President asked to resign
AMS Council votes unanimously in favour of removing president and VP external from office
brendan albano & michael thibault photo illustration
Monday, November 30th, 2009
After a heated three-hour emergency AMS Council meeting on Saturday, November 28, AMS President Blake Frederick and VP External Tim Chu were asked to resign. The request was due to a human rights complaint they filed on behalf of the AMS to the United Nations without consulting students beforehand.
Over 175 people, most of whom were upset with Frederick and Chu, attended the meeting, which had to be moved to Hebb Theatre to accommodate the crowd. Council voted in favour of withdrawing the UN complaint and ceasing to fund the cause, asking Frederick to resign, and Chu to resign. All motions passed unanimously.
The complaint claims that the government is violating its commitment under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural rights, which Canada signed in 1976, “by failing to adequately control tuition fees and not providing sufficient financial support to students.”
Frederick and Chu were not in attendance. They claimed in an open letter to Council that they had “prior commitments,” despite Frederick’s comment to The Ubyssey in an interview on Thursday that he was looking forward to Saturday’s meeting.
A student at large, identified as “Greg,” was one of the few who spoke against the motion.
“It’s a stunt,” he said. “Sometimes stunts help you get what you want….As a student who pays a ridiculous amount of tuition, I don’t really see the problem.”
However, opposition was drowned out by numerous students and councilors speaking in favour of the motion.
“I’m mostly your typical, apathetic student,” said Anna Ables, a second-year student. “I don’t really care until something is bad enough that I personally feel embarrassed by. [Making] tuition a human rights issue is incredibly embarrassing….It’s not on behalf [of students].”
“I was a little surprised that we filed a human rights complaint for tuition,” said Conrad Copeland, a UBC alumnus. “Honestly, it makes a mockery of the UN, and it’s deeply embarrassing to the school that we would be presumptuous enough to think tuition is a human rights issue.”
“None of us are happy about this,” said Engineering Undergraduate Society representative Andrew Carne. “We would like a student government that works….What we have seen here is a willful subversion of the democratic process.”
Another motion was brought forward by Mona Maghsoodi, Graduate Student Society councilor, to ask VP Academic Johannes Rebane and VP Finance Tom Dvorak to resign, as they had signed off on the contract with Pivot Legal Society—the law firm with which Frederick and Chu filed the complaint. However, the motion was tabled until January because councilors wanted to consult with their constituents before making a decision.
Dvorak and Rebane apologized for their involvement, alleging that they trusted their fellow executives, and therefore did not read the contract closely. “I took the level of trust that I had as an excuse not to do my due diligence, and for that I apologize,” Rebane said. Dvorak echoed these sentiments, asking for sympathy from councilors and students.
The AMS’ next step is to send out a press release clarifying that the complaint was not an action of Council. In accordance with AMS Bylaws, 12 councilors have signed two separate notices that resolve to remove Frederick and Chu from their executive positions that will come forward to a special Council meeting scheduled for Monday,
December 7.
—With files from Kalyeena Makortoff, Fabiola Carletti & Neal Yonson
Read Frederick and Chu’s response here.
Read the background of the issue here, here and here.
Alternate coverage on UBC Insiders.
Watch Streeters to see the student’s reaction to Saturday’s meeting
Alison Gregg Nov 30
Following through on a campaign promise to represent student’s concerns over tuition fees sounds democratic to me. Council is just sad they got left out.
And calling this an embarrassment confuses me, there are some sensitive people here! Both levels of government have refused to listen to student concerns about the state, and accessibility, of higher education and we as students have to stand up and say we aren’t going to take it anymore! And for those who claim this isn’t the UN’s business, then why would they bother with the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural rights? For fun maybe? Let’s do something!
Reply
Mike Reply:
November 30th, 2009 at 2:25 pm
If Blake didn’t want to go through council, he should have put “change the way AMS works” in his platform. He didn’t.
If you voted for me because I support lower taxes… and then I went and took a piss in the offices of Canada Revenue Agency (and said this was on behalf of my constituents), would you be happy with me “standing up”? Hey, according to you, it’s democratic!
There is a proper & democratic way to do things, and then there’s the Blake-and-Tim way of doing things.
Reply
Dan Nov 30
You’ve got elections every 12 months. It is not like your executive stole from you or did something outside of their mandate which was to lobby for issues relevant to students.
