Announcements 

During announcements, VP External Adam Gwiazda-Amsel mentioned the strikes taking place regarding Law 21, as well as the recent decision of McGill’s Board of Governors (BoG) to implement a “decarbonization plan” rather than divest from fossil fuels. Gwiazda Amsel called upon councillors to keep their constituents aware of both of these changes, as well as the difference between decarbonization and divestment. Additionally, he mentioned an upcoming series of information sessions in collaboration with Community Affairs on students moving into the Milton Park Community. Councillor Darshan Daryanani announced that the annual “Work Your BA” series, hosted by McGill’s Career Planning Service, will be taking place from January 20-31, related information can be found via Facebook. VP Internal Sanchi Bhalla announced that tickets to the Faculty Olympics “hype night” had opened up, and that further information could be found on the SSMU website. SSMU President Bryan Buraga noted that the Winter General Assembly will take place February 24 at 6 p.m. in the New Residence Hall Ballroom, as well as mentioning the upcoming McGill BoG Student Forum on January 30 at 4 p.m. Additionally, SSMU Speaker Husayn Jamal announced his resignation, effective January 31, upon which a motion was introduced and passed unanimously, expressing gratitude to his three years of service. Finally, a moment of silence was observed to honour the 175 victims of the recent plane crash in Iran. 

Motions 

Regarding motions, there was a Motion to Endorse the Student Mobilization Against Bill 21, which passed unanimously; a Motion Regarding Plan on Clubs and Services as SSMU’s Highest Priority, which was committed to an ad-hoc committee composed of members of the clubs and finance committees; a Motion Regarding a Provincial Student Assembly that passed; and a Motion Regarding Changes to the Committee Terms of Reference that passed. Additionally, there were a number of notices of motions, including one Regarding Amendments to the Internal Regulations of Student Groups, one Regarding Amendments to the Effective Committees Policy, one Regarding Adoption of the SSMU Mental Health Policy and Plan, and finally, one Regarding the Adoption of the Gendered and Sexual Violence Committee Terms of Reference. 

Discussions 

Finally, there were two additional discussions that took place which took a significant portion of the meeting. Firstly, there was the Report of the Comprehensive Governance Review Committee, which involved changes to seat allocations. Councillors debated moving to one seat per faculty maximum, two seats maximum, or remaining at the default of four seats as a maximum. In addition, a generative discussion took place regarding SSMU’s Relationship with UTILE and Potential Financing Models, which pertained to future collaboration with UTILE to create affordable housing units for students.

The post Happy SSMU Year! appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Motions

Regarding motions, the Motion Regarding Amendments to the Committee Terms of Referencepassed unanimously, and the Motion concernant la Loi resserrant l’encadrement du cannabis passed, with two No votes (Councillors Andrew Chase and Evelyn Silverson-Tokawtlidis) and two abstentions (Councillors Kevin Franceschini and Beatrice Courchesne-Mackie). The latter motion, presented by Councillor André Lametti, mandates SSMU to oppose the recent changes passed by the provincial government on November 1 – raising the minimum legal age of cannabis consumption to 21 years and prohibiting the use of cannabis in any public space (outdoors or indoors).

The Motion Regarding Suspension of the Management Representatives, which arose due to the representatives’ failure to attend mandatory sexual and gendered violence training, also passed unanimously. Finally, there were two notices of motions, namely the Notice of Motion Regarding Adoption of the Climate Justice Policy, and the Notice of Motion Regarding Changes to the Internal Regulations of the Society’s Finances.

Question Period

Of particular note was the discussion that took place during question period, which covered a few controversial topics that had been brought to Council’s attention. During this time, Councillor Lametti asked what the SSMU listserv review process was, in light of the recent incident regarding the November 11 listserv, in which VP Internal Sanchi Bhalla was criticized for not having acknowledged Remembrance Day. In addition, Councillor Lametti asked why the VP Internal was not a signatory on the recent SSMU statement on Indigenous allyship, to which it was announced that Bhalla would be putting out a separate statement on the matter.

