Protests have been occurring daily in downtown Montreal since negotiations began with the government on Monday, and subsequently broke down after Minister of Education Line Beauchamp excluded the Coalition large de l’Association pour une solidarité syndicale étudiante (CLASSE) – considered the most militant student association – from negotiations on Wednesday.

The protest, which at its peak consisted of an estimated 2,000 marchers, was advertised on the CLASSE website as well as on Facebook, where the event “HOLY SHIT : MANIF NOCTURNE PRISE 3 !!!” listed 2,304 attendees.

The protest began at 8:30 p.m., when protesters gathered at Parc Émile-Gamelin.

“It’s a huge joke,ˮ said Université du Québec à Montréal (UQAM) philosophy student Alexendre Bolduc to The Daily in French about provincial negotiations. “[Beauchamp] was there for one hour of talks; in my opinion, they really don’t take us seriously. They’re fanning the flames, they continue to infantilize us. They showed us that they can’t negotiate in good faith; it’s going to have to be worked out in some other way.ˮ

As the march set off from the park, protesters were addressed by police, who asked that they move in the direction of traffic. They were blocked by police from moving west down Ste. Catherine and instead went south on St. Denis and turned eastward to march on René Lévesque, effectively blocking the street. Police on horses, bicycles, and in cars maintained a presence ahead of the march and behind it, and groups of police in riot helmets marched alongside protesters.

As the march crossed de Bullion around 9 p.m., police declared it illegal, causing some marchers to leave.

On Twitter, the Service de la Police de la Ville de Montréal (SPVM) announced that the protest had been declared illegal because projectiles had been thrown at police. Less than an hour later, the SPVM announced that, although illegal, the protest would be allowed to continue if it remained peaceful.

Throughout the night, sirens could be heard as police rushed to keep up with protesters’ unannounced route. With the exception of a few instances of pyrotechnic material being set off by protesters, no acts of violence or vandalism were observed during the march. The only arrest reported by police concerned the use of pyrotechnics. In many instances when the crowd neared police, it chanted “On reste pacifique” (Let’s stay peaceful).

Numbers dwindled rapidly in the protest’s third hour. Fewer than one hundred protesters remained when the demonstration came to a close in front of Place Ville Marie, where one protester, Felix Levellier, addressed the crowd. “We’ll be back tomorrow, and there will be three times as many of us!”

After his speech, Levellier told The Daily in French that he was not one of the protest’s organizers, but had decided to speak to ensure that the protest ended without violence. When asked why he had attended the march, Levellier said, “We want to stop the hikes, but above all else we want the government to hear us, peacefully.”

The post Third consecutive evening demonstration appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Six teams presented their proposals in the SSMU Ballroom from 10 a.m. to 3 p.m., but it was the eco-friendly cafe project that emphasized a homey design and international menu that came out on top.

The team will receive a $4,000 prize for their design, and their business plan will be adopted by SSMU’s sustainability working group, which hopes to open the cafe in September 2013. Although the cafe’s location has yet to be announced, a number of teams speculated that it might take over the space on the first floor of SSMU that is now occupied by La Prep.

According to the SSMU Sustainability website, the members of the teams – all of whom were McGill students – have been working on the project since November, when they were chosen from a pool of applicants for the competition.

The groups then had access to a team of mentors from McGill and the wider community, including experts in organizational behaviour, sustainability and corporate responsibility, architecture and design, and community engagement. These mentors gave recommendations to the teams and made up the panel of judges.

Additional prizes of $2,000 and $1,000 were given out to second-and third-place candidates respectively, Growing Grounds and Thatched Roof Cafe.

The event was attended by approximately seven hundred students. U1 Arts and Science student Inna Tarabukhina, one of the event’s organizers, called it a “success,” and “a great opportunity for students to get engaged and to have a real say about what goes on on campus.”

SSMU VP Finance Shyam Patel, who has been involved with the project since last summer, also said the event went very well. When asked whether SSMU was ready to take on a management role in food services, Patel admitted that “it’s going to take a lot of work,” but that they had “taken the right preliminary steps.”

Patel was unsure about the project’s future in the hands of next year’s executive, but said that he would “do [his] damn best to make sure it’s carried forward.”

The post Fireside Café takes the win at the SSMU Sustainability Case Competition appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Buck-Moore, a U3 student who has been a floor fellow for two years, was informed in a meeting with Michael Porritt, executive director of McGill Residences and Student Housing, that his position – and the benefits package that accompanies it – was “terminated, effective immediately.”

Porritt refused to comment on Buck-Moore’s dismissal because it was a personnel matter.

A second Solin floor fellow, who wished to remain anonymous, also occupied the sixth floor of the James building. The floor fellow had a meeting scheduled for Wednesday with Porritt, however, he was unable to attend. At press time the floor fellow still retained his position. The meeting has been rescheduled for this morning.

Both floor fellows were told in separate meetings with Porritt on February 14 that their positions as floor fellows were at risk.

The dismissals come after a consultation process with McGill’s residence community, which began on February 16.

Porritt sent an email to all residence councils and floor fellows calling for individuals to “speak now or forever hold your peace” in respect to “the current issue regarding our floor fellow team and the residence community related to the James occupation.” The email was also shared with all residents on the two fellows’ floors.

During and after Porritt’s consultation process, two petitions calling for Porritt to drop proceedings against the floor fellows were prepared. Members of the McGill community, including 11 professors, signed the first petition. The second peition, presented to Porritt today, has signatures from 61 floor fellows, dons, and MORE fellows.