Politicians are allowed to be embarrassments. Actually, most people expect them to.
The rest of the world actually expects students to complain on a regular basis. I’d bet the UN probably has a dedicated team to deal with complaints from student groups.
Reply
Dan R. Reply:
November 30th, 2009 at 11:57 pm
But they did steal from us. In three ways in fact. 1) The stole AMS council (thus student body) funds; resources they were not entitled to to fund a project that they knew would not have have been approved by the AMS council. (They would have been entitled to those funds had they gotten approval for their actions through the appropriate channels). 2) They stole our voice. They claimed to be speaking for the AMS council as well as the student body at large. They weren’t. As has been revealed they went behind council’s back and issued a complaint not approved by council or the student body. This outcry against them from the entire AMS council and vast majority of the student body (who care/know about the issue) makes it clear that they aren’t speaking for us. 3) They stole the trust of those that voted from them and more generally the students they represent. We trust our elected officials to act in accordance with the bounds of the position we elect them to. Blake and Tim have violated that trust on multiple occasions culminating in this.
Reply
Gonzo Reply:
December 2nd, 2009 at 7:44 pm
1) there is absolutley nothing to suggest that they did not go through proper procedures to spend that money. The spending out of the legal fund required 2 exec signatures, no?
2) They do not have to get Council’s approval for every move they make. It is well within their mandate to write letters, start projects, meet with public officials, etc. they don’t need Council’s permission to do these things. And there is nothing in code that says they have to get Council’s permission to submit a complaint on behalf of the AMS. Now they DID need Council’s permission to call for “lower tuition.” But really, is that really such an infringement? That deserves impeachment?
3) I have a lot of trust for Blake and Tim, because they’re not letting Council’s constant pandering to the BC LIberals to stop the AMS from actually being effective for once! You may have lost trust, conservative Council may have lost trust, but not all students did.
Reply
Zack Nov 30
There are several issues at work here. I was a student who had to work 2 jobs every year and still needed to get student loans. I graduated with $32,000 in debt. Throughout that time, I never thought that it was already a situation that warranted a human rights complaint to the UN. It just took the situation that we have right here to another level that is just unnecessary. The UN has bigger and greater problems to deal with than our tuition situation. Feelings of embarrassment stem from the fact, that we should know better. We still have access to education, we still eat 3 square meals a day, we can still make our voices heard without fear of retribution. We are still the lucky few in this world to have a privileged life.
It’s all a matter of perspective folks that frankly the AMS executive lost.
Besides, if you find out that your executives who are suppose to represent you do not read contracts that will spend your student fees then just think of what other contracts were just glossed over. If we ever want to change the system, let’s try to hold ourselves to a higher standard than what we see happening in politics now.
Reply
sf Reply:
December 1st, 2009 at 1:53 am
I don’t think this issue is too small for the UN. If Canada isn’t held accountable for the covenants it signs then how can other nations be expected to uphold any UN agreements. Arguing for perspective when it comes to rights could justify a lot of violations.
Reply
Zack Reply:
December 1st, 2009 at 11:53 am
at the same time, we just can’t bandy around a term such as human rights violations to mean just about everything and anything without considering their full implications.
Reply
Jake McIvor Nov 30
“Wealthier Canadians are twice as likely to go to university as poorer ones”
http://www.millenniumscholarships.ca/en/newsevents/newsfull.asp?newsid=170
Reply
Sarah J Reply:
November 30th, 2009 at 3:35 pm
You’ll notice that neither that sentence nor the article as a whole mention point-blank lowering tuition as a way to deal with the problem. More importantly, they don’t mention it as THE way.
This is where the education issue ties into the problem of Blake and Tim being undemocratic and unrepresentative. Both acknowledged the financial gap in higher education, but neither discussed it at length. Good intentions don’t make their proposed solution infallible, feasible, or even necessarily realistic.
Perhaps Council, and the student body at large, could have been persuaded that it was; or, Blake and Tim could have been persuaded to take another approach. However, neither of these things happened, because dialogue was never opened.
Reply
Jake McIvor Reply:
November 30th, 2009 at 5:46 pm
Sorry, my intention was to bring attention to a resource that discusses some of the issues in the complaint, not comment on the way in which the complaint was filed. Let me try again:
The link above is to a brief summary of the latest edition (2009) of “The Price of Knowledge: Access and Student Finance in Canada.”
