As Carleton alumni and former CUSA and GSA executives, we were shocked to pick up a recent issue of the Charlatan and learn that the current CUSA executive has undemocratically redefined “referendum” to mean a vote of only three CUSA executives instead of the entire student membership. This shock did not subside when we read that the executive made this change explicitly to break its health plan agreements with the GSA.
We both spent a great deal of time and energy back in 1999 and 2000 negotiating and drafting the Drug/Accident and Dental Plan Agreement between CUSA and the GSA. This included extensive consultation with all students. By working together under a single plan, undergraduate and graduate students were able to benefit from economies of scale— in other words, more people in the plan meant lower costs and better services for everyone. The intention behind requiring mutual consent or a student referendum to cancel the plan was to provide stability and avoid sudden disruptions to an important service that students rely upon.
To be clear, at no point did we envision that a future executive would attempt to redefine “referendum” to mean a vote of three CUSA executives instead of the entire undergraduate or graduate student body. Such an approach by an executive seems so underhanded and implausible that it is difficult for us to comprehend how it could occur outside of a dystopian novel by Orwell or perhaps Kafka.
In our years, difference was fought out by passionate students with a common commitment to making things better. Some leaned to the right and some to the left. Many were dead set on being in the centre, regardless of where that was. But, in every instance, students were dedicated to a common struggle to improve the livelihoods of students. Perhaps at times it was naïve, but something remarkable came out of it: students stepped forward and worked diligently to make other students’ experiences better. There was a sense of doing things together, and of helping students who needed it the most.
The essence of a vibrant democratic community has always been premised on being honest and up-front with each other. Importantly, this includes the executive being honest and transparent with CUSA councillors, who are elected to represent students in their respective faculty. If CUSA councillors do not have accurate information, they cannot possibly do a fair job of representing their constituents.
The health, dental, and accident plan that was created back in 2000 was a milestone in terms of students working together. At Carleton, it meant an end to the animosity between undergrads and grads. All students began working together on pressing student issues – be it affordable education, food, freedom to have awesome and safe parties, housing (rent and landlord issues, for instance), addressing academic programming concerns, counselling services, access to athletics, space to study or eat lunch – most of all, it was about knowing there are people and a community that feels responsibility for each other’s welfare.
Students need to be stand up and be heard, as they have for decades. Contrary to a recent advertisement in the Charlatan, claims by CUSA executives “that for the first time the Carleton University Students’ Association has been able to lower your student fees,” should not pass without comment. Students at Carleton have been doing amazing things since its creation in the early 1940s. Without getting into detail as to the arrogance and lack of historical knowledge in claims to the contrary, it needs to be pointed out that such statements are an insult to the generations of dedicated students who have worked collectively over the past 70+ years on behalf of each other. Student unions should be about improving the lives of students, not self-aggrandizing with claims that are so obviously false.
— Robert Johnson,
GSA vice-president (finance) 2000-2004
— James Pratt,
CUSA president, 2000-2001