Councillor Jo Roy also asked about the status of the SSMU mini-courses, to which VP Student Life Billy Kawasaki stated that they were still being organized.

Councillor Bruno Marcoux brought up concerns over the use of profanity in a Facebook post from VP University Affairs Madeline Wilson condemning anti-Indigenous racism amongst the student body. In response to these concerns, Wilson responded that “I tend to use it […] specifically with regards to issues or topics I feel quite strongly about and that I feel deserve strong language, such as explicit racism directed at individuals, which is the reason I chose to use profanity in those communications.” Councillor Roy also pointed out that the debate over language amounted to tone policing, in addition to throwing support behind the VP University Affairs on the issue.Concerns about Free Trips Offered by Hillel

Finally, councillors discussed the recent offers of free trips to Israel from Hillel Montreal, given to a number of campus leaders – news of which was published in the Daily earlier that week. A number of SSMU staff – including Andrew Chase (Arts Representative), Adin Chan (Arts Representative and SSMU Director), Paige Collins (SSMU Director), Jonah Levitt (SSMU Director), and Jordyn Wright (Science Representative and SSMU Director) – all planned to attend the free trip at the time of Legislative Council. (As noted in The Bull and Bear, Councillor Chan has since declined the offer.) During the discussion there were concerns over both whether this represented a potential conflict of interest, as well as whether it would be possible to go on this trip as an individual completely independent of one’s office.

The feature, co-authored by McGill Students in Solidarity for Palestinian Human Rights (SPHR) and McGill Students’ Chapter of Independent Jewish Voices (IJV), noted the expansion of Maccabee Task Force – an overt anti-BDS organization (Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement) – to Canada in 2018. “Given that the first trip of this kind was allegedly offered by Hillel Montreal in the same year (2018), it is reasonable to suspect that MTF is providing much, if not all, of the funding for Hillel Montreal’s initiative,” SPHR and IJV wrote in the Daily. In response to these concerns, Councillors Chan and Chase read statements to why they felt this would not violate conflict of interest, as did Councillor Wright.

Following their statements, Wilson addressed Council, saying, “do not think it is possible to separate your position as arts representative, or whatever your position may be, from your personal interest in this trip. Whether you are compliant with the conflict of interest policy of not, I do not think is relevant in this case.” These sentiments were further echoed by VP External Adam Gwiazda-Amsel, Councillor Noah Meralli, and Councillor Jo Roy in separate statements.

Additionally, Councillor Lametti brought up concerns that “we have two different stories, one saying that members of council received these offers on a personal basis, and one saying they received it on the basis of the position they hold.”

“To me,” Lametti continued, “if it is the case that if they did indeed [receive] it based on the position they hold, this may or may not constitute a conflict of interest. I don’t think councillors should be receiving monetary gifts of a significant value based on their position.”

This article was originally published in print on November 24, 2019 as part of the Labour, Body and Care joint issue. 

The post SSMU Legislative Council Debates Israel Trips appeared first on The McGill Daily.

However, the email, notifying students of an upcoming demonstration, was not sent out until the next day, October 12, around 10 a.m. The delay in sending this email on the listserv led to the creation of a letter calling for Bhalla’s resignation, signed by Jirousek and seven other Indigenous student leaders. “It is the opinion of the Indigenous student community that the conduct of Vice-President Sanchi Bhalla is grounds for resignation,” the letter reads. “By failing to provide timely allyship to Indigenous students Vice-President Bhalla demonstrated a lack of respect towards the issues as well as the labour that Indigenous students had applied.”

Timeline of Events

In Bhalla’s official statement, she wrote that a number of difficulties concerning the communications staff, as well as personal circumstances, led to the delay of the email. More specifically, Bhalla said in her statement that she had incorrectly assumed that the communications department had been aware of the motion and the email it required.

