StFX Decides 2008

A correction to "Connors as Advocate"

su_comm@stfx.ca (Unknown) — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 03:37:00 +0000

In my last post I wrote that "The StFX Disciplinary Code clearly works under the presupposition that all students are guilty until proven innocent." Pat and I are in disagreement about this issue. I just spoke with him on the phone about this disagreement and it became evident to me that the article in reference (the preamble to Article III) to the community code is neither "clear" nor "evident".
The point is that I stated that Pat Connors misinterpreted something pretty clear and said this partially debunks a major part of the foundation on which he stands for leadership. When we talked Pat made it agreed that the Community Code is written in a way that one can be confused. However, most laws aren't written that clearly (it is why a law degree is hard to obtain).
Pat has been advised by the Dean of Students, the RLM, and others that he should interpret this article to read "innocent until proven guilty".
I told Pat on the phone that I would apologize for misconstruing the point. I realize now that this is not the case. I have not entirely missed the point. Pat trusted some people close to him and he can't entirely be blamed for their wrong interpretation or misleadings.
I would like to apologize to you, all candidates, and specifically Pat for making his inaccurate statement about "innocent until proven guilty," seem to be entirely his fault. As a result I came down to harshly. I should have also blamed a partially corrupt University Disciplinary System for some of the fault that resulted in this interpretation.
However, in our conversation and my subsequent contemplation on the issue I realized that, ultimately, the onus still falls on Pat. As a defender of students he shouldn't have accepted the explanation of the Dean of Students or the RLM at face value. He also should admit where he is wrong.
I was wrong as well. The Community Code isn't "guilty until proven innocent" or "innocent until proven guilty". The Code specifically reads,

"Finding of innocence or guilt under The Rules of Conduct is decided on the basis of balance of probabilities or preponderance of evidence, not on the basis of beyond reasonable doubt."

This means you begin the process in a gray area. When I was an advocate I took a harsher stand in the defense of students and approached all cases as though the student was already assumed guilty. This forced me to argue more convincingly and be more prepared to defend the innocence of students.
I don't know how effective Pat is as a Student Advocate. What I do know is that he used other people's interpretations of an important rule instead of his own. He used the opinion presented to him by the people in direct opposition to the Student Advocate office (The Dean and the RLM) rather than really questioning their agendas. Finally, I know that Pat would rather argue than listen and not admit that he is wrong.
I am sorry that I accused Pat with an overly aggressive post. We both were wrong in this issue. I thought the code was black, Pat though it was white, when really it is gray. However I am happy that right before posting closes and the polls open I was able to call a spade a spade and Pat is still trying to bluff when he doesn't have a full house.

Connors as Advocate

su_comm@stfx.ca (Unknown) — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 22:34:00 +0000

One student asked: Student Disciplinary Trials are closed to the public. Do you think this should change and why?

Connors took the lead on this response by stating: "Trials are innocent until proven guilty," and went on to say they should thus remain closed.
Connors has stood firmly on his role as Student Advocate as a demonstration of experience and leadership.
While Connors may or may not be a good Advocate, he does not know fully how the disciplinary structure at X, or any Canadian university, operates. The StFX Disciplinary Code clearly works under the presupposition that all students are guilty until proven innocent. All Canadian Universities operate with this directive. The fact that Connors, a student advocate, does not know this I think partially debunks the foundation on which his claims to leadership stand.

LIVE from MORRISON HALL - INTERACTIVE

su_comm@stfx.ca (.) — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 22:30:00 +0000

The guy who got put on the spot to answer a question says he's feeling alright. Not really sure what this whole thing is about but asking questions.

Table full of bitter girls!

SuperStar Girl #1: I just feel that both candidates are talking about getting students involved with the union, yet before they run it in their platform, they need to be informed about the union.

SuperStar Girl #2:

They only reason Pat and Scott about societies is because there was a girl at their platform meeting explaining societies. Especially with the environment, they don't understand what Lise has accomplished already.

#1: They are misinformed. They don't know the current policies.

SUPERSTAR GIRL #1 and SUPERSTAR GIRL #2 for PREZ and VICE PREZ!

**the opinions in the interactive section of LIVE from MORRISON HALL do not reflect those of Sarah Furey but direct quotes from students.

My thoughts thus far...

su_comm@stfx.ca (Unknown) — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 22:05:00 +0000

There are a tone of posts coming out. There are a tone of questions and answers being given. It is hard to get everything typed out. A lot of similar questions are being asked:

What have you done in the past?
What are your skills?

I don't know if students feel they aren't getting the answers they want, or maybe they are running out of things to ask.
Some knew questions arise about:

What conflict resolution skills do you posses?
How will you work with the Rez Staff?
If you were an animal which one would you be and why?
What is something you will do that hasn't been done in the past?

All candidates handled the conflict question well. They've been responding but giving me little to comment about. Why does this matter? It matters because if I don't feel particularly decisive about one candidate or another than I loose confidence in the future of theU. Non-indicative answers do the students little good. I wish these candidates really boiled this down to the real point and took student questions more seriously. There were a lot of students paying attention but now the room is filtering out. I think if a real connection was going on I would have different sentiments.

Rapid-fire questions

su_comm@stfx.ca (.) — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 21:55:00 +0000

Gym over-crowding:
Matt discusses the pair's plans for gym expansion
Scott wants to communicate with administration to evaluate all available options.

Why are you better?
Pat draws on the pair's track-record of confronting students and finding out what it is that students want.
Julia explains how her and Matt are a well-rounded pair.

Past experience:
Julia's involvement in the charity hockey game.
Scott initiated Bishop's ball.

Why should I not spoil my ballot?
Pat: because the union is an important part of the X experience that has the ability to affect the lives of many students here. Students should use their democratic ability to make the first step.
Matt: Want students to get involved and voting is the first step.

