UBC Insiders

1) Why BoG?
Why BOG? To stick it to the man.

2) What experiences do you bring?
I am currently a SUS representative on the AMS student council, and am familiar with its archaic modes of conduct and pomposity, which is good preparation for the even more colonial Board of Governors. I will make noise on BOG, and report back to AMS duly.

3) What would your priorities be?

1. Democratize “the BOG”, so that students (and others with an interest in improving the quality of education at UBC) can actually get motions on the agenda and pass them.
2. Reduce tuition to Quebec levels.
3. Increase the number of cheap student housing units guaranteed in the U-town plan, so there is no waiting list.
4. Increase the number of day care spaces for students with children, so there is no waiting list.
5. Pass an ethical investment policy.

4) Describe your vision for tuition and financial aid.
Tuition for University should be the same as tuition for high school; that is: zero. Almost all (good) research is subsidized by the state through research grants, so why shouldn’t education? In Ireland, everyone gets a tuition-free chance at University; most Scandinavian countries ditto. Tuition is very low throughout continental Europe. And you may say: “Aw, but educating the young without forcing enormous debts upon them is impossible in Canada because the Chinook makes us misers”. But tuition in Quebec is half of what it is here, plus they have more grants (because their student unions took to the streets last year to keep it that way.) No one in our society should feel that they cannot afford a University education; unfortunately, most of my high school friends felt that way. It is a disgrace. I will make that clear to the Board of Governors by advocating that the tuition burden on students fall well BELOW 20%), and by emphasizing a change in de facto recruitment strategies (as of now, wealthier schools are targeted).

5) What is your approach to campus development?
Vancouver is wedged in between the mountains and the sea, so property values will only continue to rise. The undeveloped regions of the University Endowment Lands are a goldmine, and fat cat developers have their thumbs up the butts of the Board of Directors (and have for decades). They are building multi-million dollar condos when they should be building – and this is most important issue on campus – CHEAP AFFORDABLE STUDENT HOUSING. This must be planned for now, because if you think it is expensive to live in Kitsilano today, just wait for 20 years. It will be worse than New York or Amsterdam.

6) The BoG is composed of CEOs, Presidents, and people with a great deal of experience. How will you tell them they’re wrong?
The Board is composed in part of representatives of faculty, permanent staff, and students, all of whom share the goal of improving the quality of education at UBC. It is a good idea to form a voting block along these lines.

The Board is also composed in part of the elite, people of privilege, political appointees of the “Liberal” (read CONSERVATIVE) government, and other proponents of the neo-liberal agenda which involves making tuition fees rise to levels of the United States, increasing the debt burden of students, shifting emphasis from education to grant-based research (look at the Chemistry Dept. homepage and compare the number teaching staff to that of research staff), corporatizing the University so that pure research becomes more difficult, and so on to infinity. It is possible that some of these elites believe that low tuition is “ideal” (though not “practical”), but they do not understand the urgent NECESSITY of acting now to make education more accessible. Our “pro-education” voting block ought to emphasize that urgency and present alternative models to those adopted in the recent past.

7) What’s the ideal relationship between you and the UBC-O student rep?
I am not pleased with the elitist attitude of UBC-V towards its sisters and brothers at UBC-O. The UBC-O representative on BOG should be our closest ally. I am also not pleased with the CASA/CFS infighting (like chickens in a cage poking each others’ eyes out). To be blunt (which no one ever is about this), CASA is a lame, status quo loving, power-schmoozing, Liberal party ass-licking embarrassment, while the CFS is a loud but incoherent, power-seeking, NDP sucking, undemocratic, centralized party run by a handful of thugs. Fuck’em both. Should we really let the Liberal party or some thugs downtown get in the way of a broad-based student movement pushing for accessible post-secondary education?

Fun fact: The AMS isn’t UBC’s only student society. Similarly, not all UBC students go to school in Vancouver.

Did you know that? You probably did, but it probably took some reminding, some prompting. UBC-O isn’t front of mind these days, but it probably should be. Why?

