Archive for Justin McElroy

After three-year consultation process, UBC decides to stay in the CIS

It’s official—the only Canadian school in the NCAA will remain Simon Fraser University.

That’s the result of today’s announcement by UBC President Stephen Toope, who said that his university will continue to work with Canadian Interuniversity Sport (CIS) on improving and reforming the association to ensure a higher and more competitive athletic standard.

“UBC has a proud history within the CIS as both a founding member and successful competitor,” he said. “But we need to build upon this tradition because, frankly, the status quo is no longer acceptable. Therefore we commit, in affirming our membership, to drive change.”

The result was somewhat of a surprise, given the bullishness of the athletic department towards moving, and the lack of movement from the CIS on scholarships and tiering. UBC and other schools have been pushing for a flexible salary-cap model for athletic scholarships, but have consistently been rebuffed, and the only movement on tiered leagues—which would allow for larger schools to play each other more often—is limited in scope, and will beginning next year. The CIS is a camel, slow-moving and created by committee, and changing it is always difficult.

However, Toope said that motions were on the table for the next Annual General Meeting to make small changes to governance and tiering which would give UBC and other large schools more influence, and affirmed his commitment to work with other university presidents to make the changes that most universities outside of Ontario have been pushing for on flexible scholarship models.

“Although the CIS has not yet resolved these issues, I believe that progress is finally being made.  Therefore UBC is today committing to both honouring and seeking to build upon the tradition of Canadian Interuniversity Sport,” Toope said.

The NCAA is currently four years into a 10-year window allowing international schools to apply for Division II membership, and UBC says it has not discounted exploring the NCAA option again if reforms in the CIS don’t come to fruition. But given this announcement, after a three-year consultation process, it seems UBC has committed to reforming the CIS, not leaving it. The door to the NCAA isn’t fully shut and locked—but for the time being, it’s definitely closed.

Photo: UBC will not be joining their SFU rivals in the NCAA anytime soon, courtesy of the Ubyssey

General issue of compensation for educators to become political issue sooner rather than later

Despite students at Vancouver Island University (VIU) returning to classes last week, the climate between faculty unions and the provincial government remains chilly as ever.

First, there’s the simple fact that, despite the strike at the Nainaimo university being over, the main issue—that of job security—has yet to been resolved. That sticking point will be handled by a mediator over the next month, though there’s no guarantee of any agreement being reached. While most are clamoring for the two sides to resolve their issues, budgetary realities will keep them at loggerheads for some time to come.

Secondly, over in Langara, the passive-aggressive pseudo-strike continues, with the faculty continuing to withhold grades as a bargaining tactic.

Adding to the whole “educators vs. government” narrative, last week the BC Supreme Court struck down a provincial law that restricted teachers’ bargaining rights. The decision made front-page news, partially due to the fact that the Minister of Education at the time of the bill’s implementation was Christy Clark—who just so happens to be Premier.

Good news? Well at Kwantlen, contract negotiations are set to start up again between the university and faculty union.

But add it all together, and you have a provincial climate of labour unrest among educators and a whole spate of public sector contracts currently in need of renewal. Factor in the election of Adrian Dix as NDP leader, a candidate considered the most labour-friendly of the four candidates running, and it’s fair to expect the general issue of workers’ bargaining rights will become a political hot potato.

In short, one gets a looming sense that the issue of teachers’ rights and benefits are something that will play out on a campaign, rather than backroom, stage.

Beyond Toronto and Ottawa national lobby group doesn’t pack a lot of punch

In the wake of UVic students voting to leave the Canadian Federation of Students last week, maybe it’s time to take stock of how national the “effective and united voice” really is.

The CFS trumpets that they have 500,000 members from over 80 student unions. But here are the facts:

• The CFS has no healthy, stable relationship with any universities in Alberta or Quebec
• The CFS has no real undergraduate representation in Alberta, Quebec, Prince Edward Island or New Brunswick
• There are no student unions with over 10,000 full-time students west of Manitoba represented by the CFS

When you break down the 83 “Locals” of the CFS, you find the amount of support they have from decently-sized universities is rather small, except in Toronto and Ottawa. That those two cities are the media and political capitals of Canada can explain why the CFS still gets the attention they do, but outside of those two bubbles, the CFS doesn’t pack a lot of punch.