The one thing that makes you perfect for the job:
Matt: both actually care about students and this job.
Julia: we want to and we're passionate about it.
Pat: I believe I can help you. With me as president you will have sufficient opportunity to make change.

Who will win the Stanley Cup?
Patt and Scott: NY Rangers and Ottawa Sens
Matt: Pittsburg

Weaknesses:
Pat: overly passionate, angry and aggressive - but it's because I care about what I'm invovled in and want to make change.
Scott: work and work and work
Julia: Not in the union
Matt: lack of residence experience

Relay for life thoughts:
Julia: very involved with it for the last three years
Matt: It's awesome
Pat: participated last year and commends everyone invovled

Rising residence costs:
Scott: 40% of students in residence; communicate with administration' utilize student reps on BoG to help reduce residence costs and find balance to make sure students get a fair deal.
Matt: work with administration

Social life for underage students:
Julia: involvement with DART program to make all events wet/dry.
Scott: experience as Burke House president, dealt with underage students

U Exec clique:
Pat: committed to advertise exec positions as widely as possible to hopefully ensure diversity during the hiring process. Reforms to executive to increase accountibility.
Matt: Meet your union event so people feel welcome and comfortable with the exec.
Julia: exec attend most if not all events on campus.

Role models:
Matt: Marc Rodrigue
Julia: my mom
Pat: my dad
Scott:

What makes you unique:
Scott: student relations experience - most dedicated to changing, expansion, improvement
Matt: unique pair - got some of each side of the university. Cover a lot of ground.

Most important part of platform:
Matt: fix intermural program
Pat: ensuring sufficient opportunity for students to participate in their union.

Fav X Memory:
Scott: homecoming weekend first year
Pat: playing in Burmac first year
Julia: homecoming first year
Matt: 19th bday

Women at X:
Julia: I am a woman and it will be beneficial.
Pat: gender does not affect your ability to reach out to others.

Events for next year already planned:
Scott: broad appealing bands. Repeat/improve frosh week.
Julia: Activities advisory committee

Burmac's portrayal of women:
Scott: working closely with Joe MacDonald on explaining the harms of the offensive language during Burmac.

Conflict resolution on the exec:
Julia: Senior RA = conflict resolution; also manages a team of ten other people.
Scott: Burke house pres in charge of house council.

Better relationship between theU and res life:
Scott: tried to do exactly that in role as house pres
Julia: awesome relationship between her and house pres in Lane. Want to implement social events between the two groups to improve relationship.

What animal are you?
Julia: A panda because they are cute.
Matt: Cheetah
Scott: A cat - they have the best life.
Pat: Dog

Something that hasn't been done in the past:
Pat: reaching out to students more, making them feel like they are making changes.
Matt: X factor volunteering.

Students from away:
Matt: get them involved
Pat: full-time international student advisor

What disney character?
Scott: Jasmine
Pat: Ariel
Julia: Goofy
Matt: Mickey

How specifically will you support societies?
Matt: society support on theU website. promoting societies that are beneficial to X.
Pat: societies that are beneficial should get funding. Tiered system and advertising.

What position would you consider getting rid of?
Scott: None. Enforce terms of reference and make sure people are doing their job.
Matt: No

Tuition:
Scott: Discussions with admin, work with student reps to make sure any increase is as small as possible and accounting for every dollar.
Matt: student recruitment = less tuition.

How will you ensure that students know about the union?
Matt: availability. Exec updates, getting them out so students feel comfortable with them.
Scott: Communications platform - improve website, use of facebook, blogs from students reps throughout campus, engage students.

"Tell me about the union"
Scott: theU is there to represent the student body and express student concerns
Matt: students watching out for each other and standing up against the powers that be.

Do you think student discipline trials should be made public?
Pat: No. Students are innocent until proven guilty. Remains private unless the student is a threat to the community.

How will you ensure that students trust the union with your leadership?
Scott: show students what we are doing. publish documents, videos, blogs so students know what's going on.
Matt: use the website to ensure that students have as much information as possible. Trust comes with availability. Students need to see their exec.

Rapid Fire Questions - Part 1

su_comm@stfx.ca (Unknown) — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 21:55:00 +0000

What will make you better than your opponents?
Connors/Matheson stumble over the question and revert to their typical "it's about you," speech and end up getting cut off by the timer.
MacG and Clarke give little more of an answer and just state they will represent students.

Why should I not spoil my ballot?
Connors/Matheson - TheU can change your life while here at X. There are some good initiatives that we will start. "Use your ability to have your voice heard."
MacGillivray/Clarke - Want to get students involved.
Both answers demonstrate that the candidates have missed the point on this question. Students are participating when they spoil the ballot. Spoiling your ballot shows that you think both candidates don't deserve these important and powerful positions.

What are your weaknesses? This was asked at the last debate, have you given more thought?
Connors - Overly passionate results in me sometimes being aggressive.
Matheson - About the same. Gives a round-about answer saying he cares too much to the point he over works himself.
MacG and Clarke stick to their guns about each persons inexperience balancing the other. Clarke is not involved in theU, MacG is not involved in residence. While not more thought out than last time, it appears that their answer is more honest than Matheson's. The award for honesty goes to Connors though. He just stated his weakness and didn't try and use it to get votes.

LIVE from MORRISON HALL 2

su_comm@stfx.ca (.) — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 21:53:00 +0000

Atmosphere: The tables are beginning to thin and the chatter is settling, still obviously there, but a little less dominant. There seem to be several faces paying close attention to the forum at the head of the stage.

RAPID FIRE QUESTIONS: Only 30 seconds to respond.

What are you going to do about overcrowding at the gym?

Matt and Julia: Push administration. I can't get the path Power Hall plowed when it snows, I don't know how they are going to get an improved gym through administration.

What will make you better than your opponent?

Pat and Scott: We will listen to you. "Making this union about you." Good call, I think talking to students and a strong relationship with the student body is important.

Why spoil the ballot?