Prior to his dismissal, Buck-Moore was presented with a letter outlining his options. The first mandated that he turn in his keys and remove his belongings from his Solin Hall apartment before Friday. It also barred him from entering any McGill residence for the remainder of the academic year, but ensured him a place at Greenbriar Apartments at regular rental rates.

The second option would allow him to stay in Solin Hall for the remainder of the year, but require him to pay regular rental fees, and would strip him of his duties and responsibilities as a floor fellow. Although Buck-Moore is required to answer by Thursday, he explained that he plans to dispute the legality of the action.

In an interview with The Daily prior to his dismissal, Buck-Moore said he had consulted with Legal Aid. “It’s a little bit unclear as to what labour codes or standards we fall under or into, given our nebulous condition as student academic staff,” he said, adding that he will likely file for wrongful dismissal. “We’re definitely employees though, that’s for sure.”

There is no official termination clause in floor fellows’ contracts with Residence Life. Guidelines within the contract under the “Responsibilities of Floor Fellows, Dons, and MORE Fellows” include being a “positive role model,” and also require that floor fellows, who are not paid for their work but receive free room and board, are “vigilant at all times of how their behavior…might affect their position and reflect on the residence community.”

Another Solin floor fellow, who wished to remain anonymous, expressed concern in an interview with The Daily that, “If you can be fired by the discretion of whoever is in power, then there needs to be a clear and defined set what you can and cannot do because, as it stands, the contract is incredibly vague.”

“If I were to reapply this year, I would feel very differently about what it means to be a floor fellow,” the floor fellow continued.

Buck-Moore described the action as “completely discretionary,” adding that  “Porritt’s boss is Morton Mendelson, and Michael Porritt is my boss. The other people that were on the sixth floor don’t have that direct employment connection [to the administration]… It’s easier for him to get to me.”

One of the initial demands made by students who occupied the sixth floor was for Mendelson to resign. Occupiers presented the action as Mendelson’s “surprise resignation party.”

In an email to all McGill students and staff on February 9, Vice-Principal (Administration and Finance) Michael Di Grappa stated, “Complaints will be lodged against the protestors under the Student Code of Conduct.” Disciplinary procedures within the University are confidential at the discretion of the individual charged.

The post Floor fellow dismissed for #6party involvement appeared first on The McGill Daily.

The photograph’s subject is Place Ville Marie – a business and commercial complex known for its cross-shaped office tower that occupies a large city block at the southern end of McGill College. The structure is central and distinctive, and has often been referred to as Montreal’s best-known skyscraper.

Inaugurated in 1962, Place Ville Marie turns fifty this year, making 2012 an occasion for reflection on the building’s pivotal role in the tumultuous creation of Montreal’s downtown core.

A child of the 1960s, Place Ville Marie was built at a time of transformation in Quebec. As new ideas rocked the political and social milieu, the advent of modern architecture and new approaches to urban planning and development were changing the way in which citizens interacted with their cities. Jean Drapeau – mayor of Montreal from 1954 to 1957 and again from 1960 to 1986 – had ambitious plans for the city. His administration believed Montreal could become one of the world’s great metropolises, and projected for the population to double between 1961 and 1981.

When an up-and-coming New-York real estate developer named William Zeckendorf expressed interest in transforming an underused plot of land into the largest skyscraper that Montreal had ever known, Drapeau was happy to oblige. To design his building, Zeckendorf hired the Chinese-American architect I.M. Pei, who would later become famous for projects such as the pyramid at the Louvre. Pei’s associate, Henry Cobb, served as it’s principal architect, aided by a team of local architects, in designing a building that would be a testament to the new, modernized Montreal. Another collaborator in the project was Vincent Ponte, an urban planner who took advantage of the existing excavation in the area – the result of a series of unfinished rail infrastructure projects – to realize his dream of a “multi-level, interconnected city,” one that would stay vibrant and economically viable, despite the outward pull of suburbia. Ville Marie, with a floor-level shopping gallery and tunnels to Central Station and the Queen Elizabeth Hotel, was one of the first projects in the establishment of the underground city, connected to the metro after its completion in 1966.

Above ground, the municipal government widened Dorchester – now Rene Levesque – into a six-lane boulevard, creating a main artery to the downtown core for motorists. This intervention spurred the development of other skyscrapers along the strip, such as the CIL House – now Telus Tower – and the Hydro-Quebec building. A photo of the Montreal skyline in 1961 shows multiple towers under construction, with steel girders stretching upward to heights that dwarfed all others around them. Of these new skyscrapers, Place Ville Marie was the largest. Its main tenant was to be RBC, who appreciated the fact that it would be slightly taller than the adjacent headquarters of CIBC, it’s main competitor.

Construction began in 1959, and, as with any great experiment, adjustments had to be made. Place Ville Marie’s builders soon realized that the tower’s unique shape made it subject to rotational stress as a pinwheel structure would be. Twice the amount of steel was needed, doubling the costs of construction and nearly bankrupting Zeckendorf.

France Vanlaethem, a Université du Québec à Montréal (UQAM) professor who studies the history of modern architecture, commented in an interview with The Daily that, “At its origin, it was a very interesting, very innovative project, locally and internationally. Its purpose was to make money, but it was financed by someone who was a great patron of modern architecture. Zeckendorf was a man who built on credit. What was the most ambitious was the scale. It was a risky endeavor.”

Very quickly however, the building became a place of prestige, and finding tenants was no problem. The complex is comprised of the main tower and a few smaller buildings, rows of storefronts and a public courtyard. It includes 45 stories and enough space for 10,000 workers. It’s top story houses a restaurant, a nightclub called Altitude 737, and an observation deck. It’s eye catching, whether because of its circumnavigating searchlights or the sophistication of its design.

