 21 is therefore Islamophobic.

The National Council of Canadian Muslims opposes the bill, stating, “we are now facing the blatant legalization of discrimination against minorities.” They have asked for the bill to be withdrawn and have already said they intend to fight “by every means available.” Two Montreal school boards have announced their refusal to enforce the bill: the English Montreal School Board and the Lester B. Pearson School Board. On April 5, SSMU firmly denounced Bill 21, saying that “this unnecessary bill will only exacerbate division in our society, and further marginalize communities already targeted by white supremacy.” There are also three demonstrations planned – one on April 7, one on April 12, and one on April 14.

The opposition to the bill is encouraging; it shows that many in this province are committed to fighting racism, anti-Semitism, and Islamophobia. However, given the CAQ majority in the National Assembly, it will take a huge amount of pressure for the bill to be retracted. We all have a responsibility to stop Bill 21. We urge you to join the sit-in in front of the Ministry of Immigration, Diversity, and Inclusion (287 Notre-Dame Street West) at noon on April 12, as well as to attend the demonstration on April 14 at Place Émilie-Gamelin (Berri-UQAM). We also encourage you to sign the open letter condemning Bill 21.

The post Bill 21 Isn’t Secularist, It’s Racist appeared first on The McGill Daily.

The Queen Victoria statue, which was erected in 1900, stands today as a constant reminder of the centuries of imperial violence enacted across the globe by the British Empire, not least in Montreal. Colonial statues, and the entirety of the McGill campus, are situated on unceded land that was violently stolen from the Kanien’kehá:ka by colonizers like Queen Victoria. The statues of Queen Victoria, James McGill, John A. Macdonald, and other racist and colonial figures plague Montreal, despite numerous Indigenous and other activist groups asking the city to take them down.

John A. Macdonald is commemorated by a monument in Place du Canada, despite having actively perpetrated genocide against Indigenous peoples through measures such as residential schools and the promotion of an “Aryan Canada.” In the words of the Delhi-Dublin Anti-Colonial Solidarity Brigade, “public space should celebrate collective struggles for justice and liberation, not white supremacy and genocide.” To give colonizers validation through grand monuments is to honour the historical and ongoing violence that their legacies perpetuate.

Using paint has been an effective part of campaigns to remove racist statues elsewhere. In Halifax in May 2016, protestors doused a statue of Edward Cornwallis in red paint. Cornwallis was responsible for the “scalping proclamation” that offered cash rewards to anyone who killed a Mi’kmaq person. That action, combined with years of protest, led to the removal of the statue in 2018. Protestors in the US have also had success after employing similar techniques: a Confederate monument was removed from a Los Angeles cemetery after activists spray-painted the word “no” onto it, and a monument to Confederate soldiers in Maryland was removed after protestors spray-painted the phrase “Black Lives Matter” onto it.

The statues on campus and around the city stand at the expense of Indigenous peoples and their sovereignty. By refusing to take them down, McGill and the city of Montreal continue to perpetrate anti-Indigenous racism and to marginalize those who are harmed by the realities of colonialism and white supremacy. The “vandalism” of public monuments represents the denunciation of a shameful legacy of racist and violent colonialism. It is a refusal to continue to tolerate white supremacist self-congratulation. Statues created to honour imperialists and white supremacists have no place in public spaces.

As members of the McGill and greater Montreal community, we must be vocal in our denunciation of colonial monuments on campus and elsewhere. We cannot go on walking past these statues every day or taking pictures of them as if they are not explicit, concrete symbols of colonial violence. Instead, choose to actively oppose these racist statues in whatever way you see fit.

The post Colonial Statues Must Go appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Several reports have been released, including one from the Human Sciences Research Council of South Africa, stating that Israel upholds “an institutionalised and oppressive system of […] domination and oppression over Palestinians as a group; that is, a system of apartheid.” Israel has violently encroached upon and stolen Palestinian land, segregating and confining Palestinians to ever-shrinking portions of their homeland. Palestinians are now restricted to the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, and blockades such as the Erez Crossing into Gaza have limited the transport of goods and the movement of Palestinians. In the first ten months of 2018, only 274 Palestinians were allowed to exit through the Erez Crossing each day, in contrast to 24,000 in 2010. Israel has also blocked fire trucks and ambulances from entering Gaza, denying Palestinians access to emergency medical care and denying Palestinians access to emergency medical care and resulting in numerous preventable deaths.