Upon finishing a midterm, she stated that she did not have the most current password for MailChimp, the application used to distribute SSMU listservs, as it had recently been updated for security reasons. As a result, she was unable to log on to compose and send the email. As well, due to it being a Friday night, she said that there were difficulties in reaching the communications director to fix the password, and only around midnight were they able to solve the issue. Just prior, around 11:30 p.m., Bhalla stated that a combination of a number of factors caused her to fall asleep.

Due to the omission of Bhalla’s whereabouts between 9:30 p.m and 11:30 p.m. in her statement and Facebook post, in combination with numerous sources informing the Daily of her presence at a bar during that time, the Daily reached out to Bhalla to clarify the situation. In an email, she confirmed that she went to Randolph’s Board Game Pub, which she identified as a cafe, around 9:30 p.m., “with notifications switched on the whole time,” and was there until 11:00 p.m.

Ineffective Communication

The Daily spoke to Jirousek, who stated that Bhalla was not communicative. “I understand that we need to take time for selfcare, and can respect that Sanchi may have needed time,” he wrote. “However, during this entire time she failed to respond to my email communication, in addition to a full day’s notice that listserv need[ed] to go out that night.”

“Moreso,” Jirousek added, “efforts could have and should have been made to communicate to me personally that she was unable to act in allyship, at which point I would be able to make alternate arrangements.” At that point, it fell on SSMU President Bryan Buraga, who, per Jirousek, was “staying up, coordinating with staff, and ensuring that this situation was rectified as quickly as possible.” Afterwards, Jirousek indicated that he sent an email to the entire executive, to which he received personal emails from Buraga and VP University Affairs Madeline Wilson.

“At the same time, Vice-President Bhalla made no effort to respond to my email, nor to relay that she was facing technical difficulties,” Jirousek added. “Due to her decision, Indigenous students who had worked on this statement, and expected to share the statement to generate publicity for our event, were forced to continue work in a stressful situation due to a lack of support from Vice-President Bhalla.”

“I understand that we need to take time for self care, and can respect that Sanchi may have needed time. However, during this entire time she failed to respond to my email communication, in addition to a full day’s notice that the listserv need[ed] to go out that night. Moreso, efforts could have and should have been made to communicate to me personally that she was unable to act in allyship, at which point I would be able to make alternate arrangements.”
– Tomas Jirousek, SSMU Indigenous Affairs Commissioner

Student Responses

Student responses to Bhalla’s statements have ranged from simplification of the situation as a “technological failure,” as the VP Internal phrased it, to the spread of intense anti-Indigenous racism across social media in response to Indigenous students’ calls for her resignation.

“It saddens me to see some students’ attempts to distort or misrepresent the current situation regarding the relationship between Indigenous students and Vice-President Bhalla,” Jirousek wrote to the Daily. “The actions of the Indigenous community have been undertaken with the goal of promoting reconciliation, solidarity, and support for future generations of Indigenous students. Sadly, certain students fail to understand this underlying goal and work done by the Indigenous community at McGill.”

Jirousek added, “Indigenous students are marginalized, isolated, and made to feel culturally alone on campus. Indigenous students struggle with systemic barriers which limit our success at institutions like McGill. For students to try and portray the actions of Indigenous students as some type of ‘attack’ is saddening and speaks to the struggles we face on campus.”

Future Plans

Regarding the reforms in SSMU that Jirousek proposed in The McGill Tribune – “a three-step reform to ensure our independence and autonomy in mobilizing to promote Indigenous issues at McGill” – he has already begun to meet with certain executives to work on implementing these changes. The three proposals include the creation of an Indigenous Equity Fund, changing the position of the Indigenous Affairs Commissioner to operate independently of the SSMU executive, and reforming the SSMU Indigenous Solidarity Policy.