“It’s a very simple architecture, with a clean, stripped aesthetic and a grand sense of spatiality,” said Vanlathem.  “The row of buildings surrounding the plaza to the northwest integrates the complex into the fabric of the city.”

Ville Marie’s opening in 1962 marked the final chapter in the decades-long migration of Montreal’s business and commercial elite from Old Montreal to the new, “uptown” city center that we now know as downtown. Paul- Andre Linteau, a history professor at UQAM who has written extensively about the development of Montreal said in an interview with The Daily, “The Ville Marie project bought a new dimension to the new downtown. Millions of square feet of office space was now available. All of a sudden, Old-Montreal emptied out… It was enormously significant. It became the symbol of modernity…of urbanism, and of a new conceptualization of the city. No other building has had that kind of impact.”

According to Linteau, however, this zeal for modernity came at a cost. “It was part of a much bigger project, of Jean-Drapeau and of others, to modernize the city. Modernization came first, and entire neighborhoods were destroyed in its name. There were a large number of projects, sometimes ridiculous ones. At one point, it was proposed that part of Old Montreal should be demolished to accommodate a highway along the river.“

The sixties remain a controversial period in Montreal’s history, in architecture and planning as in everything else. The period’s positive impact on the city can be seen in the development of important urban infrastructure like the Metro, and Place Ville Marie, to which Montrealers have long professed a special attachment. “It’s a visual symbol of the city, something very unique, in the shape of a cross,” said Linteau. “We don’t have anything else like it.”

The post Looking back on upward mobility appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Earlier this week, an attempt to expand the encampment into Place Jean-Paul-Riopelle, a public square two blocks away, was met with opposition from the City of Montreal.

“We asked City Hall on Monday night, and again on Tuesday morning, but they said we couldn’t camp there,” said occupier Laurent Goncourt in French.

Gonzalo Nunez, a public relations officer for the City, told The Daily on Wednesday that the City’s decision was for public safety reasons. “Our emergency services have to be able to intervene in an emergency situation, so we’ve asked the protesters to stay on one site,” he explained.

Although occupiers were in Place Jean-Paul-Riopelle earlier this week, they have since left. The occupation is currently contained to Square Victoria, which was renamed La Place du Peuple on the first day of the occupation.

Stéphan B., an occupier working in the communications tent, explained to The Daily in French that, for the time being, there is enough space in Square Victoria.

“But, in the future,” he said, “I don’t know what will happen.”

Occupiers are also discussing ideas for continuing the occupation into the winter.

“When it gets cold, people will start to leave if they’re not comfortable,” said Goncourt.

A yurt – a circular, portable, wood-framed shelter – was erected this week, and social activist Mostafa Hennaway has proposed that people move into empty floors in the adjacent Bourse de Montréal building as the weather gets colder.

Most occupiers seem willing to stay within the law to sustain the occupation.

“From my understanding, we’re trying to do a legal occupation,” said Tara, a volunteer at the information tent. “In New York City, they’re not even allowed to camp. This is the Rolls Royce of occupations.”

The post City halts Occupy Montreal expansion appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Organizers from FRAPRU, or Front d’action populaire en réaménagement urbain, assembled at the corner of Hutchison and Jean Talon, along with representatives from various other social advocacy groups and members of the public. The group is calling for an additional 50,000 public housing units to be built in the province within the next five years.

The demonstration was the final stop in FRAPRU’s Caravane, a nine-day journey throughout the province, during which the group staged protests in various communities to call federal and provincial leaders to account. The caravan travelled with low-income renters and made stops around the province to show solidarity with people living in substandard housing.

Protesters marched through the streets of Parc Extension, a neighbourhood where over one half of all residents are deemed to be living in low income housing, according to Statistics Canada.

As the procession–which FRAPRU estimated at 800 people – made its way towards Boulevard de l‘Acadie, Parc Ex residents stepped out onto the sidewalk to watch and chat with volunteers.

FRAPRU organizers then directed the group to the hitherto unannounced location of Ville Mont Royal, a secluded enclave. Mont-Royal directly borders Parc Ex – the two are separated by a chain-link fence and hedges, with few points of entry.

As demonstrators made their way down Mont-Royal’s streets, a few residents watched from windows and driveways. The demonstration ended in a Mont-Royal park with a speech from FRAPRU’s chief coordinator François Saillant.

“The government is always telling us that there’s no money,” he said in French, prompting vocal responses from the crowd. “As you can see, the money is here. The problem is, it’s not being shared.”

Stéphan Corriveau participated in the demonstration as a representative of the Fédération des locataires d’habitations à loyer modique du Québec (Federation of Quebec Public Housing Tenants). He associated public housing needs with what he sees as a discrepancy in the distribution of wealth.

“I’m not interested to live in a society where it’s the law of the jungle. You end up in a society…where there’s a huge level of mistrust between the different communities,” he said.

Corriveau spoke of Ville Mont-Royal, where the average house costs $750,000, as being symbolic of the situation.

“I’m doubtful that [Mont-Royal residents] work harder than any people who work in a kitchen, or as a janitor, or a construction worker, or the mother that is raising five kids in Parc-Extension just across the fence,” he said, adding that “these people deserve just as much life quality as the people who live in Mont-Royal. We’re not talking about charity, we’re talking about justice, and we’re talking about solidarity.”

While on the road with FRAPRU, Grant Latimer described the housing situation in the Val d’Or native community as “a desperate situation.”

“They don’t even have electricity or water,” he said. “This is a reserve that is surrounded by gold mines.”

