J ’ a c c u s e
Students are being asked to choose today and tomorrow on whom they want to represent them for the coming academic year. Unfortunately, both teams failed to truly capture what will be the issues on which they will represent students.
Tedjo-Paterson-Clark, using a combined 14 years of undergraduate experience have decided that health and wellness, student safety, the environment, and kitsch election offerings will form their platform. Within the all-important health and wellness component, they propose one solution and a fair degree of rhetoric: by reducing the number of exams being written in a 24-hour period required to declare a conflict from three to two the team hopes to ease student stress.
While this will more than likely have the desired effect, I firmly believe they’ve failed to examine the implementation of this action.
Students are not only stressed when they have several exams close together, but also when they’re unable to fly home in a reasonable amount of time to get unpacked before holiday meals become a priority. And while many students believe that the istration’s worries are none of their concern, the most pressing issue is a reduction in secure and quiet exam space: with Queen’s Centre construction and loss of Jock Harty Arena, the istration is scrambling to find suitable space for students while still allowing them to take as broad a range of courses as possible.
Although I respect Paterson’s iration and confidence in the ability of the AMS’s IT office, I think it might be premature to put into place an AMS-based system that handles students’ currency.
The Q.Ca$h system is flawed, and no amount of “we can do it”s and “it can’t be that hard”s can save face on what looks like a unnecessary and expensive venture.
Chak-Manning-Mitchell’s attempts to showcase the importance of community at Queen’s have missed their mark.
They are correct in pointing out that many students had the option to attend a bigger, less community-based school. However, a strong clubs night or a comprehensive events calendar is not how things become popular at Queen’s and is not how they help build our tight-knit community.
If this was a true priority for CMM, they would have realized the true risks facing the undergraduate student community: a shift in focus towards research and graduate education at Queen’s which will remove the currently afforded undergraduate academic and non-academic priorities; the loss of centralized meeting space, disruption of student services, and encroachment onto green spaces around campus caused by Queen’s Centre and Tindal Field construction projects; and continued problems associated with the liabilities of student ventures that remove autonomy and increase scrutiny by the istration.
By addressing these issues, CMM can truly build an environment where students enjoy their extracurriculars, promote them amongst each other, and embrace what they offer to the Queen’s experience.
When students cast their ballot they must ask themselves not which team can provide a ill-conceived replacement for Q.College or a video guide to Queen’s, but which team can fully represent their interests in the coming year.
Students have made a significant contribution to a construction project that has been sitting idle for months. While holes along Earl Street are great for property values, students want to see the most for their money and the project needs to find legs; time is money. Students need to choose a team that can not only explain the Ontario Undergraduate Student Association’s formula for funding balance to the government, but can communicate that plan to the students themselves. Students need representatives who inspire trust and professionalism in the istration, so that students have the ability to lead teams, clubs, and causes without worry of potential istrative pitfalls.
Standing in front of the ballot box bears more weight then you might think. It’s important for students to realize that they have to look past the pretty pink and green. What the teams promised in their platforms is bunk.
Ensure you are placing your vote for the team that you think is capable of not only recognizing what the true issues facing undergraduates is, but is capable of doing something about them.
All final editorial decisions are made by the Editor(s) in Chief and/or the Managing Editor. Authors should not be ed, targeted, or harassed under any circumstances. If you have any grievances with this article, please direct your comments to [email protected].