To start with, let’s see who comprises those 83 Locals. Nineteen are colleges. Another 11 have undergraduate populations of less than 3,000. This is not to besmirch the good people of the Saint Paul University Students’ Association (Local 85) and other small institutions, but these locals are never going to carry a lot of weight.

Then, you add in the fact that at many schools, there are multiple student unions. At University of Toronto alone, there is the Scarborough Campus Students’ Union, the University of Toronto Graduate Students’ Union, the Association of Part-Time Undergraduate Students of the University of Toronto, the University of Toronto Students’ Union and the University of Toronto at Mississauga Students’ Union. That may be five locals, but it’s just one school. So let’s lump them together.

Then, there’s Prince Edward Island undergraduates, Saskatchewan undergraduates, Guelph undergrdautes, Concordia students, Post-Graduates at McGill, Graduate students at Calgary, SFU students, and UVic students. All of them have voted to defederate (or in the case of Saskatchewan, never legally joined in the first place), yet all are listed by the CFS as members on their website. And while the CFS can use plenty of semantic or legal arguments to claim they are still part of the organization, you can’t claim they are happy, active members.

When you consider all that, which student unions at moderately-sized universities are left? And which of them represent students at large, national universities? We’ll go province by province, noting when the CFS only represents graduate students, and bolding any school that is either the largest in its province, or has more than 15,000 full-time students (as measured by the AUCC).

• British Columbia: UBC-Okanagan, Capilano, Kwantlen, Vancouver Island University, and Thompson Rivers.
• Alberta: None
• Saskatchewan: U of Regina, U of Saskatchewan Grad. Students
• Manitoba: U of Manitoba, U of Winnipeg
• Ontario: Carleton, Lakehead, Laurentian, Nipissing, U of Ottawa, Ryerson, U of Toronto, Trent, U of Windsor, York, Brock Grad. Students, Guelph Grad. Students, McMaster Grad. Students, UWO Grad. Students, Wilfrid Laurier Grad Students
• Quebec: None
• New Brunswick: U of New Brunswick Grad. Students
• Prince Edward Island: UPEI Grad. Students
• Nova Scotia: None
• Newfoundland: Memorial

Now yes, this list misses out on plenty of small schools, and plenty of schools the CFS argues are still part of their organization. But this is the backbone of the CFS now. And outside of Toronto and Ottawa, it’s not particularly strong.

The “Canadian Federation of University Students from Ottawa and Toronto Along With College and Graduate Students From Across the Land” might not roll off the tongue—but it’s probably the most accurate description of the CFS as it currently stands.

After Liambas hit, university hockey gets national attention for all the wrong reasons

Friday night at a local hockey game, two players got into a fight. One was bloodied up, while the other one walks away smiling.

Pretty simple right? Probably happens dozens of times every night across this country. Probably has for decades.

Except the game was a university match between UBC and Alberta. The Alberta player who was bloodied up was also concussed, courtesy of his head hitting the ice. And the UBC player doling out the punishment was Mike Liambas, best known for being kicked out of the Ontario Hockey League after a bodycheck that fractured the skull of Kitchener’s Ben Fanelli (the video is not for the faint of heart).

And now, university hockey gets national headlines, for all the wrong reasons.

I wasn’t at the game, but from talking to people who were, it seems that Liambas didn’t do anything more vicious then what you would normally see in a fight (take that for what you will). And Liambas, despite his reputation, is a smart kid (an honours student in high school), who was looking forward to going to school, playing hockey, and moving on from a moment that made him a national symbol for violence in hockey.

“After everything I’ve been through, the best route for my life right now is for some mental stability and just settling it down for a bit,” he told The Ubyssey last year. “I’m getting my school done and paid for and I’m still playing hockey. I’ll be able to work on the offensive side of my game, instead of worrying about fighting.”