In addition to Vice-President Wilson’s work helping to draft and support the Indigenous Equity Fund, Jirousek stated that he has “had conversations with VicePresident Wilson about the change in power dynamics and […] received her full support for the changes.” With regards to the other members of the executive committee, Jirousek expects to meet with them individually to discuss how the changes in the Indigenous Solidarity Policy will affect their respective portfolios. “Sadly,” he added, “I do not expect to receive such support from the Vice-President Internal, but I do look forward to working with the other five executives.”

“I would also just like to note in closing how much damage has been done at this point. While Sanchi may feel this response is unnecessary, there has been very real damage done to the relationship between Indigenous students and the SSMU due to her inaction, whether she meant to do so or not. Further, her failure to take a personal stake in the course of these events is particularly saddening. Yes, her inaction may very well be a symptom of a larger institutional issue. However, we still remain personally responsible for our actions and their effects. She had the choice to personally reach out, and discuss the issue when I emailed. She ignored my email. She had the ability to apply herself diligently the same way President Buraga and Vice-President Wilson had. Again, she didn’t.”
– Tomas Jirousek, SSMU Indigenous Affairs Commissioner

The post Jirousek Talks SSMU Response appeared first on The McGill Daily.

However, it was far from the only important discussion that took place during the council session. There were a number of motions brought forth, hard-hitting questions asked, presentations made, and important governance changes discussed.

Presentations

Three presentations took place at this Council meeting. Firstly, the Student Rights Commissioner, Adrienne Tessier, reported on their portfolio. In this presentation, Tessier noted some key findings, primarily regarding what could be done to get councillors and senators more involved in informing students of their rights. One method Tessier noted was the use of classroom announcements as a way of getting more students involved, interested, or aware of their rights as students.

The second presentation came from the president of Drivesafe, Charles Choi, who discussed a motion that would be presented later in council to implement carbon-offsetting funding. (The motion was later approved by Council.) In addition, Choi mentioned a number of planned or ongoing changes to Drivesafe, such as going fully electric by 2030 and expanding service to the Greater Montreal Area and Macdonald campus.

Professor Gregory Matthew Mikkelson, the president-elect of the McGill Association of University Teachers, also presented on University Senate governance reform. He then introduced a motion primarily focused on the appointment of deans, in order for all members of the McGill Community Council to be in unanimous support and thus have a better bargaining capability with the McGill administration. The vote passed unanimously.

Motions

In addition, there were a number of important motions presented, such as a Motion Regarding the Creation of an Affordable Student Housing Committee, a Motion Regarding the Adoption of an Events Management Policy, and a Motion Regarding Amendments to the Internal Regulations Regarding of Elections and Referenda.

Especially important was the Comprehensive Governance Review Committee Report, which prompted a significant amount of debate. Specifically, councillors debated the proposed removal of a number of seats from Council, such as that of the Arts and Science representative, two undergraduate Senate representatives, the residences representative, and the environment representative. There was also a proposal to add three non-voting members to Council: one of the equity commissioners, a member of the Indigenous affairs committee, and a member of MacDonald Campus Student Society. Another important proposed change was to allow students to bring motions to legislative council to be debated and voted on by councillors.

Question Period

Question period largely dealt with concerns regarding the sale of samosas on campus, with councillors asking what could be done in the future, as well as what should be done at the moment in response to the situation. The fine in question ranges from $2,250 to $54,000, which SSMU has stated they will cover in full. President Buraga then announced that “SSMU has taken steps to prevent future samosa sales for the time being, until we’re able to put a process in place to ensure that we are able to follow these health and safety codes, while also maintaining financial accessibility for clubs and services who do wish to have samosa sales and other food sales on campus.” There was also discussion as to whether this plan could be done with the cooperation of other student groups such as AUS or SUS, in order to prevent similar situations from arising there. (It is worth noting that a councillor ordered a box of samosas at the meeting as a show of solidarity with Pushap, the restaurant that usually provides the samosas to student clubs.)

