Despite the motion being defeated, Bowen Tang, a student with profound hearing loss, says this isn’t the end of the issue.

“Even though tonight the motion failed, I believe that given enough time, that when we gather more people with disabilities, get them to know more about what happened tonight, and if they voice the same concerns that we do, then we’ll eventually bring this motion back to Council, and that this time it’ll be more successful.

“Right now I guess that all we can do is to continue advocating for ourselves within our faculties and be able to speak our voice as loud as we can.”

from {http://www.accessibilitynewsinternational.com/?p=1015}

I wonder what students with disabilities have to say about this, and what they think about your opinion… you insinuate women are a minority at UBC (factual mistake) in your opinion piece, like people with physical disabilities.

Another opinions might be that you are trivializing these people and their claim, after all, students with disabilities themselves came up with it, and they should know why it is important, not you… and the repercussions are here, and they will keep on coming… {http://www.accessibilitynewsinternational.com/?p=1015]…

The problem is that, at least in he US, to discriminate against the inclusion of people with disabilities, if they feel discriminated, is a ‘hate crime’… Imagine how good it will look in the Council reputation when particular people with disabilities begin coming claiming they have been discriminated by the decision largely motivated by a single councilor’s opinion? (Check minutes)… People will be making sure nobody forgets exactly which individuals voted against the students with disabilities seat.

I hope you will be able to explain yourself well enough when the signatures from people opposing your view start pouring… now the question is: will you censor this comment, or will you address it? Don’t you love screen shots?

love, willie.
ps: good luck [my best advice is 'retract' and 'make up']

That way, you can bring up the issue again. It’s politics in action. When they vote down a new tax, add on a motion to help sick puppies. Resubmit and win.

Seriously, though, I am curious if it did include mental health issues. I think these are a serious issue facing students. If you’re trying to improve the lives of students, mental health issues, I would argue, are certainly an important issue for many students.

The definition of students with disabilities was not defined, as it is not common knowledge. Those students who have persistent mobility, sensory, learning, or other physical or mental health impairment are considered to be living with disability.

There were outside political bodies that were in support of this seat like the Paralympics Representative. Many students wrote to the speaker in support of the seat. The seat’s purpose was to be an acting liaison and communication channel for the AMS and students with disabilities, and as a resource for the council members as well.

The most unsettling were the council members’ ablest remarks that made those in support of the vote feel unwelcomed. They were unwelcomed. The tension had a major insider/outsider divide. Many students in support of the vote (students identified with disabilities, and their allies) later felt uncomfortable and some were drawn to tears.

The seat’s allies were fighting for room to speak: Binjan Ahmadian (BoG) said that all marginalized students should “just organize themselves into a non-political body”.

Tahara Bhate (Science) made an offhanded comment “once you let one in, they all want to get in. And this is a problem” referring to a non-voting seat given to a First Nations representative a year ago and using ‘slippery slope’ analogy against students with disabilities.

At one point, Antti (Luke) Luukkonen (GSS) literally cut the AMS Equity Officer off from speaking in the middle of council discussion. I would hate to see how Luukkonen would treat his constituents outside of council.

Kyle Warwick (Arts VP External) showed his ignorance to AMS resource groups when he openly said he was not in support of the non-voting seat for disabilities, because he saw that [they] should look for a place in the AMS Resource Centre. But as someone from the audience pointed out, there is literally no space inside the Resource Centre. He obviously didn’t know how things roll around here.

The following members of council spoke against to the Disabilities Non-Voting Seat. Andrew Carne (Engineering) ; Aaron Sihota (Science); Tahara Bhate (Science) ; Binjan Ahmadian (BoG) ; Kyle Warwick (Arts) ; Matthew Naylor (Arts) ; Ryan Trasolini (Arts) ; Antti (Luke) Luukkonen (GSS) ; Jeremy McElroy (Arts) ; Katherine (Arts).

Perhaps the discomfort some council members faced came from a place of complete ignorance or insecurity, where they really could not defend their ablest sentiments in public. Or perhaps they realized that they have been putting the onus on their constituents to “reach out” to them as representatives all along and neglected to put themselves out there for their constituents. That’s the problem with a lot for these council members, once you introduce them to the Council Chambers cushy seats, they begin to think they are members of the US Senates. They will ask for “special interest groups” to “lobby” and do the work for them. I wonder if the AMS was built on that notion, but I highly doubt it.

When the tension came high and the ones with diplomatic sense realized that there were witnesses all around the room, the council members talked amongst themselves and tried to pass anonymous voting. People outside of the circle chuckled uncomfortably to the injustice and disgrace the representatives have put on themselves.

What happened that night was a disgraceful moment for the AMS Council; it was ablest, and reinforcing of marginalization. If they don’t understand the what ablest means, they should get off of Facebook during council and look it up.