Now, he’s being called a “bad-boy” in the Toronto Sun, someone who “couldn’t control his base urges” by respected junior hockey writer Neate Sager, and generally derided coast to coast. Again.

But for his faults, Liambas shouldn’t be the story here. Alberta captain Eric Hunter is the one with the concussion.

“I have a kid [Hunter] in business, an honour’s student and an academic all-Canadian,” his head coach said to The Globe and Mail after the game. “What happens with him going to school? With his exams? Hockey is hockey. These guys are preparing for academic life. What if he has to sit out the semester?”

To date, UBC has been silent, outside of head coach Milan Dragicevic. He defended Liambas, arguing that Hunter speared him first, and that while he doesn’t condone his actions, “right or wrong, quick decisions are made on the ice and sometimes they are not the right decisions. Maybe Michael Liambas has to control his emotions a little bit more on the ice but, as a person, you’re not going to find a more outstanding individual.”

I’m sorry, but here’s a player who once gave an opponent a fractured skull, has now concussed an opponent to national attention, and the only acknowledgment of wrong-doing is first blaming the other guy for starting it, before saying “Liambas has to control his emotions a little bit more on the ice.”

If that’s only response anyone from from the university is going to make, it’s tone deaf to the seriousness of concussions. We’re having a national conversation about headshots, UBC has been placed into it, whether they like it or not. This isn’t 1990, or 2005, or even 2010.

It’s 2011, where on the first day of the year Sidney Crosby got hit in the head and hit the ice hard, a few days later he hit the ice again, and since then hasn’t played.

It’s 2011, where former Pro Bowl defensive back Dave Duerson can shoot himself in the head, write a suicide note that reads “PLEASE, SEE THAT MY BRAIN IS GIVEN TO THE NFL’S BRAIN BANK,” and everyone understands that neurologists will see if the effects of repeated concussions caused him to lose mental acumen.

We’re now at the point the only defense against soft-pedaling the impact that concussions can have on the body is ignorance. A decade’s worth of studies have shown that there is no greater risk to an athlete’s long-term health then whether his head gets smashed around. As the Globe’s Stephen Brunt puts it:

Apologies to those bored by the concussion conversation, but there’s the troubling truth once again. Blow out a knee and someone will try to repair it, someone will lay out a timetable of healing and rehab and therapy and provide a pretty solid answer as to when you might be back at full strength and the chances that you might be just like new again.

Injure your brain and there’s none of the above, and the answer to that last part is sometimes never.

I understand that when you coach a team your support for players is unconditional. And I know that, by all accounts, Liambas did not attempt to seriously injure. But I hope that Dragicevic does not speak for UBC, or university hockey coaches in general, when it comes to soft-pedaling concussions and fighting. The risks our best and brightest face are too serious to dismiss in that way.

UPDATE: Well, that didn’t take long for the other shoe to drop, as Liambas has decided to leave UBC. From the Vancouver Sun…

Controversial forward Michael Liambas, who has a history of violence on the ice, has left the UBC Thunderbirds hockey program after just one season. Liambas, 22, was involved in another incident last Friday against the Alberta Golden Bears in which he injured Bears captain Eric Hunter in an altercation…

“Michael has decided to leave UBC and pursue professional hockey,” Dragicevic confirmed Wednesday, offering no further comment.

Referendum set for March 29-31

Another week, another court battle between the University of Victoria Students’ Society (UVSS) and the Canadian Federation of Students. And another victory for the UVSS.

When we last left this wacky escapade (which is wasting tens of thousands of dollars intended for student advocacy), the two were in a court case over whether a petition of UVic students gathered nearly 18 months ago was valid grounds for a referendum to defederate from the CFS. After some deliberation, the judge deemed the petition valid, and allowed the referendum to go ahead.