In addition to this, a number of councillors asked questions regarding Indigenous student concerns about VP Internal Sanchi Bhalla. She referred to her later report which contained a statement on the issue, which is available online. (There will be a separate article discussing this issue in depth soon.)

Announcements

Finally, a number of announcements were made. First of all, VP External Adam Gwiazda-Amsel stated that many unions on campus will be – or currently are – going into bargaining or conciliation, and asked that the SSMU show solidarity with them. In addition, he noted that the Association for Graduate Students Employed at McGill (AGSEM) is looking to unionize non-unionized members of the academic staff such as undergraduate TAs.

VP Internal Bhalla also noted the upcoming Halloween party on October 31, and encouraged everyone to purchase tickets. Councillor Platt made a note of a number of upcoming musical performance by Schulich School of Music students, such as a jazz chamber concert on October 28, and encouraged all to attend. It was also announced that the AUS Grad Fair will be held on November 6 at New Residence Hall, and the SUS Grad Fair will take place on November 5 at the same location. Finally, it was noted that the SSMU General Assembly will take place on October 28 at New Residence Hall at 6 p.m.

The post Legislative Council appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Kat O’Donnell presented research on the University’s tenure processes. Given that the tenure process is quite central to how McGill functions, the presentation put significant emphasis on how tenure worked and possible areas that it can be improved, as well as specific methods through which students could get involved in the process. (Currently, there is no student involvement.) Some of these include prioritizing teaching out of the three criteria of the tenure process (teaching is currently ranked second to research). Additionally, the issue of equity in the tenure process was brought up, with O’Donnell pointing out that “right now, women, racialized professors, Indigenous professors, [and] professors with disabilities are underrepresented amongst tenure and tenure track positions,” meaning that “relative to their population in society […] we’re below the percentage we would expect to see.” In addition to this, there were concerns regarding disciplinary records, as they are “currently not included in the tenure dossier, [as] the professor producing their own tenure dossier has no reason to include those.”

A Debate on the Motion for a Moratorium on McGill Fees

Following the presentation, councillors debated the Motion Regarding Policy on Moratorium on McGill Fees Until Fossil Fuel Divestment, which was announced at the last council meeting. Proving to be a significant point of debate, questions arose as to whether the motion constituted an effective solution, or if it was a proper way of addressing the issue of McGill’s divestment from fossil fuels.

Arts Councillor Adin Chan asked “if this might antagonize the relationship [of the SSMU] with the administration,” to which VP University Affairs Madeline Wilson responded, “the short answer is: it absolutely will.” She then elaborated on the already complex relationship between the administration and SSMU, and spoke to the fact that so far no other options have proven to have any effect. During debate, the proxy for Senator Lametti, Sebastien Duckett, brought up that student senators had recently decided to vote against this motion, arguing it only served to take away student voices from the current process of having a say over what fees and funding-based changes take place. He also argued that the University may increase international student tuition as a means of raising funds for projects if referendums are not available.

In response, however, VP External Adam Gwiazda-Amsel pointed out that McGill has already made it clear that they plan on raising international student tuition, and that there is Quebec legislation that requires student consultation. Additionally, a significant discussion took place regarding the merits of divestment as a whole, with some arguing that it would instead be better to attempt to use the stakes McGill has in fossil fuel corporations to pressure these companies at stakeholder meetings, and become so-called “activist shareholders.” Amongst others, environment representative Michael Rhamey pointed out the issue with attempting to push divestment of fossil fuels from within fossil fuel corporations. Ultimately, the motion passed by a wide margin, with more than 20 councillors voting in favour of it.