Pat: The union is important and both slates have some good initives.

MacGillivray: Get involved.

What is the one thing that makes you different?

Macgillivray: This school means a lot to us and we want to. Clarke mentions again that it's not for our resumes.

Pat: I believe I can help you. Your voice will be heard.

Who will win the Cup?

Scott and Pat: NY Rangers and Ottawa Senators

MAcGillivray and Scott: Pitsburg Penguins

What are your weaknesses?

Pat: Overly passionate. This is because I can and I want to help people. Sometimes I see that as a weakness. (I think it's a strength)

MacGillivray:

Clarke: Not in the union and doesn't really know how it works. I think is could be a strength as well, because it's good to go in blind. Hopefully she'll see things differently, if elected.

What do you plan to do about the rising cost of residences?

Scott: It comes down to communicating. Talk and lobby the administration through the board of governors.

MacGillivray: Agrees.

HOw are you going to promote activities for underage students?

Clarke: All events should be wet/dry.

Scott: I am very passionate about this.

How do you gaurentee that your excutive won't be an eliteiest click?

Pat: Advertise the postions widely. Hire the best person for the job. - I hope this is the case!

MacGillivray: WAnts to make sure 4th floor is a comfortable place to hang out.

Who is your idol (?)

Clarke: my mom

Pat: my dad

Scott: my dad

MacGillivray: Marc Rodrigue

What makes you different or unique?

-time out... Brian Cauly just gave me a piece of pizza.

If you could do one thing from your campaign what would it be?

MAcGillivray: Intramural Program. - Good call. I think that's huge. Nice answer Matt.

Pat: Opportunity for students to participate in their union.

What is your favorite memory of St. FX?

Scott: Homecoming First year.

Pat: BurMac first year.

Julia: Homecoming first year.

Matt: My 19th birthday at X.

What are you going to do to ensure that women's vocies are heard?

Clarke: I am a woman. I know my my issues and those of women.

Pat: I dont think your gender makes a difference.

What specific events do you have planned for next year?

Scott: Frosh week. Talk to students and deliver.

Julia: We will be working nonstop to ensure you get what you want.

How does BurMac portray women?

Pat: There are positive things about that event and there are also some negative. If elected we will get rid of negative and embrace postive.

As an RA how so you propose to make a better relationship between res life staff?

Scott: I don't really know what he said.. he used a few acronyms that I dont recognize.

Clarke: Social events between house presidents. Work together, have fun together.

Which animal would you be?

Clarke: Panda - cause it's cute

macGillivray: Cheetah - cause it can run fast

Pat: Cat - because they have the best life

Scott: dog

Marc is at the grilled cheese line.

That is probably the most exciting thing going on right at this second. A lot of the questions are turning out to be cookie cutter. Both slates, god love'em, are just answering the most diplomatic way possible. I wish one of them would just say something crazy. It's almost like they just care soooo much about being elected that they are being sooooo careful. I really believe if one of the slates took a risk, did something different, they would be a shoe in.

MacGillivray is answering a question about lowering tuition and he says that The Union needs to be involved with student recruitment.

I'm gonna go make this blogging a little more interactive.

Leadership

su_comm@stfx.ca (.) — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 21:52:00 +0000

Question three deals with leadership on campus. Scott begins by highlighting the various options in which students can build their skills by involvement in theU. Matt and Julia address two of the better ideas in their platform: volunteering and a first year councillor. Both of these are fantastic ideas that with help improve relations between students and their union.

Even more posts from the debate

su_comm@stfx.ca (Unknown) — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 21:51:00 +0000

Still here, still live, Morrison hall students asking some question specifically about the platform of both slates, demonstrating their knowledge of this campaign. I am pleased to see this level of intellectual questioning, I just hope the answers are as well thought out.

What about jobs and leadership opportunities on campus?
Connors/Matheson demonstrate their knowledge of theU jobs by listing things like "Work @ X" and "LEAD".
MacG and Clarke give a short reply with little content.

On to rapid fire questions = rapid fire posting:

and questions begin

su_comm@stfx.ca (.) — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 21:45:00 +0000

And Marc turns the mic over to the crowd and without fail, the first question has to deal with the below average dining options in Morrison Hall. Pat answers first, outlining how he and Scott have talked to students about their dissatisfaction and pledge to enter into discussions with Sodexho, in hopes that things can be improved. Matt and Julia address their idea of the introduction of a dietician and if the dietician says that Moe's food is sub-par, then they feel that that will give them some pull when negotiating with Sodexho.

Question two blatantly calls the candidates out for not answering the question asked previously. Both slates talk about taking advantage of the Health reps on the various house councils to educate students on how they can take advantage of the options present while discussing food quality with Sodexho.

2008 Debates - Version 2.0 - first questions

su_comm@stfx.ca (Unknown) — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 21:41:00 +0000

What will you do about the food?
Connors/Matheson - Think that discussions can take place between theU and Morrisson so students are happy. Don't actually state how this change will occur.
MacGillivray/Clarke - Bring in a dietitian to substantiate claims. This is an actual solution rather than just an open-ended answer.
Connors/Matheson - Strongly reply with just "Students want this so we'll change it." Their aggression only shows their desire to win rather than their ability to come up with ideas that may demonstrate this ability to change.

After this question another student demands to hear some concrete answers:
Connors/Matheson show a larger understanding of the issues citing vegans and other groups.

Specifically, what plans do you have to pay for your new innovations?
The budget is tight and students want to know how these candidates will pay for new developments.
MacG and Clarke simply only have one idea: use the new drive home van. There is little money here and thus little additional resources for new innovation.
Connors/Matheson criticize this idea and say that MacG and Clarke don't have enough money to pay for their ideas.

LIVE from MORRISON HALL

su_comm@stfx.ca (.) — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 21:30:00 +0000

Okay Marc Rodrigue is giving us the go ahead....