• The “degree equity” matters. A UBC degree is only worth as much as UBC’s reputation. So UBC-V students have a vested interest in making UBC-O is as good as its older sibling.
• Money, and subsidies. Did you know that UBC-V residents subsidize UBC-O residence construction? Your rent is helping to build housing in Kelowna. That’s because housing is “system-wide,” with revenues from Vancouver offsetting the costs in the Okanagan.
• Rankings. While the importance of rankings is questionable, there’s no doubt that UBC’s ranking (in any number of surveys) will include outcomes from both campuses.
• Institutional priorities. UBC-O is new, and the government and UBC have a lot riding on its success. It gets a lot of attention.

So what are the implications for the student movement? Read more behind the cut.

There is little to no history of co-operation between the student movements at the respective campuses. In fact, OUC-SAC (the OUC student union) changed its name to UBC Students’ Union in what appears to be something of a swipe at the AMS, and what was perceived as a monopoly on student representation. Moreover, the national CFS/CASA tension is clearly evident in the relationship between the two campuses. UBC-O has a rich CFS heritage, which tends to manifest itself in more adversarial, less collaborative lobbying efforts. By contrast, the AMS has a tradition of working with the University, with less central control. Heck, UBC-SUO refused to sign a letter (drafted by the AMS) asking the government to amend the University Act to allow international students to sit on University boards.

This causes problems. The central tension was illustrated at the Board meeting in 2006 during the discussion surrounding tuition. The AMS “supported” the tuition increase, while UBC-SUO opposed it. The absence of any coherent vision or agreement on principles really undermined the arguments we made, in opposition to the hikes.

We don’t mean to suggest that V and O must agree on recommendations each time, or that they all have to say the same thing… but purely contradictory approaches help nobody, and seriously cripple the ability to get things done. So we hope that relations with UBC-O become a priority, and, more importantly, managed effectively. There’s too much potential to work together for it not to happen.

1) Why BoG?

I never considered other positions. Board matches my interests, the pay’s not an issue, the problems I want to fix are generally higher than the AMS (most are UBC-level) and not normally academic, and I don’t have the time to take on an AMS (or GSS) exec position. The question is “why run (as Darren, not the Hydrant)?” But you didn’t ask that…

<!– D(["mb","

“,1] ); //–>2) What two experiences (jobs, positions, volunteer, etc.) have you had that gave you the skills you feel necessary for representing students on BoG?

<!– D(["mb","

<!– D(["mb","

“,0] ); //–>I’m not going to tell them they’re wrong. I’m going to pr
ovide them with more information than they had, perspectives and insight that may not have occurred to them, and the student point(s) of view. These people generally didn’t get where they are by making their minds up early and being stubborn in the face of new evidence. If there’s a side to the story that they’ve been missing, they’ll generally adapt to it. If they see one flaw they hadn’t expected, they may pay more attention and find more of them. They value the student viewpoint far more than students think, provided it can be enunciated in such a way that they don’t get a knee-jerk reaction against it.

7) Describe your ideal relationship with the UBC-O student rep

Ideally, we’d be in constant communication, would support each other, would always be on the same page, and would provide a united front (we’d have different ways of saying the same thing, and pushing for the same results). Ideally. I’ll try, but there may be irreconcilable CFS/CASA differences on some issues. E.g. the current CFS tuition demand is for an immediate 10%
reduction, which is purely arbitrary and would require provincial support or gutting of programs.

1) Why VPX?

I chose to run for the position of VPX because it is the position where I feel I can make the greatest contribution to the society. As someone who has been involved with politics, both at a student and federal level, I feel that I have an adequate grasp of public policy, and a fair deal of experience that suits me for this role. It is also an area where I can affect the greatest degree of positive change, based on the priorities that I have outlined in my platform. Many of them cannot be accomplished without cooperation from the governments, so VPX seemed a natural step to take.

2) How would you handle relationships between CASA and CFS schools?

A major part of my platform is something that I am calling United Front Lobbying. Basically, it stems from the fact that the student movement in the province is divided in voice. In the past, CFS schools have been notoriously unwilling to work with the unaffiliated and CASA schools in the province, but because of some recent events, namely the impeachment of the SFSS executive, that have opened up an opportunity for us. I think that they will be less likely to blindly follow the CFS, and willing to work with the AMS, and CASA, to get results for our constituent members. I am not advocating overthrowing the CFS – I just thing that the opportunities that have presented themselves make this time an optimal one for cooperation.

3) What do you see as areas of co-operation with UBC-Okanagan?