Motion on the Athletics Facility Improvement Fee Referendum Question 

Following the passing of this motion, councillors discussed the Motion Regarding Creation of an Athletics Facility Improvement Fee Referendum Question. While this represented a new auxiliary fee, and thus would be directly affected by the prior motion, there was significant desire to bring it up for debate anyways, and to vote on it as well. SSMU President Bryan Buraga began by motioning to object to the question, under the grounds that it would go against the motion that had just been passed. However, that was not the end of the issue, as councillors made attempts to bring it up for debate, eventually succeeding by appealing the decision of the chair.

Once in debate, questions included asking whether it would be “possible to change the name of the motion” so that it would not be considered a new fee, whether councillors could vote on it despite it going against the previous motion, and whether the Board of Governors could change their agenda to vote on the Moratorium motion after the athletics fee. In the end, a major portion of the debate focused on whether this would violate the prior motion as well as the spirit of the motion. After the motion was voted on, it did not end up passing.

Additional Motions

A number of other important motions were presented this council, including the Motion Regarding Condemnation of Judicial Challenge of Human Rights Tribunal Ruling Regarding First Nations Children, as well as the Motion Regarding Condemnation of Bill 21, both of which passed with relatively little debate.

Other motions debated included a Motion Regarding Creation of the Gerts Reopening Fund and Fee, which failed, a Motion Regarding Increase and Nature of SSMU Equity Fee Referendum Question which was approved, a Motion Regarding Creation of SSMU Student Academic Support Services and Fee Levy, and finally a Motion Regarding Changes to the Health and Dental Review Committee Terms of Reference which also passed. The motion to open Gerts in Winter 2020 with a one-time fee levy of $7.50 proved to be controversial, with nine councillors voting in favour of opening the bar, ten voting against, and four abstaining. (The motion mentions how the bar “would operate at a significant financial loss if it were re-opened during the Winter 2020 Semester.”)

Due to the significant time constraints, the rest of the motions and reports which did not require immediate approval were pushed back to the next meeting.

Finally, regarding announcements, it was noted that the Fall SSMU General Assembly will be taking place October 28 at New Residence Ballroom.

The post Leg. Council appeared first on The McGill Daily.

On behalf of the administration, Christopher Buddle, the Dean of Students, gave a presentation discussing the Policy on Involuntary Student Leave. Krista Houser also spoke, on behalf of the Sustainability Projects Fund (SPF). Buddle’s presentation on the policy fielded a significant number of questions, notably regarding the student status of those who will fall under the policy, as well as concerns over whether there would be student representation on the case management team. Facing widespread student pushback, Dean Buddle suspended the policy shortly afterwards, and will be reworking it throughout the year. Following Buddle’s presentation, Houser provided an overview of SPF and its efforts on campus, pointing to initiatives such as Refill McGill as examples of successes in sustainability on campus.

Strong sustainability discussion

With regards to sustainability, SSMU President Bryan Buraga presented a report on changes underway on campus. He pointed to a number of sustainability changes being implemented, namely that Midnight Kitchen would be helping in the future with supplying vegan food for council meetings, rather than ordering delivery pizza. Buraga also noted that the SSMU Fall Semester General Assembly had been set for October 28 from 6 p.m. to 9 p.m., and will take place at New Residence Hall. In closing, he announced that renovations in the Shatner University Center would hopefully be finished by December 2019, and noted the possibility of an opening in January 2020 – 22 months after the building’s initial closure. In addition to the report, Buraga gave notice for a motion to be presented next council meeting – the Motion Regarding Policy on Moratorium on McGill Fees Until Fossil Fuel Divestment. In a speech laying out the plans for the motion, Buraga spoke to the urgency of McGill’s action in divestment. “Councillors, it’s time to act, and the message is clear: our students are demanding strong, principled, and decisive action on climate justice,” Buraga said.

Buraga continued, “McGill University seems to only care about two things: donations, and its reputation, […] we must demonstrate our resolve in the face of continued inaction on fossil fuel divestment by McGill University.”