Elizabeth, a FRAPRU volunteer, spoke of the caravan’s visit to students in Sherbrooke, who she said are living “in very bad conditions, with a very desperate need for [public] housing.”

Under provincial policy, most university students are ineligible for Quebec public housing.

FRAPRU also voiced concerns that federal funding for public housing, including rent subsidies and renovation payments, will be cut in coming years due to the expiration of funding contracts with provincial and municipal governments.

Alain Roy, who came to the demonstration representing the Association des locataires de Sherbrooke, expressed concern for what he considered to be thousands of people who might lose their homes because of the loss of subsidies. He spoke from his own experiences in Sherbrooke, where many federal subsidy contracts that had benefited low-income renters in co-ops have already run out.

He described how his group has been receiving calls from individuals panicking about sharp rent increases.

“They tell us that they’re completely hopeless, they were paying two or three hundred dollars a month with the subsidies, now they’re paying six,” he told The Daily in French. “They’re just not able to live there anymore.”

The post “We’re not talking about charity, we’re talking about justice” appeared first on The McGill Daily.

To commemorate World Habitat Day, a long-standing activist group is set to launch a week-long caravan campaign to raise awareness and demand government investment in social housing.

The Montreal-based coalition of 138 activist groups in Canada, known as le Front d’action populaire en réaménagement urbain (FRAPRU), will begin a caravan campaign around Quebec on October 3. The FRAPRU caravan will stop in various towns and communities to hold demonstrations calling for federal and provincial politicians to take action on the issues of social housing and poverty.

“We’re taking our message to the streets all over Quebec, because we see the same problem in every region,” said FRAPRU organizer Marie-Josée Corriveau. She said she expected around 80 participants in the caravan.

The caravan will consist of two convoys. One departs from Quebec City, and the other from Ottawa; both will end up in Montreal on October 9, the same day FRAPRU is planning a demonstration. Corriveau explained that the convoys’ routes would include stops at the offices of various politicians – among them Quebec Finance Minister Raymond Bachand and Minister of Municipal Affairs Laurent Lessard.

According to Corriveau, 160,000 people in Quebec have serious housing needs.

“What we’re asking is that the [federal and provincial governments] agree to investments that will provide for 50,000 new units over five years, if only to deal with the most urgent cases.”

Stéphan Corriveau, who works as a coordinator for a low-income housing advocacy group called the Fédération des locataires d’habitations à loyer modique du Québec (FLHLMQ), spoke to the large demand for social housing.

“There are currently 45,000 households – not people, households – on waiting lists, and, of those, 22,000 are in Montreal. Many more think the list is so long, they won’t even try to put themselves on it,” he said.

There are over 100,000 social housing units in Quebec, with low-income housing making up the largest part of the public housing system. According to Corriveau, the mortgages on many of the buildings are due to expire soon. As they do, the federal government will be free from certain funding responsibilities, which Corriveau predicts will lead to higher rents, a reduction in the quality of services, or the neglect of necessary maintenance projects.

According to Corriveau, maintenance on existing social housing units also has a long history of being underfunded and deferred.

“These buildings are 31 years old on average, and they were often made with inferior materials – they need significant upgrades,” he said.

Maude Ménard Dunn is a community organizer for Montreal-based homeless advocacy group le Réseau d’aide aux personnes seules et itinérantes de Montréal (RAPSIM). She stated that much-needed maintenance to housing units will result in rent hikes to cover the expenses.

“[Housing co-operatives] simply can’t afford to take responsibility for the subsidies because of mounting renovation costs,” she explained.
Dunn predicted a sharp increase in homelessness as a result of the funding shortfalls, something that could cripple Montreal’s already overcrowded shelters.

“Homelessness is a multi-faceted problem, one of the causes is, by definition, the need for social housing; the situation in Montreal has exploded,” she said.

Marie-Josée Corriveau also spoke to the effects of a decrease in government subsidies for rent in low-income housing and other units, such as cooperatives and non-profit housing organizations.

“These people could then be subject to rent increases of two, three, four, even five hundred dollars a month,” she said.

The post Quebec housing rights group launches caravan campaign appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Since its application in 1977, the Canadian Human Rights Act has pledged to uphold the principle that “all individuals should have an opportunity equal with other individuals without being hindered in or prevented from doing so by discriminatory practices.” Until last June, however, the Act included a special provision, Section 67, which restricted the right to file claims of discrimination from First Nations peoples.

“For thirty-five years, people living under the Indian Act were not able to avail themselves of recourse to justice when they felt themselves to be victims of discrimination in many matters of their daily lives,” said David Gollob, communications director for the Canadian Human Rights Commission, in an interview with The Daily.

The Indian Act is a broad piece of legislation that affords First Nations communities the right to a certain level of autonomy on their lands, and determines the relationship between Aboriginal citizens living on reservations and the federal government. First drafted in 1876, it has broad implications in Aboriginal law. According to then-Justice Minister Ron Bassford, Section 67 was included in the Human Rights Act in order to avoid potential conflict between the two pieces of legislation. Its implication was that anyone living or working on an Indian Reservation was not legally able to pursue discrimination claims against First Nations governments under the Human Rights Act if the discrimination was related to the Indian Act. It also prevented complaints of discrimination against the Indian Act itself.

“This was recognized by successive governments as an anomaly that needed to be rectified,” said Gollob. “The [Commission] has been calling for the repeal of Section 67 for many years, and the United Nations also echoed this need to end what has been a historical injustice of not giving all people living in Canada the same human rights protections.”