The full report ‘provides analysis of key trends and new data relating to access to post-secondary education, student finances and financial assistance programs.’ One of the major policy conclusions is for more effective student financial assistance programs.
http://www.millenniumscholarships.ca/images/Publications/POKVol4_EN.pdf
The complaint to the UN does not suggest any particular solution. The complaint argues that Canada is not meeting the treaty that it agreed to and requests an investigation.
Reply
Seamus Wolfe Nov 30
Wow. The reaction to an interesting and innovative way of representing student’s needs for a high-quality and accessible post-secondary education is to ask for resignations?!?
I would just like to say this then:
1. What other tactics should be used? (because I know that here in Ontario, we’ve been doing tones of research and submissions to governments, direct lobbying, small protests, big protests and it doesn’t seem to work, even though polls now show that 90% of Ontarians want tuition fees to be frozen or reduced.)
2. Doesn’t this seem a bit reactionary? Even if you don’t like this tactic, it’s not like anyone stole funds or did anything would put anyone at risk.
Seamus Wolfe
President, Student Federation of the University of Ottawa
-born and raised in BC
Reply
Ashley Reply:
November 30th, 2009 at 7:00 pm
1. The tactics he used was to subvert and deceive AMS council and fellow AMS executives. That is the issue here; not the topic which the complaint was submitted about. It was deliberate and intentional. To add to this, Blake and Tim skipped out on the AMS meeting on Saturday where they could have explained themselves. And on top of that, they’ve attempted to throw 2 fellow executives under the bus. And on top of THAT, this is not the first time they’ve acted in a manner unbecoming of an AMS executive. This is the straw that broke the camel’s back; one of many straws that have been piling up over the last several months.
2. See above.
Reply
Zack Reply:
November 30th, 2009 at 8:05 pm
unless somebody can correct me, there would be a misuse of student funds stemming from the costs of going through the Pivot Legal Society.
Of course, that point would be moot if it would’ve been done pro bono.
Reply
Jeremy - Arts AMS Reply:
December 1st, 2009 at 4:30 pm
The AMS budget this year allowed for up to $25,000 to be spent on legal fees. The allocation of these funds is at the discretion of Council OR the Executive Committee. The contract with Pivot, and the payment were taken through Executive Committee and not reported to Council.
So technically it wasn’t a misappropriation of funds, as they didn’t go against any rules, however the whole issue in and of itself is a big bucket of fail.
Reply
Chanelle Nov 30
The way Blake went around what he did was definitely a “subversion” of representative democracy, but this does not diminish the truth of rising tuition fees. Frankly though, I find it extremely embarasssing that he referred to our 2% increase in fees as a “human rights violation” on top of sending the complaint to an international organization who deals daily with vast numbers of deaths and humanitarian crises around the world. However, as a publicity stunt (which was undeniably over the top, I have to add) it has done well to draw attention to our school fees (and also the dynamics of student politics). Therefore it becomes easy to characterize this as a case of misguided intentions, except some will see Blake’s earlier misuse of his position and power (ref: demanding accountability re: bus loop) as a faulty character trait instead of devotion to student representation.
Regardless of whether they were misguided intentions or “willful subversion” of democracy, the popular saying “the ends justify the means” finds some footing in this situation: it is undeniable that Blake and Tim must be sanctioned for their means – but it is also absolutely crucial that we acknowledge the importance of the ends they were trying to achieve.
Reply
Alex Nov 30
Could it not be argued that the vehement responses to Frederick and Chu’s actions are an example of the reactionary politics that ferment at an institution of the affluent? Several times at the ‘emergency’ meeting on Saturday, it was claimed that UBC’s tuition is not that high, especially because it competes well in the rankings. These statements were met with wholehearted applause. Bijan even suggested that tuition could/should go up in some hope that this would increase accesibility.
Rebane and Dvorak look as though they will get off free even though they were signatories in obtaining the funding to pay Pivot Legal. They say that they were too busy to read what they were signing, and trusted their other executives. If Blake and Tim were elected on platforms of lowering tuition, then this action is based in trust. It seems that Rebane and Dvorak are happy to backpedal out of the situation, and they, like the rest of AMS council, can revel in their bureaucratic ineffectiveness as a reason for such reactions.