During the announcements period, several bulletins were put forth by members of council regarding the climate strike. Councillor Beatrice Courchesne-Mackie, representing the Faculty of Law, reported the Faculty’s successful GA, as well as the Dean’s decision to cancel classes. Members from the Arts Undergraduate Society (AUS) also brought up the Faculty’s GA that not only met quorum, but passed a climate strike motion by unanimous vote, which was also approved in the online segment of voting with a nearly 40 per cent voter turnout. One of the Councillors representing the Faculty of Management spoke to the Management Undergraduate Society’s (MUS) Board of Governors’ actions in formally and unanimously endorsing the strike. Councillors Andrew Dixon and Mariam Morgan, representing the Faculty of Medicine and the School of Physical and Occupational Therapy, both announced successful votes regarding the strike.

Finally, during the question period, a student from the Faculty of Science – attending the Council as a member-at-large – asked the science representatives to clarify the SUS stance on the strikes. In response, a member of the Faculty clarified that while they were unable to hold a GA on time, they were able to release a statement on the SUS Facebook page that endorses the strike. Additionally, the member acknowledged that labs can be difficult to postpone, but noted that some classes, such as Organic Chemistry I, were able to make an alternative lab day to accommodate students who were striking. Furthermore, another member of the Faculty clarified that SUS had emailed a significant number of professors in the Faculty of Science to either cancel classes, or at least not make anything due, on the day of the strike. They noted that many professors had responded, and that many science classes were in fact cancelled, although there was unfortunately not an explicit strike vote.

Finally, the Motion Regarding Support of Climate Justice Actions at McGill was presented by VP External Adam Gwiazda-Amsel, which mandates SSMU to recognize the climate emergency and take steps to both pressure both the Quebec and Canadian governments and the McGill administration to divest from fossil fuels, as well as support efforts to advocate for climate action. In the succinct words of Gwiazda-Amsel, “we’re all going to die in 12 years if we don’t do anything, [and] strikes are a really good way to impose economic pressure on both institutions and governments who are directly responsible for climate change.”

Indigenous Equity Fund and Fee

There was also an important motion brought written by SSMU Indigenous Affairs Commissioner Tomas Jirousek – the Motion Regarding Creation of Indigenous Equity Fund and Fee. The fund and associated fee, which seeks to bring to referendum a fee levy to support Indigenous student activism, points to the lack of resources available to efforts such as the Change the Name campaign – which had to draw from the First People’s House primarily – an organization whose budget has already been cut, per Jirousek.

Jirousek spoke to the urgent need for a dedicated fee levy to take the strain off such organizations, as well as the need for the administration to support Indigenous students. All councillors present voted in favour of the motion, except for Management Councillor Jonathan Gurvey.

Further announcements included applications for a member-at-large on the Accountability Committee (applications are available at SSMU Facebook page or by emailing speaker@ssmu.ca), as well as VP Finance Samuel Haward’s announcement regarding the club workshops that took place on September 14 and 15. Haward expressed his desire to make it clear that any club who missed the workshop, but gave notice that they would be unable to make it, would not be sanctioned, and that the claim published in The McGill Tribune that they would be sanctioned was not factual.

The post Legislative Council appeared first on The McGill Daily.

There was little debate regarding the latter, most significantly over how long to extend the policy for – Council eventually agreed to extend it until 2024 in order to stagger the dates that policies must return to Council. On the other hand, there was a great deal of debate regarding the changes to the standing rules, with a significant area of discussion focused on a number of the recommendations given by the Gender Neutral Language Researcher, specifically regarding the format of the placards used in Council, as well as responses to misgendering.

Colour-Coded Pronouns on Placards

Clause 4.7.1, which was eventually removed from the motion, was particularly controversial. It stated, “placards will also use a neutral colour system to more easily identify commonly used pronouns as recommended by the Gender Neutral Language Policy Implementation Coordinator.” In this recommendation, green would be used for councillors using she/her pronouns, burgundy for councillors using he/him pronouns, and black for councillors using they/them pronouns.