The House of Commons passed Bill C-21 in 2008, allowing First Nations communities immediate access to the complaints process against the federal government, and affording First Nations governments a three year transitional period to allow for possible complaints against them. The Bill did not come into full effect until this past June, when the transition period ended.

Post-repeal, the Commission – through its National Aboriginal Initiative – had been working to “understand all the implications of the act as it regards First Nations people” said Gollob.

Sherri Helgason, director of the Initiative, said that the role of the commission “is to accept complaints where complaints are filed.”

“We also have an education role, a role in expanding knowledge and identifying policy or systemic issues that could be problematic, with the goal of reducing, or eradicating, discrimination,” she continued.

Helgason explained that the application of Bill C-21 on First Nations reserves has the potential to address issues of inequality, including the division of matrimonial property.

“From a human rights perspective, we did identify that the absence of regimes or laws that would allow for equitable distribution of marital assets was a problem,” said Helgason.

Already, cases have been brought to court challenging certain aspects of the Indian Act that some individuals living under it perceive to be discriminatory.

Gollob described one case in particular which “could have a very significant impact on the quality of life and quality of services” on First Nations reserves.

A joint complaint brought forth by the First Nations Child and Family Caring Society of Canada and the Society of First Nations, currently working its way through the court system, reveals the amount of state funding available to First Nations children in need of intervention by child welfare services is less than what is available to services for children living off-reserve.

“This is a discriminatory practice,” Gollob asserts. “It’s going to be a very important case in that it will help shape the impact of the inclusion of First Peoples under the Canadian Human Rights Act.”

Attempts to contact representatives of First Nations governments for comment, including the Assembly of First Nations and the Grand Council of the Crees, could not be reached at the time of press.

A previous version article stated that Sherri Helgason is the Director of Communications for the National Aboriginal Initiative. She is in fact the Director. The article subhead incorrectly described the changes to the complaint processes under Bill C-21. The subhead has been altered to accurately describe the processes. The Daily regrets the errors.

The post Canadian Human Rights Act amended to include Aboriginal citizens appeared first on The McGill Daily.

“I told my father I wanted to become a writer,” said the 82-year-old writer in French. “He told me, ‘You’ll die of hunger.’”

One of Mexico’s foremost literary figures, Fuentes is the author of two-dozen novels and numerous short stories, essays, and plays. He has been suggested as a candidate for the Nobel Prize in Literature several times in the past few years. He is also a journalist, a political commentator, and has held diplomatic posts with the Mexican government.

Fuentes spoke to current Law students Wednesday as a former Law student himself. In English, French, and his native Spanish, he spoke of his education – of teachers, formative experiences, and books. He entertained the crowd, reciting a bawdy monologue about love and lust from the perspective of Niccolò Machiavelli.

A diplomat’s son, Fuentes talked of studying the internationalist tradition in Geneva at twenty, discussing matters such as “the tension between the equality of states and the hegemony of big powers,” and working as a junior member of the Mexican delegation of the International Labour Association. He ended his time in Geneva as secretary to the Mexican member of the international law commission of the United Nations, continuing his internationalist education.

Fuentes returned to literary pursuits while writing about issues of will in his law thesis. “The heart of the country was calling me and saying ‘Please, write for me,’” he explained.

Asked what makes a good writer, Fuentes responded, “Dilligence. I get up at 6:30 or seven, and start writing at eight. I work from eight to twelve, read all afternoon, then go to the movies. … I don’t wait for inspiration from the heavens.”

Law and literature, he says, are similar in that they are both “part of the civilizing process,” in contrast to events like the “tremendous violence” of the Mexican Revolution, which were part of the “de-civilizing” process.

On the subject of the drug-related violence that is plaguing many areas of Mexico, he said that “forbidding drugs and fighting the cartels violently will not solve the problems. We’re not offering alternatives to drug consumption. It is more than a criminal act. We need to start thinking of new policies and go forward with small steps.”

Concerning Mexican migration, he attested that, “It is the problem of Mexico, of Latin America, to retain our workers. … Some people leave, but most people stay. Latin America is moving, it is not an empty continent. ”

Fuentes called for a “reformed” United Nations to better equip us for the realities of the 21st century. “What can we say about the future, knowing that it is changing so quickly?” he asked the audience. “We’re going to see a lot of things we have never thought about before.”

“I ignored completely what was going to happen in Northern Africa,” he added. “This came as an enormous surprise…we had no inkling! The fact that there are societies that are forming themselves in order to act democratically – this is going to be a major factor in building this century’s politics.”

The post Carlos Fuentes: fighting drug cartels will not solve problems appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Munroe-Blum explained the report’s three main tenets are diversity, excellence, and community engagement. At the town hall, she stressed that diversity does not reduce academic quality or standards, but that it is “quite the opposite… the report includes a very precise statement that describes how diversity and excellence are linked.”

Munroe-Blum also emphasized that the Task Force’s recommendations would not include any affirmative action measures.
“We really thought that our major goal would be to make sure that those who could be qualified for these positions had a route into our application and enrolment procedures, whether at the staff or the student side, that would make us easy to interact with,” she said.

Kevin Whittaker, president of the McGill University Non-Academic Certified Association (MUNACA), wanted to know why there were no employee association representatives on the task force.

“One of the main topics addressed in the task force is employment equity. Under the Federal Contractor’s Programme, McGill is required to consult and collaborate with employee representatives and bargaining units in all employment equity implementation,” he said.

SSMU Equity Commissioner Emily Clare told The Daily that in the same vein, groups like the Union for Gender Empowerment, the Black Students’ Network, and Queer McGill should have been consulted.

Munroe-Blum said there was no special group representation to the task force, as it was created by an ad hoc committee wherein specially appointed members tackled diversity issues “writ large” and not “particular interests.”