Open Q&A with Presidential and Vice Presidential Candidates

"It's all about you." Opening line, MacGillivray and Clarke.

"We want to talk to you, not at you. We want to have fun. To offer you the help and services you need." Clarke

"We're students just like everyone else. In these positions we never forget we are students. We are not here for our resume or job title. We believe students should have a say." MacGillivray

*Quotes are edited based on what I hear and think is relevant.

"It's all about you and what you're union can do for you." MacGillivray and Clarke.

"Good evening everyone." Opening line. Roommates in first year. Scott was Burke house president second year.

"I can do a better job than anyone else."

"Participation, communication and innovation." - core values.

"We have want it takes to be your president and vice president."

"On election day tomorrow, make sure your union is in the right hands, your hands." Scott.

Pat- was active in his home community of Dartmouth. "This desire to help is what pushed me to run in this election."

Opening speeches were kinda weak. Just because I think someone should take a risk, go out on a limb.. do something unique.

Atmosphere: The tables are fairly full and the room is consumed with chatter.

Q: Quality of Food.

Pat - we have food quality in our platform.

MacGillivray is dieing to say something... Clarke says we should bring in a dietitian. I don't know who is going to pay for this dietitian, or how students are really going to utilize it.

Pat comes back with a solid argument of, "We don't need a dietitian to tell us the food sucks." Again, they are just dancing around the question.

Q2. What are you going to do about the food?

MacGillivray - back on the dietitian kick, explaining that we need official documentation regarding the crappy food.

Pat - taking the lets talk to people approach. Ask the students, then bring the discussion to the Sedexo administration.

Q3. How are you going to work out all these idea - financially?

MacGillivray - perfectly feasible through sponsorships.

Scott - webmaster - Squeeze out every dollar where possible.

For the record I think a full time webmaster will never happen.

Q4. How are you going to get more ppl out to the varsity sports?

Scott - We will ultilize the X-Army. Which is all well and good, but the X-Army isn't that large and they put in a lot of work as it is. I would like to know how he is going to get more people involved with the X-Army.

Q5. What are you planning on doing to get people involved with leadership and events on campus?

Scott - "Leadership is very important on this campus, and it has been tapped into but really could be tapped into more."

------- post--------

2008 Debates - Version 2.0 - openeing remarks

su_comm@stfx.ca (Unknown) — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 21:30:00 +0000

Brian Cauley live at Morrisson Hall...yes, the place where even the future of the food being served is in question. Connors/Matheson and MacGillivray/Clarke are here and they have a stance on just about every issue on campus. While students are here, eating, they are being given the opportunity for students to ask the candidates questions before they head to the polls tomorrow.
"It' all about U," MacG & Clarke open with. Clarke does much of the talking while MacGillivray stares into the crowd without a smile. "We're here to make a difference," MacGillivray chimes in. The two deliver a speech that clearly screams "we want votes," and which demonstrates the candidates ability to read off of a page.
Connors and Matheson begin with the same shpeal of introducing themselves through personal history. While giving a much more introverted speech than MacGillivray and Clarke (demonstrating Connors and Matheson's self-confidence) the two still read off of a page rather than just engaging the crowd. "I am running because I believe in the Union," Connors remarks strongly. These two seem much more confident than MacG and Clarke.
I wish that all of the candidates just dropped their walls and spoke to the students. We'll see if this changes as the questions come in...

Debate take 2 - live from Morrison

su_comm@stfx.ca (.) — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 21:29:00 +0000

Alright folks, here it is: the last day of campaigning and the last scheduled event for your 2008-2009 Union Pres and VP candidates, Pat Connors and Scott Matheson vs. Matt MacGillivray and Julia Clarke. It's exciting in here. Introductions have begun and the crowd seems genuinely excited by this newest addition to elections campaigns at StFX.

Matt and Julia are up first, making a powerful opening statement. The pair seem more confident than their last time in front of a crowd. It's encouraging because this crowd is much bigger and filled with many students who have to be here if they want their dinner.

Pat and Scott are poised with take two of their opening speech. Pat and Scott's speech doesn't have quite the excitement as their opponents and is very similar to the speech they gave last week in the SUB caf. The roar of the crowd is gaining momentum and the candidates seem to be frustrated that they are not being listened to attentively. I guess it's all four's first chance at displaying their ability to be heard over the "noise" of apethetic students, stubborn administration, and ideas that just don't pan out. Being in public office means figuring out how to be heard over the noise.

Are you up for the Challenge?

su_comm@stfx.ca (.) — Mon, 18 Feb 2008 13:10:00 +0000

Not only is this years election a heated contest for Presidential superiority, it's also a real opportunity to turn around one of the most important buildings on campus. "The SUB is one of the more important buildings on campus when it comes to the student experience," notes Union President Adam Harris,” really when it comes to student health, study space and entertainment, this building is a lifeblood for campus and most of it is falling apart."

The 2008 general election will feature a referendum asking students if they would allow an increase of $10 to the capital fund already found on student accounts. This increase would mean the fund would move from helping fund the KMC to helping renovate the Health Centre, study space and the campus Bar.

The referendum question is in a yes/no format meaning you can just say yes you agree with it or no you don't. Voting begins tomorrow at 8 am with the general election. So, can you turn the shitty parts of the SUB into a long lasting hit? The challenge is yours to vote.

Connors & Matheson - Platform Critique 3 of 3

su_comm@stfx.ca (Unknown) — Sun, 17 Feb 2008 21:35:00 +0000

There has been a lot of online discussion over the course of this election. Since my last critique many people have posted comments on both this blog and other websites. It seems as though people are starting to loose faith in both the Connors/Matheson and MacGillivray/Clarke slates. I say this is with good reason. Within the ongoing discussion it has become apparent that both slates lack a vast amount of important knowledge of theU.
Rather than replying to all the discussion immediately, I will reply specifically to the last section of the C&M platform - Innovation - and let future posts address the other issues.