This again stems back to the concept of United Front Lobbying. UBC-O has a very long standing tradition of being a very pro-CFS school, so much so that the would not sign a lobbying letter regarding international students on the Board of Governors because they did not have a policy statement from the CFS offices. Regardless, I am willing to extend the olive branch, and offer them the chance to work for all students in BC. Specifically, the issue of Board of Governors provincial appointees comes to mind. I want to lobby the provincial cabinet to appoint BoG members who care about student issues, rather than the CEOs and patronage appointments that currently dominate the Board. Due to the fact that UBC-O shares this Board with us, I think it would be only natural for us to work with them on this issue.

4) Would you support the raising of a U-Pass fee for UBC students in order to guarantee a universal U-Pass for all college and university students served by Translink? Similarly, how do you feel about the U-Pass Coalition?

I think that the situation is entirely about balance. We recently joined the coalition which is unfortunately designed to increase UBC’s U-Pass fee. I am only willing to see our fees increase if we are able to see a proportionate increase in service. If I were to be elected to the VPX portfolio, I would lobby with the U-Pass coalition, but my first priority would be to the student of UBC. As such, I have mixed feelings about expanding the U-Pass and the U-Pass Coalition as a whole. One thing that I do want to do is raise awareness about the lack of service to UBC to the GVRD, and I want this to happen by asking them to hold a Transit Committee meeting at UBC. Because the meetings are at 9AM on a Friday, they will see the massive need for service for students that exists, and alert them the the massive pressures being put on the transit system.

5) How would you argue for a provincial grant program?

I would lobby for an increase in the BC Grant program in conjunction with lobbying aimed at bringing down out tuition payment proportion to 20% of the total cost. There needs to be a balance between the money put into grants and the money that will be more equitably spread between the students in the form of tuition proportion reduction. I hope to do this in conjunction with other schools, as there is a significantly more persuasive argument to be made if all the schools I the province were to lobby for this, as opposed to a singular institution. Voices, united regardless of CASA or CFS affiliation, will be able to get a lot more done than the current climate.

6) How would you evaluate the effectiveness of Policy 72?

Sadly, I think that Policy 72 sets out a noble goal, and I strongly support its intention. I do feel, however, that there is no substance behind it. The university and the province need to back up the policy with real institutional support: with grants and tuition proportion reduction, to improve access to this University. I would like to work with the VP-Academic to lobby the University and the province to provide guarantees as to how the policy will be enacted, and a process on how the policy will be enforced.

7) What experience do you have, that will help you in the position?

I have a number of valuable experiences which I think will prove valuable. I have served as the SUS Executive Secretary for one year, which, if nothing else, has taught me to function in a position of authority and to become more organized. I have also served as the AMS Representative for Science, which has allowed me to become familiarized with this organization and how it works. In this capacity, I have served as the Chair of the Ad-hoc Lobbying Review Committee, and was responsible for changing its terms of reference so that it can serve as an elected driver of policy, to work in conjunction with the VP-External and the External Commission, in addition to a body that will give oversight and accountability to the lobbying activities of the VP-External.

8) What are your lobbying priorities?

I have four major lobbying priorities. The first deals more with how I lobby than with what I am lobbying for. The fighting between the CFS and CASA must stop, and I want to work with those schools to lobby the provincial and federal government on a United Front from BC. The first thing I would do when I got into office would be to phone the VP-Externals and Presidents of the other student societies in the province, and tell them that I am willing to work with them. Second, I want to lobby the government on increasing funding to the BC Grant program, to reduce the resentful dependence on student loans, and to improve access to out University. Third, I want to lobby the cabinet to appoint people to our Board of Governors who will be willing to listen to student issues. Finally, and most importantly, I want to work toward a long term tuition proportion reduction agreement, where we pay only 20% of our tuition, as opposed to the current 28%. That 8% can account for a significant amount of money, and could make the different between someone being able to afford school and someone having to go in to debt, or, in the worst case scenario, not attend at all.

9) If you could change one thing about the AMS, what would it be?

I would like to make the AMS more accountable to the people who pay its fees. As such, I will, if elected, be holding bi-monthly forums with the members of the External Commission, the Ad-hoc Lobbying Review Committee, and myself. I think it is absolutely ridiculous to state that you are working for students if the students you are working for have no idea what you are doing. I want to lobby for things that are important for students, and that would be the major function of these consultation mee
tings.