Why are we punishing political action on an ideal that many students are united around? It seems very unlikely that AMS council, without Blake and Tim, will do anything about tuition as they seem to be more interested in UBC’s international reputation, pleasing the administration, and their own bids for power.
Reply
Gordon Katic Nov 30
Much of this outrage stems from a very narrow and misguided conception of human rights. I find these dismissive “UN has bigger fish to fry” arguments are misplaced and evasive. Go actually read the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights, look at Article 26. Access to education, based on merit, is quite explicitly a priority of the UN. This complaint is not an embarrassment, it is quite the opposite. This complaint should be lauded. There is a very heated student uprising to massive tuition hikes going on right now in California, where access to higher education has never been more difficult. This is a human rights issue, and it will creep up on us if we are not diligent. Prior comments have documented the danger of increased tuition better than I have and they must be taken seriously. There remains the issue of “subverting the democratic process” that people continue to raise, but I fail to see what tremendous negative implications this complaint will have on student life and student governance. Blake ran on this issue and he is following up on it, we ought to laud him for it. He has just filed a complaint to an external body, he has not changed in any way the makeup of the internal student body.
Reply
Helen Reply:
December 1st, 2009 at 5:25 am
I concur.
We have a right to complain about tuition fees; they are, in fact, going up. Frederick and Chu may have had other means of lobbying for their cause, but this does not mean they don’t have the right to do what they did. The student body, by voting or lack thereof, elected both of them to office. They acted on their platform. I applaud them – for standing up for me. If you don’t, then that’s -1 for them for delivery but still +1 for intentions. I say, let the UN decide if the cause were merited and let Frederick and Chu finish out their terms.
Those too embarrassed by our rights to stand up for ourselves and state our problems, please, the next time you screwed up and accidentally poured hot soup all over your feet working your near-to-minimum wage job, don’t come into the emergency room. There are people dying. Don’t bring your customer in either. We don’t want to triage you, at all. Please and thank you.
Reply
Ashley Reply:
December 1st, 2009 at 11:36 am
This is not standing up.
We know the UN won’t do anything. Canada and BC know the UN won’t do anything. How was this not a gigantic waste of time and money?
Reply
Gordon Katic Reply:
December 3rd, 2009 at 1:19 am
That’s the UN’s prerogative, it has nothing to do with Blake Frederick. He filled the complaint on the grounds that Canada has not fulfilled treaty commitments, and from my understanding this seems to be quite accurate. The greater issue is why nobody seems to be substantively addressing Canada’s shameful non-compliance; Canada’s non-compliance is the embarrassment, not Blake’s RECOGNITION of it. You wonder why the UN is so weak on the international stage? Well this is the answer, and we are all complicit. International commitments matter, they are what introduce morality to the international stage, facilitate universal human progress and heal the divisions between nations and peoples of the world. If we don’t honor the human rights commitments we have made to our own citizens, what sort of behavior do you expect from this country in the chaotic world of international politics (apathy towards detainee abuse perhaps)? As students, and as Canadians, we ought to rethink where our anger should be directed.
I personally think any effort to view access to education as a human rights issue (as the UN explicitly does, as the general public does, as the general public views access to health care) as a step in the right direction. I was disgusted by the apathy demonstrated by the student council at today’s meeting–voting to end debate on Blake’s motion was quite frankly cowardly. We saw one person today break down in tears because she can no longer afford to go to UBC, but discussion of this issue ended before it began. How can you claim to represent the concerns of the students if you vote to not discuss the issue of tuition? Passing it to committee when a large portion of the crowd was there to address this concern was simply using bureaucratic politics to defend the status quo. Never mind the millions who would do anything to attend a university of this caliber, but the very students attending are not being spoken for. The council should be ashamed for putting petty politics over issues of profound importance. And to those who laughed at that obnoxious UN joke (although it was funny, I’ll admit), I hope you don’t embrace that misguided and narrow-minded understanding of human rights and the role of the UN.
Slapper Badger Reply:
December 2nd, 2009 at 2:03 pm
Yeah Gordon!
Reply
Geoff Dec 1
It is clear to me that what Blake and Tim have done was underhanded and against moral values held by the majority of the student body. It is also clear that the UN does indeed “have bigger fish to fry”. So you graduate with debt, pay it off. You went to school to figure out how to do that, whether or not the education you received was directly responsible for an increase in lifetime salary.