I am glad to see that the Innovation section of the C&M platform really is the most innovative of all 3 sections. Sure, there may not be a lot of content and all the good and feasible ideas are about the environment, but the environment is important. OK, I'm getting ahead of myself. I'll go through the issues one-by-one.

Creating a Greener and Healthier Campus
As I alluded to earlier, the solutions C&M present to environmental issues on campus are both thoughtful and innovative. I am glad to see that any environmental proposal isn't a rehashing of current ideas, but something new.
However the innovation stops right about there. C&M go on to discuss the food at Morrison Hall and suggest they will attempt to sway Sodexho to produce better quality food. I have 2 issues with this suggestion:
1) C&M themselves state that this is a relatively unfeasible idea; "This is a very sensitive issue due to the constraints of the contract that Sodexho has with the school."
2) If you eat the same of anything 3 times a day every day than you are going to complain. It is obvious students are going to complain about Morrison Hall, but the C&M solution is one that will only temporarily halt these complaints. Give students a few months of eating the same "better" food and the issue will arise again.
Rather than C&M proposing a nonviable, band-aid solution they could have approached this issue realistically and not tried to get elected on campaign lies. It is true that Sodexho serves cheaper food that they recycle in to new meals. They cut costs wherever they can. C&M could have suggested lobying to lower Food Service Costs to better reflect the product being delivered to students.

Improving Your U
Once again C&M apply the same tricks of setting up a Straw Man fallacy to dupe students. They suggest that theU is structured in a way where "councilors do not [have]...enough power to hold the executive to their word or enough opportunity to bring their own issues to debate." If councilors ability to add any issue to the agenda, criticize any executive member during the presentation of executive reports, or the ability to impeach any member of theU isn't enough power than I don't know what is. If councilors aren't effective or efficient it may be an issue that every year the majority of the councilors are incompetent at doing their job. Their silence at council meetings isn't a demonstration of a poorly structured organization, it is blatantly an issue of the current talent pool.
Now there are many problems with the structure of theU, C&M just don't know what they are. I think it is a good idea to put in some research into theU's by-laws, various departments, and overall operating efficiency and make some realistic, viable, and beneficial solutions.
C&M do suggest the importance of researching other Student Unions for possible ideas. Why haven't they done this already? Why haven't they already looked at our by-laws (which are public)? Why haven't they gone to at least one council meeting? If they did any of these things than I and many other students would have read a document with some truly innovative ideas.

Academic Improvements
I actually think C&M have addressed some important issues in this section. StFX does have an unusual format of registration and presentation of our academic calendar. They suggest that we should register for courses before the summer while I say that registering before the year makes a lot more sense for our small school. Yes, maybe things would be easier for certain individuals. However, when you look at all the internships, co-op, and exchanges students are attending it becomes evident that a lot of students don't know what they want academically until moments before they return. Additionally, with a small staff going on sabbatical quite frequently the postponement of registration compensates for the needed flexibility.
That aside I think C&M should follow through with getting official exam schedules posted earlier and a more reflective academic calendar.

More Election Stuff on Debate Radio

su_comm@stfx.ca (.) — Sun, 17 Feb 2008 00:19:00 +0000

Every Thursday at 4pm CFXU hosts "Debate Radio" a show where contentious issues are discussed in an organized and public forum. This editorial-format show is put on by The StFX Debate Team in order to bring relevant discussion to the air-waves. Last week Debate Radio featured the resolution: "Candidates for President and Vice-President should be required to provide a balanced financial budget along with any election promises."
Listen to that debate here.

**X-Debate meets every Tuesday at 5:30pm and Thursday at 7pm in NHB19**

One MIllion Dollars

su_comm@stfx.ca (.) — Sat, 16 Feb 2008 02:19:00 +0000

"If you were given $1,000,000 to invest in St. FX, and you could spend it anyway you wanted but you had to invest in one thing only (can't break the money up and spread it around). What would you do?"

Matt MacGillivray
“I had to think about this for a long time acctually. There are so many ways you could use this money, and I wanted something that would have a noticeable inpact on students. Obviously tuition came to mind, we all pay so much to attend university and any way to reduce this burden would be a good use of the money. So my first thought just out of the blue was to use it to reduce eveyones tuition next year, but this idea is a little short-sighted. Everyone would like their tuition reduced by any amount next year, but using the money this way would only benefit students once and $1,000,000 divided by ~4000 (~$250 reduction) is a help but not a significant one. So I expanded on this idea and decided that I’d invest the $1,000,000 and create a bursary program for students, that would help a number of students in need each year.”

Pat Connors
“This was a tough one. I wanted to think of something that would benefit a maximum amount of students, while still investing the $1,000,000 in one place. I’m hoping this answer fits your criteria since the original lump of money would remain together.

I would say that what the overwhelming majority of students have in common at St FX – no matter where they are from, what subject they are studying, or activities they are involved in – is that most receive the X-ring. So, I thought the best way to use this money would be to place it in a savings account. Each year the interest from the money could be taken, and divided up amongst each X-ring recipient to be used toward covering the cost of the ring.

Obviously the amount would not come close to covering the entire cost but it would reduce some of the burden. Plus, it would benefit each graduating student for years to come.

I admit that I can’t take all the credit for this idea. It was actually bounced around and discussed by students at one of our platform development meetings. However, that is where I would choose to invest $1,000,000 for St FX.”

Scott Matheson
“I'm going to cheat a little bit on this question...but only a little. If I had a million bucks to invest in StFX, I would add the entire amount (thus not breaking your rule) to the Student Union endowment fund. As you may or may not know, the The U's endowment fund is a chunk of change sitting in the bank collecting interest. The Union, in turn, uses the interest to finance itself. The bigger the principle amount in the bank the bigger return, and the more money the Union has. By increasing the endowment fund by a million dollars, increasing the principle and consequently the interest, the Student Union would have more money to fund its operations - whether they be concerts, X-Ring, societies, services etc.