When staff and students gave recommendations on how to better promote diversity, or exposed any deficits in diversity and acceptance at McGill, they were directed to the Task Force website, or told to  “think carefully about what you could be doing.”

The principal also expressed the need to improve mobility on campus.

“Our campuses need to be more physically accessible as a high priority. That’s been a challenge for us, [and is] certainly something marked for me,” she said.

A student from the Départment du langue et litérature française and the School of Environment asked about the fact that international students can no longer take FRSL at the in-province tuition rate, as she believed this change would prohibit the integration of international students into Montreal.

The principal replied that the main problem was underfunding. “We’re constantly having to make tough decisions,” she said, and suggested that the student who raised this issue should petition the provincial government for these funds.

Laura Risk, a member of the PGSS family care committee, spoke of the lack of recognition, lack of facilities such as changing tables and nursing areas, and lack of academic accommodation – for instance, leeway for students who miss exams because of a sick child – that were facing students with families.

Munroe-Blum was unwilling to make any daycare promises because of “constraints of space and money.” However, Jim Nicell, Associate Vice-Principal (University Services), immediately sent out text message to scout out possible locations for changing tables.

On the subject of equality of access and tuition rates, Munroe-Blum specified that governmental bodies could better address these issues.

Joël Pedneault, next year’s SSMU VP External, asked whether Munroe-Blum had personally consulted with any upper-level administrators at Canadian banks about tuition rates.

“I have spoken right up to the level of CEO,” she said.

After the town hall, Pedneault pointed out that this relationship presented a “conflict of interest, knowing that any increase in tuition fee means that students start to incur debt and start to have to pay interest to banks.”

The post Principal hosts town hall on diversity appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Finally, I reach my destination: a small but distinctive display tucked in a corner of the huge Toyota showroom. It’s here that I find Scion, one of the most fascinating examples of how the automobile industry is fighting to retain its grip on the way we move.

Scion is a marquee of Toyota, but nothing at the booth gives that away. The display looks more like a nightclub than anything else. The brand’s three models – the xD, tC, and xB – sit on plush black carpet, displayed in jewel tones that pop against the booth’s smooth, jet-black walls. Nondescript techno blares from overhead speakers. Scion’s circular “S” symbol is omnipresent, alongside slogans like “Creative- Authentic- Individualistic” and “Different by Design”.

The booth’s presenters, all in their early twenties, have discarded the standard car show uniform of company polos and black trousers in favour of hoodies and jeans. One presenter, Maude, starts explaining Scion’s appeal to me: “The models are for sure, like, a younger image. It’s a more, like, powerful car.” Around us, show-goers are climbing inside cars, examining specs and playing the “augmented reality” Scion videogame set up in a corner. I ask Maude what about Scion gives the car this younger image, and why I’ve been seeing the logo so often around town lately. “I just think that’s because it’s so new. Young people are more attracted to it,” she says. “Everywhere young people are right now, they’re trying to be.”

Scion’s story begins about ten years ago. In the early 2000s, Toyota had a problem. The average age of their drivers was 46 – one of the highest in the industry. The term “Japanese Buick” was getting thrown around, and although Toyota had just launched a series of models meant to attract younger buyers, almost all were flops. (Do you by chance recall the Toyota Spyder? Or the Celica?) The brand that meant safety and reliability to older buyers was seen as dowdy by the new generation, who didn’t want to be driving their parents’ cars.

Toyota needed a new approach. They found it in the Blue Ocean Strategy, a corporate playbook born of the Harvard Business Review, which “challenges companies to break out of the red ocean of bloody competition by creating uncontested market space that makes the competition irrelevant.” In other words, Toyota was no longer going to compete with Hyundai or Mazda, because they would be selling a completely different product. They would be selling cool.

Thus, Project Exodus began. The objective: to create a new brand name that would appeal to the Gen-Y demographic (anyone born between 1975 and 2000). Exodus launched Scion, a line of models with distinctive designs that drew from a racing aesthetic, made available in the U.S. in 2003. To bring in the youth market, Scion began inserting itself wherever 18-to-30-year-olds hung out by sponsoring concerts, art installations, independent films, trendy restaurants and the like.

Scion taps into the psyche (or, at least, the supposed psyche) of our generation and acts accordingly. A big theme in their campaign is originality and individualism. “The younger generation express themselves through music, art, style and lifestyle choices,” says scionnation.ca “Every Scion is just that – a steel canvas for expression, using accessories to create a vehicle that is as unique as the person driving it.” Scion offers hundreds of customization options, like stereo upgrades, spoilers, and lowering springs. Younger car buyers are more likely than older ones to be “tuners” – drivers that modify the appearance of their car by paying thousands of dollars for head-to-toe customization.

Another way that Scion distinguishes itself is with its “pure price” policy: no haggling, because “buying your car should be as easy as buying anything else.” Apparently, young people only buy things with barcodes.

The idea is that by offering customization, sponsoring events and having a pure-price policy, Scion demonstrates that it “gets” us. In adding these elements to fast, design-forward and powerful cars – priced within reach of first-time buyers – Scion became Toyota’s newest success with sales peaking at 170,000 units sold in 2006.

It avoided the loud advertising techniques used by other car manufacturers, saved money by avoiding too many TV ads and by piggybacking showroom space from existing Toyota dealerships. The Scion dynasty grew and began looking to expand to new markets. In late September of last year, the shiny new 2011 models made their debut in Canadian Toyota dealerships for the first time.

