It’s been a bit quiet around Insiders lately: writing long posts take work, and we’d rather be enjoying the sunshine. But that doesn’t mean things have stopped happening. Make sure to check out AMS Confidential’s News for N00bs for the latest news (and lulz!); rather than overlap, we’ll come up with our own alliterative title and report even hackier things for you. Without further ado…
Category: CASA
Upon receiving our tweet regarding the motion to leave CASA this evening, CASA has sent a letter, with supporting documentation, to various UBC media regarding the constitutionality of such a motion.
CASA claims the AMS has two unmet obligations: that 30 days notice be given to CASA prior to leaving, and that one full membership-year be passed prior to leaving. Insiders was the first notice given to CASA regarding this motion, and one full membership-year has yet to expire.
CASA concludes the earlier the AMS could leave CASA is upon the end of the membership-year: April 1st, 2010, and as a result, under a new executive committee.
The letter convincingly demonstrates that the AMS was aware of this obligation, having exercised full member privileges up to and including March 2009.
Further, the letter claims that the AMS has been negligent to respond to questions from CASA, who still seeks clarification around their concerns, and the steps that the organization could take to address them.
This editor remains convinced that new blood need to be entered into the decision, as it has become clear the main players are too invested in personal politics, and are having that cloud any reasonable assessment.
This is a difficult issue to access from the outside, as the information both media and council have received has been largely hearsay. CASA does not yet proactively disclose minutes of meetings. Upon requests for minutes, CASA has promised draft copies to Insiders, but to no avail yet.
Further, this editor is not convinced that AMS VP External Tim Chu has provided due diligence in this affair. It appears from my limited perspective that he has been avoiding CASA staff, preferring to not speak to them or respond to their questions, and instead holding ‘public’ meetings with students, personally invited by himself, complete with dubious claims about CASA spending. This is demonstrated by both CASA’s claims about the lack of contact between him and CASA staff, as well as his attitude at the public meeting where CASA was present. Chu remained silent throughout. Given the other gaffs of his term, council should be most skeptical of what comes from his office tonight.
In other news, the University Act provisions in Bill 13 just passed committee amendment phase in the legislature without revision, with exclusive focus on the parking lawsuit.
In the post below, Maayan expressed shock that AMS Council would change it’s position in CASA “without due diligence”. I think that Council should be praised for its prudent political decision, not accused of haphazardly voting without thinking.
The concerns expressed by the AMS in the letter sent to CASA cannot be swept aside merely as minor. They are indicative of ongoing issues that AMS has had with CASA, which have yet to be resolved. The tone of discussions, language used, social activities, and unfair treatment of delegates at conferences are not problems that are easily reformable. They are part of the culture of CASA and require a serious and concerted introspection by the organization. More serious issues such as the AMS’s alignment of CASA’s policies and strategy, as well as concerns over CASA staff setting the political agenda of the organization rather than the delegates have been raised by the AMS in the past.
One of the major concerns with CASA not expressed in the letter is their decision to not run a federal election awareness campaign. Contrary to Maayan’s suggestion, the AMS did not vote in support of this move. Rather, former AMS representative to CASA Matt Naylor voiced his concern over the poor quality of CASA’s campaigns. The solution he suggested was to make the campaigns better, not eliminate them. This year the AMS had to run its own federal election campaign costing $12,000 without help from CASA, a reality that is particularly disturbing given that they are the AMS’s federal lobbying organization.
The AMS is also evaluating the benefit of being a part of a federal lobbying organization. No one has suggested that CASA should turn its attention to provincial matters, but with limited resources, the AMS has to make a choice whether to focus more extensively on federal lobbying or provincial lobbying. Plus, it’s quite possible that the AMS can do what CASA does, but better and more reflective of the AMS’s principles.
What’s the benefit of being in CASA? The argument that more students united together means more resources and more influence doesn’t apply so well here. As mentioned above, CASA isn’t acting as a useful resource for the AMS – certainly not to the tune of $60,000 per year of student money. The influence has been lacking too. It might be asserted that CASA is more adept at getting in meetings with decision makers in the federal government. While this might be true when the Liberals are in power, the AMS is just as adept as scheduling meetings with the government. During the recent federal election, the AMS met with and lobbied nearly every federal candidate in the Vancouver area. We are the largest student union in the country and that carries a lot of weight. The most significant benefit that the AMS receives from CASA is the ability to network with other student unions across the country. This benefit should not be underestimated, but being a part of CASA is not the only way to meet with other student politicians. There are conferences every year that student unions attend (including the AMS) to network with one another.
Let’s be clear about this though – the AMS is not leaving CASA, it’s stepping down to associate member status. What does this mean? It means we pay half the fees. It also means we lose our vote, which many will argue was virtually non-existent in the first place since the Eastern Block of CASA tends to band together and shut out the AMS. Most importantly, it sends a strong message to CASA that the AMS is serious about its concerns. CASA’s response will largely dictate whether the AMS decides to stay or go – it’s really up to them. CASA’s national director, Zach Churchill, will get his chance to respond to the AMS this Wednesday.
Disclosure: Blake is employed by the AMS as Stef Ratjen’s assistant.
In an apparent unanimous decision, AMS Council voted tonight to change its membership in CASA from full member to associate member. (View the AMS’s press release here.)
The AMS is one of the five founding members of CASA, the Canadian Alliance of Student Associations, a student federal lobby organization that is predicated on four main principles: 1) member driven policy setting 2) exclusive focus on post-secondary issues 3) fair membership regulations 4) exclusive focus on matters under federal jurisdiction.
The issues that the AMS has with CASA were expressed in a recent letter sent to the organization’s national director. The letter as well as CASA’s response can be found here:
AMS Letter to CASA (Aug 13 08)
CASA Response Letter to AMS (Sep 22 08)
Among the issues discussed in the letter as well as in an ensuing AMS working group are: staff setting the political agenda, respect for all delegates, troublesome bias in information documents, cost of membership vs. benefits received, the prioritization of federal lobbying over provincial lobbying, the decision by CASA to not run campaigns, and the AMS’s opposition to CASA’s new constitution.
The change in membership effectively means that the AMS will pay half of the regular membership fees, not receive a vote, but still be invited as a delegate to conferences. The move was designed to send a clear message to CASA that the AMS is serious about the concerns it has voiced with the student lobby organization, which have been largely ignored thus far.
Dropping to associate member allows the AMS to proceed with dropping out of CASA entirely next year, going back to full member status, or remain at associate member status.