So if this massive funding increase were to happen, I would love to expand the scope of the Union and change / improve several things. For one, I would like to provide more funding to the X-Pride society and the International Student society. Both societies are support systems for their constituent members and pick up the university's slackness in this regard. In addition, I would like to improve the entire Union Services portfolio - improving infrastructure and training for the entire sub-exec. I would also use some of the money to pay for a full-time professional webmaster for the TheU.ca. In addition, working in accordance with the Environmental Officer, I would like to use some of the money to improve StFX's ecological footprint. Many initatives are already in the works by the office, but many environmentally friendly practices are expensive. It would also be great to have some really cool events at the Inn! The list truly could go on and on, and I guess that that is because I cheated (but not really haha). Above are just a few ideas off the top of my head - I could add to the list almost indefinitely. I think you get the pictue though: Smart and Innovative financial management will led to greater success for The U and the student body as a whole.”

Julia Clarke
“If I could split up the money i'd have lots of little projects I would like to see done but since you put that restriction on me....haha. $1 million dollars would be spent to build the much anticipated business building. I am going into my 4th year of business and the one thing the business program is lacking is the ability to teach in a business world setting, this is because there are no appropriate venues to teach classes of the business nature. Right now business classes are spread all over campus and just like science they should have a building of their own. I know its in the works but since money seems to be a factor, this would speed up the process. “

Until next time,
sf

Debate Radio Speaks on the Election

su_comm@stfx.ca (Unknown) — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 21:35:00 +0000

Every Thursday at 4pm CFXU hosts "Debate Radio" a show where contentious issues are discussed in an organized and public forum. This editorial-format show is put on by The StFX Debate Team in order to bring relevant discussion to the air-waves. Last week Debate Radio featured the resolution: "Any Presidential/Vice-Presidential candiate must perform mandatory job shadowing of the current Pres and VP."
Listen to that debate here.

**X-Debate meets every Tuesday at 5:30pm and Thursday at 7pm in NHB19**

LET DUFF MAN SPEAK.

su_comm@stfx.ca (.) — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 15:45:00 +0000

This is the slogan for an intimate afternoon event with CTV politics expert and everyone’s favorite bald headed TV personality Mike Duffy next Wednesday in the Student Union Building. The informal discussion will begin at 4pm and run until just after 5pm when Duffy will announce the winner of this year’s Union election.

"You couldn't really ask for a more interesting way to learn about politics in Canada," noted Union President Adam Harris, "He really wanted to make this event informal and said we should have it in The Inn, but well, The Inn at 4pm isn't the nicest spot on campus so the Sub Cafe should be much nicer."

The event is open to anyone who is interested and free. Get there early though, seating is limited.

Connors & Matheson - Platform Critique 2 of 3

su_comm@stfx.ca (Unknown) — Thu, 14 Feb 2008 06:13:00 +0000

While it has been awhile since C&M have released the second part of their platform, I decided to take my time before writing about the whole document. What I found were a few new ideas wrapped in a multitude of existing initiatives or truths masked as innovation. Let me go point by point to make my issues clear.

Reaching Students
C&M propose that theU is "struggling to adapt to today's networked world." I on the other hand would argue that theU is adapting relatively well and that C&M are trying to set up a Straw Man fallacy in order to make students believe the proposals by C&M are going to solve problems that don't exist to the extent they would have you believe.
C&M do have some excellent initiatives that further the direction being implemented by the current U executive. Ideas like streaming audio/video from council, video updates from the President, and many many blogs are all great. The problem is that all these ideas seem to develop from C&M's proposal for a full or part-time webmaster. This comes to an issue of money; and with theU currently running a $0 based budget, either a money-making proposal is in order or C&M are going to have to cut even more services.
C&M continue their money-spending suggestions by stating they will make the Xaverian Weekly autonomous. The only way for this to truly exist is fiscal independence. Under most circumstances this means we can say goodbye to the Xav. C&M also demonstrate a lack of understanding of the Fox by suggesting theU provide help to the radio station to cover union events and special lectures. The Fox is an alternative radio station that wants to keep programming interesting and entertaining, and while sound bytes from events (which we already do) may be sweet for listeners, complete coverage can guarantee a decrease in listeners.

University Administration
C&M suggest that "many feel that students interests are not defended." The truth of the matter is that theU does defended students, but not necessarily with the desired results. The problem is that as much as theU wants to stand for student rights, they still have to work with administration. As long as theU needs to maintain a working relationship they can't go and protest every action until admin caves - it is about give and take.
However, there is a group of people that can just put a halt on everything and protest until admin caves - the students! However, students don't do this. Students don't fight administration on serious issues. Many students whine and complain while doing nothing. C&M try to suggest they are going to change this, but the fact is that even while they stand for student rights (something I think they will do just as excellent as our current executive) they will still have to remain amicable with admin. Eventually the students will have to stand up themselves without any assistance from theU, and it is irresponsible for students to ask the current executive, Connors & Matheson, or MacGillivray & Clarke to do their dirty work all the time.
The executive does regularly meet with administration, maintaining an "open and cordial relationship." C&M think that because students complain about certain StFX Administrative actions theU executive isn't doing a good job. Reality is that there will always be necessary actions that result in disfavor from groups. I'm not saying any of administrations actions have or have not been necessary, I am saying that C&M can't please everyone and are ridiculous for framing initiatives in a tone that would suggest they can.
The only thing I can praise is C&M's suggestion to get BOG and Senate members blogging.

MacGillivray-Clarke Platform re-launch: parts 6-9

su_comm@stfx.ca (.) — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 09:07:00 +0000

Well here it is: the final portion of the MacGillivray-Clarke platform. The issues addressed are activities, the environment, lobbying of various organizations, and the crux of the pair’s campaign, accountability and availability.