The CFS had other ideas though, refusing to agree to a date for the referendum until the UVSS had paid back what they claimed was a $129,058 debt. So they went to court on Friday, in a case that should go on for a while, and—

(cue the visual of  picking up an imaginary phone, listening to someone on the other line and nodding)

I’m sorry, I’m being told the judge immediately mandated a referendum be held March 29, 30, and 31. So, with five weeks before the vote, there should be some quiet before active campaigning begins, at which point—

(again cue the imaginary phone)

I’m sorry, I’m being told that the students’ society at Camosun College, another post-secondary institution in Victoria, just approved unlimited spending to convince UVic students (who, last I checked, are not Camosun students) to vote no in the referendum.

This is nothing new for the CFS. They’ve always been fairly open that students sometimes campaign for causes at schools they don’t attend. It’s been just three years since seemingly every BC student politician got a leaked copy of a referendum “war plan” outlining the possibility of CFS loyalists across the country to campaign against Kwantlen University’s attempts at leaving.  And when you think about it, if you believe—as CFS people do—that they are the national union for students, and one of those members was trying to leave, thus weakening the student movement, wouldn’t you do everything you could to try and get them to stay?

It’s charming, in a way, how every breakup between the Canadian Federation of Students and a member school seemingly happens more or less the same way. A lovely, amicable relationship devolves into blackmail, lawsuits and former best friends yelling at you to stay loyal. Ah, university relationships.

UPDATED: Eventually, high school students will realize that debt will be a bigger issue if they stay in BC

CLARIFICATION: Our claim that $34 million had been removed from Student Support Programs is inaccurate. The Ministry of Advanced Education has split into the Ministry of Science and Universities, which is responsible for universities, and the Ministry of Regional Economic and Skills Development which is now responsible for colleges. Prior budgets included supports for both university and college students under the same ministry. They are now listed under separate departmental budgets. We regret the error.

With a new Premier of British Columbia set to be elected by the BC Liberal party at the end of this month, a lame-duck provincial budget was almost a certainty.

And it was, for the most part. A $600 million contingency fund was put in place for the next premier, but otherwise, this was a status quo budget, with no real winners or losers in any department.

Well, except for post-secondary students. Their programs for financial assistance were cut by $34 million.

In the budget estimates which need to be voted on, there’s a line item for “Student Support Programs”, which provide, and I quote:

financial, income and other assistance to and for students including scholarships, bursaries, loan forgiveness programs, transfers to students, and transfers for initiatives that enhance student performance and access. Costs may be recovered from organizations and the federal government for payments administered on their behalf for programs described within this sub-vote.

Now, here’s the amount of (rounded to the nearest million) money budgeted for that over the past four years.

2008: $132 million

2009: $99 million

2010: $84 million

2011: $50 million

Depressed yet? Consider that the student loan repayment program is considered to be abysmal, or that the government has also canceled the provincial grant program, that the Vancouver area is ridiculously expensive to live in, or that there isn’t even a ministry for post-secondary education anymore (it’s now “Science and Universities”) and you can see why student leaders are furious. The government, as it did during its throne speech, will trumpet the fact that there are more universities than ever before and that press releases from the Canadian Federation of Students don’t tell the whole story and so on.

But you know what? Ultimately, whomever is elected the next BC Premier will have to do a much better job of engaging on the issue, and at least pretending to give a hoot. Or at the very least, notifying student leaders before they make cuts (which they haven’t done in the past, and didn’t do today). Because eventually, high school students will click into the fact that debt will be a bigger issue if they stay in BC than any other province in Canada, and adjust accordingly.

University agreed to a noble idea without thinking where they would put the building

I just returned back to Vancouver from a week in Montreal for a journalism conference, and saw that inexplicably, my university was right in the middle of a national controversy over hospices, million dollar condos, “Chinese values,” and a whole lot of misinformed opinion.

Allow me to quickly summarize a debate that’s actually gone on for over two years, which a lot of people are johnny-come-lately to: In 2008, UBC agreed to hold a hospice on campus. It would house six to twelve people, other groups would pay for the construction, maintenance and operation of the building, and all the university would have to do is commit the space—provided that appropriate land be found.