However, councillors had different opinions on the colour scheme, with some advocating to keep it the same. It was eventually agreed to keep the placards red, and instead increase the font of the pronouns.

VP University Affairs Madeline Wilson, who was in favour of removing the coloured bands in exchange for increasing the font size of the pronouns, explained her position further to the Daily:

“In my experience, the coloured band on [councillors’] placards has become colloquially understood to refer to their gender identity and not their pronouns. So for example, a councillor who used she/her and they/them pronouns and identified as a woman would be assigned the placard band colo[u]r that denotes a female gender identity, which a) fails to capture the full picture of this person’s experience with gender and b) does not, in my opinion, simplify the identification of the pronouns by which they wish to be addressed.” She elaborated to say “that presenting options within the binary and then one option outside the binary conveys the idea that such a binary exists, when in reality, it does not.”

Wilson writes that SSMU Legislative Council has been a “deeply, systemically, and toxically masculine” space, and that “to implement this mechanism (the coloured placard bans) and do nothing to address the fact that Council can be (and has been) an actively hostile space for folks who do not identify as male, [feels] like a slap in the face.”

Responses to Misgendering During Council

Additionally, there was debate over clauses 2.7.5.2 and 2.7.5.3, the first of which mandated that if the Speaker notices the misgendering of any councillor, they call it to Council’s attention by stating, “Before we continue with debate, I would like to call attention to the pronouns specified on councillor [Last Name’s] placard.”

Clause 2.7.5.3 then mandated that if a councillor noticed the misgendering of another councillor, they call it to the attention of the Speaker on a Point of Personal Privilege. In the final, approved version of the standing rules, Council voted to change the language of the councillor clause from “[councillors] should call [the misgendering of another councillor] to the attention of the Speaker on a Point of Personal Privilege,” to “[councillors] may call this to the attention of the Speaker on a Point of Personal Privilege.”

Adam Gwiazda-Amsel, VP External at SSMU, was in favour of the change. “I argued that this wording change offered an avenue for recourse, but did not impose this obligation on councillors given that the person being misgendered might not want to call attention to it,” he wrote to the Daily. “In my comments, I encouraged councillors to ask one another if they’d like to be spoken up for.”

In addition, they removed clause 2.7.5.2, which required the Speaker to address the misgendering. Gwiazda-Amsel elaborated on his reasoning in supporting this change. “The clause which mandates the speaker to call out misgendering would produce an incredibly uncomfortable environment for the person being misgendered, in case they did not want to call attention to it,” he explained.

This suggestion was first given by the SSMU Gender Neutral Language Researcher at a meeting of Council in September 2018. At this meeting, they explained the procedures they were proposing: “councillors must address each other formally, usually in the form of councillor last name, and avoid referring to one another using third person pronouns to promote a cordial environment,” they said.

Other Council News

Also acknowledged were the appointments of four new members to the Board of Directors, two of whom (councillors Bhutkar and Wright) are filling the role immediately as Interim Directors, while the other two (councillors Chan and Fakih) will enter the role on November 15.

A number of announcements were made as well. Importantly, several Committees are now open for applications for members-at-large, notably the Equity Committee (via the Equity Committee Facebook event) as well as the Library Improvement Fund Committee (which can be found at https://ua.ssmu.ca/libraries/). Additionally, elections for First Year Council have begun, and students can now access nomination kits for the Clubs and Services Representative position (available on SSMUís Facebook page). Furthermore, it was announced that a number of motions regarding the climate change emergency would be brought to faculty and department councils in the near future.

Finally, it was noted that the SSMU General Manager, Ryan Hughes, had unfortunately resigned. He had worked at SSMU for the past seven years.

This article has been corrected to clarify that the four new appointments were to the SSMU Board of Directors, not the Board of Governors. The Daily regrets this error.

The post SSMU Debates Gender-Neutral Language appeared first on The McGill Daily.