Activities

The main ideas in this part of the platform revolve around the creation of an Activities Advisory Committee and an increase in events sponsored by The U. I’m divided when it comes to these initiatives. I fully support the creation of an Activities Advisory Committee. I think it’s a great idea and definitely a positive step when it comes to determining how to plan events for such a diverse student body. It would ensure the events that are planned appeal to the largest group of students possible. Having representation from every year would help to achieve this goal.

What worries me is the typically apathetic attitude towards Union events. Increasing the number of events is not going to bring in more students if they are not attending the events already being put on. It seems like the more you try to do, the less interested students seem to become. Two years ago, when Amanda Milne held the position of VP Activities and Events, SuperSubs were her thing; and there were many of them. These were expensive and poorly attended; and according to an archived issue of the Xaverian Weekly, published March 23, 2006, Milne ran a $33,000 deficit in the 2005/2006 year. Events are the most visible evidence of our union dues at work and to see my money spent on events with poor turn-out is disappointing. Perhaps utilizing the proposed committee to review current events for improvement or revamping those that are poorly attended would be a better idea than just simply adding more events.

Environment

I’m glad to see a commitment to maintaining the Environment Office and improving publicity of the department. This is really all the department needs. Lise Richard, the current Environment Officer, has been doing a phenomenal job of increasing the profile of environmental concerns on campus and forcing administration to acknowledge these legitimate concerns. Perhaps actively recruiting more student involvement in this initiative is a worthwhile option to consider.

Lobbying

I’m kind of confused as to why this is included in the platform. These roles are already included in the job description of President and Vice-President, and are a big part of the job at that. While important to know that MacGillivray and Clarke intend to honour this part of their job, and I fully support our membership in CASA and ANSSA in particular, it’s something I feel that goes without saying. If they didn’t fulfill this aspect, then they wouldn’t be doing their jobs. It just strikes me as out of place to include this as a platform issue because by including it, MacGillivray and Clarke are essentially saying that lobbying on behalf of students has been a problem in the past and past presidents and vice-presidents have not been fulfilling this role adequately. It would need more evidence of how they would do this part of their job better than others who have gone before for it to qualify as a legitimate campaign platform. You can’t just copy out your job descriptions and run an election campaign on it, calling them ideas.

Accountability and Availability

This last portion is the main focus of the MacGillivray-Clarke campaign, according to campaign posters, website slogans and the candidate’s themselves. It’s also the portion that I have the most concern with. MacGillivray is the Off-Campus Councilor. I live off-campus, which means Matt is my councilor. If I have concerns about living off-campus, theoretically, I would bring these concerns to Matt and he would present them to council. Matt has never once identified himself to me as the Off-Campus Councilor, and up until I started blogging, I didn’t know that Matt was my councilor. I find this incredibly problematic. A big portion of the MacGillivray-Clarke campaigns deals with keeping Union executives, sub-executives, councilors and other staff accountable for their work. If MacGillivray is unable to promote himself as a councilor, I’m not convinced he’ll be able to do it as Union President. Yes, students will know who he is because of the public nature of the job, but that doesn’t mean he’ll represent students the way the President should. His track record is not exactly favourable. While making council minutes readily available, posting regular executive updates, and publishing a staff directory are all noble efforts, it doesn’t change the fact that MacGillivray has not approached his off-campus constituents all year to find out what he can do to improve their living experiences while at X. You can’t just sit back with an open office door and let students come to you; a big part of being in public office is actively seeking out the problems that need addressing.

The second half of this initiative deals with availability. Currently, I don’t see this year’s union as being unavailable. They hold office hours, they answer emails, are easily approachable and are more than willing to help out students and answer questions. They understand that the purpose of their job is to work for students. I don’t see availability as an issue, and it’s especially not a big enough issue to base the bulk of your campaign on. I understand that MacGillivray and Clarke want to open the union up to more student involvement and participation, but their ideas don’t seem to go farther than letting students know who they are. I need some proactive ideas – engage that student who could care less about the union, inspire that student who thinks union fees are a waste of money and seek out that student who is too shy to come find you. These are ways in which I would like to see my union working for me.

Overall, this platform is lacking really innovative ideas and often just mirrors the campaigns of years past, calling for the same reforms. Either these reforms haven’t been fixed (which I don’t believe to be true as the Union has drastically improved over the last few years) or MacGillivray and Clarke aren’t as in tune with the Union as they would like voters to believe. I need to see some guts and some brawn; all I’m seeing is recycled ideas with limited enthusiasm and I’m not confident MacGillivray and Clarke have given this campaign the research that StFX students deserve.

- Danielle

*The views expressed in this post are entirely those of the author and do not reflect the opinions of StFX's Students' Union.
- all platform descriptions can be found at http://macgillivrayandclarke.googlepages.com/platform

2008 Debates - Version 1.0

su_comm@stfx.ca (.) — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 06:08:00 +0000

Here is the first video from the first of two Presidential/Vice-Presidential debates. This one took place February 12 in the SUB Cafeteria. The debates got pretty heated and contentious, but you can see for yourself...

Opening Remarks:

**Submit a question for the Morrison Hall Debate on Monday Feb 18**

To get the ball rolling Your Vice-President Executive read questions to both the candidates. Things started to heat up as the two slates took different stances on important issues to you and even made some attacks...

Question 1:

**Submit a question for the Morrison Hall Debate on Monday Feb 18**

Question 2:

**Submit a question for the Morrison Hall Debate on Monday Feb 18**

Question 3:

**Submit a question for the Morrison Hall Debate on Monday Feb 18**

Question 4:

**Submit a question for the Morrison Hall Debate on Monday Feb 18**

Question 5:

**Submit a question for the Morrison Hall Debate on Monday Feb 18**

So we opened the floor and allowed the audience to ask questions to both MacGillivray and Clarke as well as Connors and Matheson. There were some pretty interesting questions and some unique responses. Check it out!