Since its arrival, the company has staged an all-out marketing blitzkrieg on Montreal, and, it seems, my life. After buying my ticket before a concert last October, I was given a Scion wristband from a man at a Scion tent, and walked past a display of two parked Scions on the way to the door. There are Scion ads on the back of the number 24 bus going down Sherbrooke as I walk to class, suggesting that I would rather be riding in a Scion than on the STM. My favourite music magazine has a double-page Scion spread in every issue. That new producer I love? Scion just released his mix tape. Scion sponsors Piknic Electronique and Igloofest, as well as the Cheaper Show – a major exhibition for emerging artists – and dozens of other smaller events.

“We’ve been bringing over DJs from the U.K. and Europe to host events in the three cities, and we’ve been doing some experiential marketing by taking the cars out with street teams to downtown cores, with local events with surf and skateboard shops,” said Scion Canada’s marketing manager Paul Harrison to Marketing Magazine at the time of the launch last September. “We certainly target that influencer market.”

The word “influencer” is a relatively new addition to the ad man’s lexicon. It’s basically the equivalent of buying a pair of sneakers because you saw the popular kid wearing them. An influencer shows up where you’re least expecting, and builds loyalty by associating itself with things you like. Since Scion has the same tastes as me, in music or fashion or art or whatever else, I’m supposed to like it more as a car.

Generation Y is known to advertisers as an “ad-blind” demographic. We’ve been bombarded with conventional advertisements since before we can remember, and we’ve become quite jaded, so influencers are the marketer’s newest trick to get us to buy.

And Scion is not only selling a car, but an entire lifestyle. At the auto show, I was handed a copy of Scion Magazine. It features a picture of a smiling twenty-something named Lisa, leaning out the window of her boxy xB. “It’s funny how a car can change your life,” the caption reads. “The xB is more than a car… whenever I’m cruising around, you just can’t help but take a second look.” Lisa’s Scion, which is about as “different by design” as your standard kitchen toaster, would turn heads. The red custom-painted 18-inch wheels that pop against the ultra-low white body are meant to show us Lisa’s individuality, her creative masterpiece on Scion’s “steel canvas.”

Lisa, as it happens, is the “editor-in-chief” of the clever bit of ad propaganda that Scion calls a magazine, a position which she claims she fell into “serendipitously” after importing her beloved Scion from the U.S. over a year ago.

It’s a tempting illusion. In the magazine’s sunny, overexposed pictures, beautiful people in shiny cars cruise past trendy shops on Queen West and in Mile End. Laughing, a well-dressed gang piles into the back of an xB for a daytrip. A could-be model, sporting an impeccable pixie cut and an expression of utter self-assurance, rolls up to a night-time gallery opening. This could be your life. All that’s missing is a Scion.

It’s not new for car companies to associate an idealized lifestyle with their brand. In their ads, companies like Jeep and Subaru push a thrill-seeking aesthetic, while Lexus and Audi tantalize us with the wonders of high living. And Scion is only one of many companies using influencers to attract youth buyers – Red Bull and Virgin Media are other forerunners, hosting events that cater to younger tastes and offering a curated collection of music and video on their websites. What’s striking about Scion, however, is how it taps into a disconnected generation’s need to belong and the ease with which it does so.

It’s likely that Toyota is using these unconventional methods in advertising because young people are beginning to see cars in a different way than their parents did. Issues like air pollution and climate change are influencing consumption, and car companies seem worried. Another reason that cars are becoming less desirable is that young people are more and more attracted to lifestyles that don’t involve driving.

“What it all boils down to is the effect of housing versus cost of transportation,” says Nik Luka, a McGill Architecture and Urban Planning professor who specializes in the efficient use of urban space and infrastructure. “Explicitly, what that means is, people could pay more [for housing] and not need a car, or pay less and need a car. One of the reasons that you see targeted marketing like this is because perceptions are beginning to shift. In studies on housing choice and satisfaction, younger households are more interested in living in denser neighbourhoods and not having a car,” he says.

“In Montreal, we have a dense, compact layout, and so the benefits of not having a car have surpassed the benefits of having one, especially in a neighbourhood like the Plateau, which can’t accommodate very many cars. The more you squeeze in, the more time is spent sitting stopped. So people are choosing not to drive and getting places faster… If there are viable alternatives, they should be used.”

But, he concedes, the alternatives are often underwhelming when compared to the allure of a new car.

“There’s a practical, pragmatic, logical, moral argument there… The trouble is, cars are selling a product, a physical object that gives visual pleasure. It’s much harder to sell an everyday activity,” Luka says, pointing to activities like cycling or riding public transit.

Car companies, of course, spend millions on advertising, while transit authorities cannot. Luka could think of only one exciting promotion of alternative transportation: the STM’s 1976 “Il fait beau dans l’metro” campaign, a TV commercial depicting happy public transportation riders singing and dancing while miserable drivers sat in gridlock. For the most part, however, car companies have the upper hand when it comes to attracting us.

There are 19 million registered vehicles in operation in Canada today, and over 80 per cent of us drive to work. It will be up to young people to decide whether our society will continue to be centered around the car, or whether it’s time for a new direction.

The post You are what you drive appeared first on The McGill Daily.

—

Jane Gatensby is a U0 Arts student. She can be reached at jane.gatensby@mail.mcgill.ca.

The post Alternative is more than an aesthetic appeared first on The McGill Daily.