Apartheid does not stop at segregation; Palestinians also face constant racial discrimination. A telling example is the Nation-State Bill passed in 2018, which stated that Jewish people are the only ones to have the right to self determination in the country. Another salient example is the dual legal system which exists in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. Palestinians live under military law, while Israelis are governed by civil law. The enforcement of military law has led to the detainment at least 220 Palestinian children for “crimes” such as throwing stones. Furthermore, Palestinians in the West Bank have more limited and more costly access to state services, including water and electricity, than Israeli settlers. In addition, separate roadways exist for Palestinians in the West Bank, including a recently built wall dividing Israeli and Palestinian drivers on Route 4370. This divided route allows Israeli drivers easy access to Jerusalem, while Palestinians are forbidden from using the Israeli side of the road without a special permit. Moreover, the Israeli Defence Forces use lethal violence against Palestinians who approach or attempt to cross fences between Gaza and the rest of occupied Palestine.

Supporters of Israel argue that the IAW should not exist because it endorses the BDS movement. This nonviolent movement calls on people, institutions, and governments to stop their complicity in the human rights abuses carried out by the Israeli government by boycotting, divesting from, and imposing sanctions on Israel. The BDS movement has been mischaracterized as anti-Semitic; this wrongly conflates the Jewish identity with the Israeli settler-colonial state. In the January 28 editorial, the Daily wrote more in-depth about the importance of the BDS movement in holding Israel accountable for its apartheid regime.

The obstinate denial that Israel is an apartheid and settler-colonial state speaks to the necessity of raising awareness about the ongoing violence and discrimination faced by Palestinians. The IAW in Montreal is taking place from March 18 to March 25, centering around the theme “Stop Arming Colonialism.” We encourage you to attend the various events happening throughout the week, which include panels, movie screenings, and workshops. We also encourage you to continue spreading awareness and standing in solidarity with Palestinians resisting the Israeli occupation after the week is over. You can do so by attending events, including those organized by McGill Students in Solidarity for Palestinian Human Rights (SPHR), Independent Jewish Voices McGill (IJV), and QPIRG, participating in demonstrations against Israeli apartheid, and engaging in the economic and academic boycott of the institutions that contribute to the occupation of Palestine.

The full list of events is available on Israeli Apartheid Week – Montréal Facebook page.

The full list of companies which contribute to the occupation of Palestine can be found here.

The post Israel is an Apartheid State appeared first on The McGill Daily.

The post Beyond Body Cams: The SPVM Must Be Held Accountable appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Subsequently, in December 2018, the administration received the final report of the Working Group. Unlike the Task Force, the Working Group never provided a concrete statement of approval or disapproval of the name of the men’s varsity teams. An email sent on December 21, 2018, regarding a meeting of the Board of Governors, announced that a decision on the name change would be made in January. Fortier’s latest email contradicts that earlier statement, and further delays a decision. The administration’s bureaucratic procedures and multiple empty emails give the illusion of progress to the student body while doing nothing substantial. Fortier’s email perpetuates the racism of the name and insults student activism. Moreover, the only reason for delaying a decision is that the students who have, and continue to, mobilize, will eventually graduate, or lose momentum in their efforts.

The Working Group’s final report also noted that several major donors expressed attachment to the R*dmen name. In the report, donors stated that if the name was changed, “they would never again donate to McGill, they would discourage their children from applying to McGill, [and] they would ‘consider McGill dead to [them].’” The administration is failing its students by focusing on the monetary implications of changing the name instead of addressing its inherent racism. Further, Fortier’s email emphasizes consultation with “key stakeholders,” such as athletes and alumni. This dismisses the racism experienced by Indigenous students, as they are the only real “stakeholders” in this situation.

The final reports call for consultation with Indigenous students and organizations both on- and off-campus. In reality, these groups have already made their opinion clear: the name needs to change. SSMU Indigenous Affairs has campaigned all year to change the name. Tomas Jirousek, the SSMU Indigenous Affairs Commissioner, wrote an open letter to the administration where he stated that “the University’s tokenization of Indigenous people and initiatives to ‘Indigenize’ in order to defend the continued usage of the R*dmen name is morally reprehensible at best.” The Indigenous Student Alliance released a statement last November in support of SSMU Indigenous Affairs’ “Change the Name” campaign. The student body as a whole also supports a name change: on November 12, SSMU released the results of the “‘R*dmen referendum question,” in which 78.8 per cent of those who voted wanted the name to be changed. The report’s emphasis on further “consultation” is part of the administration’s attempt to delay the renaming process and ignore concerns from Indigenous students and groups that have already spoken.