Question 1:

**Submit a question for the Morrison Hall Debate on Monday Feb 18**

Question 2:

**Submit a question for the Morrison Hall Debate on Monday Feb 18**

Question 3:

**Submit a question for the Morrison Hall Debate on Monday Feb 18**

Question 4:

**Submit a question for the Morrison Hall Debate on Monday Feb 18**

Question 5:

**Submit a question for the Morrison Hall Debate on Monday Feb 18**

Question 6:

**Submit a question for the Morrison Hall Debate on Monday Feb 18**

Question 7:

**Submit a question for the Morrison Hall Debate on Monday Feb 18**

Question 8:

**Submit a question for the Morrison Hall Debate on Monday Feb 18**

Question 9:

**Submit a question for the Morrison Hall Debate on Monday Feb 18**

Question 10:

**Submit a question for the Morrison Hall Debate on Monday Feb 18**

Question 11:

**Submit a question for the Morrison Hall Debate on Monday Feb 18**

Closing Remarks:

**Submit a question for the Morrison Hall Debate on Monday Feb 18**

Live from the Presidential/Vice-Presidential Debate

su_comm@stfx.ca (Unknown) — Tue, 12 Feb 2008 23:26:00 +0000

I am sitting at the SUB cafe on 2nd floor watching the Connor/Matheson and MacGillivray/Clarke campaigns hit it off head-to-head. Starting with opening remarks, then to set questions the debate seems to be off to a good start. To make things as comprehensive as possible I plan to summarize the responses of both candidates with my thoughts on some of the more important questions.

Question 1 - How will you address student concerns?
Early on Connors attacked MacGillivray asking "Why did I only find out now that you are my Off-Campus councilor". MacGillivray replied stating that student are unaware of who to approach with their issues.
I ask the same question as Connors: MacGillivray, if you've been on council for a year why haven't you changed this issue?

Question 2 - How do you plan to address the issue of rising tuition?
I definitely think that MacGillivray and Clarke had a more realistic approach to this issue. While Connors/Matheson took a more aggressive approach by suggesting developing personal relationships with Elizabeth May and Peter MacKay, they also denied the importance of the lobying groups which theU is a member - CASA and ANSSA. MacGiilivray/Clarke demonstrated their knowledge of these groups and made me confident that they would insure theU continues to support the achievements already seen by these lobbying groups.

Question 3 - Why should you win?
Connors/Matheson stated "student perception [is] that the Union isn't for everyone. We want to change that." I think Connors and Matheson do want to reach students and I feel they will. However MacGillivray and Clarke brought up an issue that I agree with - Connors and Matheson are only engaging the students confident enough to present themselves at open forums; they have not engaged the students who don't feel comfortable expressing themselves publicly. Furthermore, engaging students doesn't convince students to get involved, it only convinces them to express their concerns.
As I stated MacGillivray and Clarke suggested more personal interaction and being more available. I think this is a great idea but I was expecting a more concrete and thorough response to this question.

**Look forward to more live posts and a video podcast of the entire debate.**

If you want to be the face of TheU: You better learn how to smile.

su_comm@stfx.ca (.) — Mon, 11 Feb 2008 02:21:00 +0000

Esthetics

If you want to be the face of the student union, you better learn how to smile. I'm talking about what you put your name on. What you connect to your cause, what you brand.

The most obvious during this campaign would be the posters. I was
really excited about the campaign for that reason. Pumped to see new
ideas splashed across a plain white sheet of letter paper. I've yet
to be impressed. Not one poster has drawn me in, interested me, or
even just caught my eye.

In my opinion MacGillvray and Clarke have the best of the bunch. They
have a few full colored, graphic, photo and text incorporated posters.
Although sitting in the lounge on 4th floor of the SUB I just noticed
a blue poster, and it's a good thing the background is drowning out
the font because MacGillivray is missing an L!

Pat and Scott have a good idea sticking with the same photos on
their posters and website, really nailing the images home. But on a
lot of their posters only one third of the page is filled out. Which
doesn't make sense to me because it would cost the same to print
a full page of colour. It looks like someone just pressed print on the
website. Using familiar images is important but you need to spice it up.
Keep it fresh. A solid 8.5 by 11 with a splash of colour would definitely
add a spark.

It's good to see the sub-election candidates taking some risks.
Trying to add humor, images, and interesting stats to their posters.
I'm not trying to rip on the presidential candidates just trying to
communicate the need for a professional front.

I think MacGillivray and Clarke made a mistake launching their
election video. The video is posted on youtube.com and runs for about
3 minutes. Commercials are barely 45 seconds these days, I've still
yet to find the attention to watch the whole MacGillivray Clarke video.
There are some good ideas but it's not catchy, not interesting. If they
took that video cut out half the pictures and changed the transition from 5 seconds to 0.5 seconds, used only 5 of the most powerful words and
added a shot to their faces between each photo the video would be a
much more captivating promotional tool.

My point here: if you want to be the face of the union, you gotta be
on your game. You don't have to know how to write a website, edit a
video or design a poster. But you do have to be able to open your
eyes and say, "This is crap, we're not putting our name on it." Or,
"This is stellar, make the background blue add TheU's logo and send it
to print." Image is huge. Our number one means for communication?
Our eyes. We see everything all the time. Present yourself and our
union in a professional manner, always.

To prove these comments and the ease involved in executing them, I
challenged myself to make my own election video. I allowed myself
only 30 minutes. Total 45 minutes from initial idea to posting on
youtube.com.

I understand I'm into design, but I only started playing
with video footage in August. The programs do the work. It's easy,
especially with our good friend Google making tutorials so easy to
access.

Presidential Slates: had I not had this position I would have been
happy to put together designs for you. Because I write for this blog,
I can't do the work for you but if you have questions, want a little help or just some guidance, ask me. I love this stuff.

Until next time,
sf