To many, literature has an important role to play in constructing a national identity. In Canada, where national identity is still ambiguously defined, the subjects entertained within our high literature are thought to be representative of our interests as a whole. This year’s GG short-lists are filled with stories that reflect distinctly Canadian experiences. Diane Warren’s Cool Water is a psychological drama set in small-town Saskatchewan; David Yee’s Lady in the Red Dress explores the anti-Chinese prejudice in our nation’s legislative past; Alan Casey’s non-fiction book Lakeland contains “Journeys Into the Soul of Canada”; and John English’s Just Watch Me: The Life of Pierre Elliot Trudeau is – well, you get the idea.

But how much does a GG nomination really matter? In the end, very few people will actually read these books. According to a survey conducted in 1998, only 61 per cent of Canadian adults had read any book at all in the previous twelve months. Among those who do read, Canadian literature is not the top priority. Only one GG nominee can be found on this week’s Globe and Mail bestseller list: Emma Donoghue’s Room is the sixth top-selling hardcover novel. The much more widely-read categories of paperback fiction and nonfiction are dominated by books like The Girl who Kicked the Hornet’s Nest and Eat Pray Love. These mass-produced “popular fictions” do well because they are written and presented in ways that appeal to the general reader – using simple prose, for instance – and are supported by massive marketing campaigns.

In the world of high literature, however, profit is seen as secondary to literary accomplishment: few serious novels, books of poetry or plays ever actually make much money. Canadian literature and popular literature are, with a few exceptions such as Life of Pi, mutually exclusive categories. According to a study published in the National Post last January, only half of us can even name a Canadian writer. Literary awards such as the Governor General’s are meant to rectify this both by promoting Canadian authors and by deciding which novels will be the classics of tomorrow. The hope is that with the aid of publicly-funded organizations, Canadian books can achieve a certain amount of popularity without having to completely succumb to the whims and demands of a readership market. If this all seems a bit fabricated, it is. The GGs are part of a very conscious effort to help shape the nation’s identity by creating a recognizable literary ideal. “In nation-building narratives, ‘great literature’ is supposed to be a sign of a nation’s maturity,” said Karis Shearer, a former postdoctoral fellow at McGill and current Fulbright Visiting Research Chair at Vanderbilt University in Nashville. “So certainly it’s in Canada’s interest, as a state, to foster ‘excellence’ in literature, acting like a patron to the arts.”

One of the more obvious ways that the GGs act as a “patron to the arts” is by offering financial awards to winners. Although in its early years the GGs only offered medals to its prizewinners, recognition of the financial hardship that Canadian writers faced led to winners receiving monetary awards by 1951. Today, this award amounts to a whopping $25,000 in each of the seven categories, with additional prizes for the runners-up and funds for publishers to promote the winners making the total value of the awards close to $450,000. This money, however, is perhaps less valuable than the lucrative possibilities this prestigious award creates for its selected authors.

“After we won, we had more offers from publishers, more recognition, more demand,” explained Lori Saint-Martin, who with her husband Paul Gagné has won the prize twice for English-to-French translation. “It was a real springboard for our careers.”

Because the council insists on using peer juries, the chance of running into a conflict of interest in Canada’s relatively small writing, publishing, and editing world can often create a great deal of controversy. In 2008, Jacob Reiner won the award for poetry amid accusations that one of his judges, Di Brandt, had too many ties to the young poet. Reiner had solicited Brandt’s help with a translation for the collection and had thanked her in the book’s acknowledgements. Reiner held onto the award in spite of this criticism, but only after his acknowledgements had become, according to his editor, “the most scrutinized acknowledgments page in the history of Canadian letters.” The incident brought the issue of what defines a conflict of interest to the forefront of the awards.

“As is the case with any prize, the winning book tends to reflect the aesthetic and political values of the specific jury,” said Shearer. “That’s just logical. And it’s one of the reasons, I think, in the interest of being as fair as possible, the Canada Council has developed a mandate over the years that emphasizes its commitment to balanced juries – balanced in terms of age, cultural background, aesthetics, and so on. That doesn’t mean there haven’t been surprises over the years.”

The relationship between these awards and the state is another issue that gives rise to controversy. The Canada Council for the Arts operates, according to its website, “at arm’s length” from the Canadian government, who provides the prize money but stays away from the decision-making process. For some, however, this is still too close for comfort. In 1968, two of the prizewinners, Leonard Cohen and Hubert Aquin, declined the award outright. Aquin, who was involved in the Quebec separatist movement, did not want to accept an award from a government he deemed illegitimate. Cohen, never one to pass up an opportunity for controversy, professed that, “Much in me strives for this honour but the poems themselves forbid it absolutely.” After the incident, the council began asking writers in advance whether they were willing to accept the awards. The controversy did not stop there, however: the next year, during the heyday of Canadian nationalism, a group of poets contested the results, citing the American influence on the jury, and raised $1,000 for their preferred runner-up, Milton Acorn. They called this the “People’s Poetry Award,” and presented it in a makeshift ceremony at a Toronto tavern. Contention carried over into the next year as well, when a handful of Members of Parliament were outraged that bpNichol’s The True Eventual Story of Billy the Kid, which they considered to be obscene, had won a state-sponsored award.

For most writers however, the GGs are still viewed as a great honour and a career-boosting opportunity. As Saint-Martin puts it, “There is nothing controversial about the award for us.” That the GGs are contested is – as Northrop Frye noted – to be expected: “…A committee with so august a name attached to it represents an Establishment, to be attacked for that reason alone.” Yet the role that the GGs have played in creating a strong sense of Canadian culture and supporting our literary arts is invaluable. With this year’s selection coming from a number of independent publishers and breakthrough authors, the results will be some of the most exciting yet.

—

Winners will be announced at La Grande Bibliothèque, 475 de Maisonneuve E., on November 16 at 10 a.m.

The post Who’s a winner? appeared first on The McGill Daily.