In Fortier’s email, she asserted that she, and only she, will make the final decision concerning the name change by the end of the academic term. Fortier had the possibility to use her influence to push for a rapid change of the name after Indigenous students made their needs clear. Instead, as Shanon Fitzpatrick, Assistant Professor and supporter of the “Change the Name” campaign, explains, “[Fortier] has granted herself (by fiat) additional ‘time and space’ to consider the ‘opinions’ of various ‘stakeholders.’” The problem with Fortier assuming full responsibility for the decision is that she hasn’t shown any real concern for the demands of students and seems perfectly comfortable being complicit in preserving the toxic and racist history of McGill.

Fortier herself told us that “if you have yet to add your voice to the conversation, you can do so through the online form.” State your discontent and rally against the administration’s ongoing racism by attending Senate meetings. Enough is enough: the administration can no longer ignore the name’s racism in order to appease donors.

The post No Extensions for Racism: Change the Name appeared first on The McGill Daily.

The post Mental Health Services Now, Renovations Later appeared first on The McGill Daily.

The post Canada is Complicit in the Occupation of Palestine appeared first on The McGill Daily.

As of January 1, 2019, McGill has missed the deadline set by Quebec’s Ministry of Education to update its sexual violence policy. Bill 151, passed in December 2017, mandates all post-secondary institutions in Quebec to adopt a new sexual violence policy, or to update their existing policies. Other institutions, such as Concordia University, have met the deadline, while Université du Québec à Montréal (UQAM) and most CEGEPs have not. Although Bill 151 provides the first step to creating a more comprehensive sexual violence policy, it still has issues that need to be addressed. The Bill demands that the new policies include mandatory trainings for students and staff, a standardized complaint process, and support services for survivors. While these changes must be implemented by September 2019, our demands should not stop at Bill 151.

McGill’s current Policy against Sexual Violence was adopted in 2016, and received a grade of C- from OurTurn, a student movement that addresses sexual violence on campuses across Canada. According to Provost and Vice-Principal Academic Christopher Manfredi, the new policy is “in review,” and is expected to be completed in February and seek approval from the Senate in March or April. The current policy mandates compulsory training for counselling and front-line healthcare professionals, but not for other members of the university community, as Bill 151 stipulates. McGill’s Code of Student Conduct also does not explicitly include a section on relationships between students and teaching staff, which is mandated under Bill 151.

In a roundtable discussion with the Daily, Principal Suzanne Fortier maintained that McGill already introduced a policy on sexual violence in 2016, and therefore did not miss the deadline set by the province. Fortier’s argument neglects the fact that students still have to live with a policy that does not comply with provincial regulations.

The McGill administration has not done enough to address student concerns about its sexual violence policies. At last year’s walk-out, organized by the Concordia Student Union and SSMU, several hundred students demanded that the administration take action. This came after allegations of sexual misconduct emerged against at least five professors within the Faculty of Arts. McGill students called for an external investigation into sexual misconduct of professors and for a stand-alone sexual violence policy. The report published by the Ad- Hoc Committee on Teaching Staff-Student Intimate Relationships does not fully ban student-staff relationships. The administration has continually ignored student concerns over the inadequacy of the report. In response to students chanting “we want a ban” at a Senate meeting on December 5, Principal Suzanne Fortier said, “I think we all heard you. You don’t have to repeat that twenty times.”

McGill has failed to demonstrate that it is committed to ensuring the safety of students and supporting survivors. An open letter published a year ago by OurTurn and several other organizations included other recommendations to improve Bill 151. While McGill’s sexual violence policy is still being reviewed, we have the chance to push administration to exceed the requirements of Bill 151. McGill students have made clear through their actions that they advocate for a survivor-centric approach from the administration. Until then, the burden of care continues to fall on students.

While this continues to be a problem, there are ways to pressure the administration to improve their policy and overall attitudes regarding sexual violence. The first step is to follow the policy updates, and hold the administration accountable for the deadlines Manfredi announced. Secondly, you can email Angela Campbell (angela.campbell@mcgill.ca), who is in charge of the external investigation on teacher-student relationships to voice your concerns. Third, you can show up when demonstrations are organized on campus. Lastly, you can go to the next Senate meeting on February 20 and disrupt the event if nothing has been done by then.

SACOMSS and O-SVRSE are on-campus resources for students who have experienced sexual violence.

The post We Need a Better Sexual Violence Policy appeared first on The McGill Daily.