And that’s where the problem comes in. Last year, after much deliberation, UBC thought that the best place for a hospice would be . . . right beside student residences. Not to mention a nude beach that was also quite close. Oh, and it was a first-year residence.

For whatever reason, planners did not appreciate that this spot would be less than ideal for all involved, but after students complained and campaigned, in public and behind the scenes, UBC changed their mind and decided to scrap the plans.

You can see where this is headed.

After another year of consultation, the university has found a new place, with which came new complainants, which resulted in UBC deferring a decision yet again.

Leaving aside my personal quibble that the national media raced to this story because it was laden with millionaires and allusions to ethnic values, yet didn’t give a hoot when students were involved, where should blame actually fall? You can say that the condo owners should just accept the hospice. It’s easy to complain about them. But a lot of this is due to UBC (or more accurately, the real estate agents who sell the property) being less then honest with what landowners are getting into. Yes, you get views of the mountains, Pacific Ocean, and amazing sunsets, but there’s a catch.

For example, this is a 12th floor two-bedroom suite overlooking the North Shore at UBC. It costs $1.6 million. The description makes no mention of the fact it is less than 50 metres away from a student residence of three 17-storey apartments, often filled with parties.

Or why don’t we look at a property for sale at Promontory, the site of the protests by residents. Again, $1.6 million. Does it even mention it’s on a university campus, and in fact right next to a football stadium? No. Should it?

There are many, many more examples of UBC selling land without explaining to landowners what they might be in for, who then inevitably complain, but I’ll stop there. The point is, they promise prospective condo owners world class views, a sustainable university town, and a certain amount of tranquility for their million-plus dollar apartments. They promise students a life in residence that will allow them to  do the things one anticipates they will when they go off to university for the first time. And they’ve promised the Vancouver Hospice Society that they’ll build provide an area somewhere on this land that won’t interfere with either of these things and be “predictably peaceful.”

What this comes down to, more than anything else, is UBC trying to do too many things with a land too densified, too meant for the purpose of teaching young adults, and already too paralyzed by competing interests. It may well be that because of this the hospice will not be built, and the finger will be pointed at rich Chinese landowners or beer-chugging students. In actuality, the only finger to be pointed should be at the university itself.

Related: UBC shouldn’t cede to superstition

Photo: Aerial shot of UBC campus, courtesy of UBC public affairs.

UVic’s student union is attempting to hold a referendum on leaving

After many months of behind the scenes wrangling, the University of Victoria Students’ Society (UVSS) finally went to court with the Canadian Federation of Students (CFS) in an attempt to force a referendum to leave the sometimes maligned, often litigious student association.

(To tell an exceedingly long story in 66 words: Last year a petition was circulated at UVic to leave the CFS. It had the signatures of more than 10% of students. Then, a counter-petition was circulated. The CFS decided those that had signed both petitions had essentially revoked their original signature in wanting a referendum, and therefore wouldn’t count. Ipso facto, they refused to accept the petition. The UVSS got mad, and here we are.)

The courtroom battle will continue today, but from the looks of tweets from the Martlet’s Kailey Willetts and a detailed writeup from the blog Eye on the UVSS, it looks favourable for the UVSS. The judge, Malcolm Macaulay, found the CFS’ position that their executive could find ways of invalidating signatures of real students flawed.

“It’s a slippery slope,” he said, according to Eye on the UVSS. “If you can go further and inquire, ‘Did you really mean it when you signed it,’ it requires them to conduct what may be a very flawed investigation, we don’t know. They’ve taken evidence that someone else presented to them–was that not an investigation?”

More notably, the CFS’ secondary claim against the validity of a referendum—that the UVSS owes over $100,000 due to fees from the student union to the CFS not keeping up with inflation for a period of time—was ruled irrelevant by Macaulay. This isn’t to say that the fees couldn’t come up in a later courtroom battle, but in this particular case on whether the UVSS can hold a referendum, it has become a moot issue.

Andrew Petter’s role is not to innovate but to simply manage

I just finished up my work for the Christmas holidays by interviewing Stephen Toope, UBC’s President, for a good hour or so. He conducts an annual interview with the student media each year, and it’s always a valuable opportunity to examine the mindset of a man leading of one of Canada’s largest universities.

Right now, UBC is moving forward on a number of “big picture” items: governance of lands, a new strategic plan, sustainability partnerships with Vancouver , and Toope is going about it confidently. But that’s to be expected. He’s been President for nearly five years, and having been reappointed to another five-year term in the summer time, is intent on seeing his vision for the university come to fruition.

The conversation made me think of Metro Vancouver’s other university—Simon Fraser University—and its new President, Andrew Petter, a former provincial NDP cabinet minister. Despite 35,000 students and a good reputation for a institution only 45 years old, SFU plays York to UBC’s U of T—not so much second fiddle as not part of the national conversation. Petter’s arrival at SFU merited a small story from the Vancouver Sun, but otherwise, his first few months have merited little attention.

Will this change? The university is well suited for growth in the next few years: With a recent move to the NCAA, and the development of satellite campuses throughout the lower mainland, SFU is in a strong position, so Petter’s job in the coming years may be more of a managerial one than anything else.

I asked Sam Reynolds, an SFU journalist, about what effect, if any, Petter’s first semester as President has had on the Burnaby campus, and here’s what he had to say:

Petter steps into the shadow of former SFU President Michael Stevenson. Under Stevenson, SFU continued to move away from relative isolation on Burnaby Mountain to being a vibrant part of the Metro Vancouver community with the extensive expansion of the University through openings of three new campuses. Stevenson inherited a University plagued with problems after a tumultuous decade, from academic program cutbacks and budget shortfalls to a long running sexual harassment case involving a swimming coach and a Science undergrad turned Fox News contributor.

Overall the student body of SFU as a whole has been rather blasé about the change in guard.

The only real challenge Petter has faced in his inaugural term is that of a negative response by student activists to a donation to SFU’s Woodward’s campus by Vancouver based gold producer, Goldcorp. These activists claim that Goldcorp has a rather sordid history of human rights abuses through their mining operations in the Global South and this donation is merely an attempt to distract the public and repair their image. Despite this manufactured activism, the student body as a whole is rather indifferent and nonchalant about the subject.

Petter has inherited a University that substantially redeveloped itself during the last decade. Petter’s role will not be to innovate, but to manage. SFU will face considerable, though not serious, financial pressure during the next decade and if Petter brings the University through this turbulent time unscathed he can call his term a success.

They serve should serve niche domestic markets

Often times, so much of our attention into post-secondary issues is focused on the large research-intensive schools that it’s easy to forget there’s a whole other world out there of mid-level universities, focusing on the undergraduate level, where changes in policy affect just as many students. Which is why a little nugget from Thompson Rivers University (TRU) caught my eye.

“I would like to see an improvement on the domestic side in the next few years,” said Ulrich Scheck, Provost and VP Academic, to Kamloops this Week. The numbers bear out that TRU has seen international enrolment rise 15 per cent in the last year, while domestic numbers have slightly dropped. These changes make sense from a pure market perspective—TRU became a full university in 2005, and is undoubtedly more attractive to international students than before. And at the same time, the fees for internationals ($450 per credit, as opposed to $121.15 for domestics) makes it attractive for the university, even discounting the built-in subsidies received by TRU for domestic students.

But does it make sense? UBC is a giant school, a key economic driver for all of British Columbia, and has spent 20 years building connections throughout Asia to ensure bright international students come to Canada. Increasing international seats while keeping domestic enrollment static make sense. TRU, on the other hand, serves Kamloops, the fifth largest city—in British Columbia. It simply serves a different niche than UBC, and just because it’s called a university doesn’t mean it should be pursuing the same strategies.

This isn’t to say that international students shouldn’t be welcome at smaller schools. But a heavy push for them only really makes sense in the context of a globally competitive university—your Waterloos, Toronto, et al.