We are among the privileged few people in the entire world who have access to education. We don’t even know the meaning of “lack of access to education”. You went to highschool, why? It was free, you didn’t have to work to support your family, and you didn’t have to, or could afford to pay for necessary school supplies and uniforms. Just the fact that you have change in your pocket means we are among the richest %20 of the world population. I feel blessed and privileged every day that I can think about taking loans and paying them back to receive an education, and possibly more than a few individuals are taking their privileges for granted.
Lack of access to education is not an issue in Canada. Our country’s literacy rate is 99%, higher even than our southern neighbours. World perspective to this question is completely necessary and the complaints of a select few who would like to get more for less is unreasonable.
Resources are scarce, rational thought is scarcer.
Reply
Slapper Badger Reply:
December 2nd, 2009 at 2:00 pm
I am very disappointed with your comments, Geoff. I would not have expected you to claim that because we got ‘privileged access’ that we ‘have no idea what lack of education is’ and should therefore be glad for tuition increases that go against a public commitment with the UN which was not upheld. It is hilarious that apparently people have NOT paid for public school throughout their lives, and then should be expected NOT to complain when it comes to being FORCED to pay tuition. There are many countries where higher education is free or close to (e.g., Norway, Sweden, Cuba, Brazil, France, Germany). Your assertion that access to education is not a problem here is not only irresponsible, but misguiding and misinformed. It also ignores the realities of the Downtown Eastside and the issues being faced by aboriginals. In short, it is a lamentable comment, and your ‘rationality’ seems to be incredibly problematic. Not everything is about making calculations. You should read Stephen Jay Gould’s “Mismeasure of Man” and refresh your stale ideas.
Reply
Geoff Reply:
December 3rd, 2009 at 12:44 am
When you cannot attend primary school because you cannot afford to pay for something as simple as a pencil to write with, that is a financial barrier to education. When this is part of a society’s “norm”, that is a political issue. 80 dollars to students who spend that on their cellphone bill, or an overpriced textbook is not. I would love education to be free. My roommate (Scottish) is here for free on exchange, because his education is covered by the government. But free is a caveat term we apply to it because, in the end, the government will pay for his education with his tax dollars.
Am I in favour of free education?
Of course. I would love free education.
Do I want to see an increase in my taxes?
I’m perfectly fine with that. I really don’t mind taxes because I see the benefit they do.
Do I share views with the majority of Canadians?
No. And understanding this, I understand that I will be paying for my education up front instead of over time.
Access to education is minimal. I cannot tell the whole population of Canada to go to school. Some people just don’t jive with the education system. The issues being faced by First Nation peoples are much more deep rooted than the cost of tuition, and that the Downtown Eastside has little or nothing to do with rising tuition fees. Literacy is a goal on the Eastside, and an astoundingly difficult one at that, despite the social services available to residents. It may even be argued that funding for research and post-secondary education would be better utilized in social support systems across Canada.
Your blatant ignorance of basic economic principles and social issues is not uncommon from either the liberal or conservative contingent. Understand that issues such as poverty and education are much more complex that simple “for and against” politics that we are culturally infused with.
Reply
Gordon Katic Reply:
December 3rd, 2009 at 1:30 am
The relatively healthy state of our educational system (although it is far from perfect) is only more reason to defend it and to stand by international commitments. Again, the “bigger fish to fry” argument is evasive; the fact that other people have it worse does not absolve us from keeping our international commitments. How the UN organizes it’s triage of human rights violations is not Blake Frederick’s concern, Canada’s non-compliance and the state of her public educational system is. We need to be all the more diligent when these issues come up, because without our commitment to public education and international treaties, things can only slide.
Reply
Nicholas FitzGerald Dec 1
Latest in the Blake-BS: Hijacking a non-partisan club to spread his partisan politicking – http://blog.nfitz.net/?p=267
Reply
J Reply:
December 1st, 2009 at 1:14 pm
This is misinformation. Frederick didn’t target this group specially. If you are on any AMS or the Council mailing list you’d know that he sent this out to EVERYONE. If a group decided to pass it on (as V-Day seems to have), that’s their own decision. FYI the original didn’t ask anyone to pass this on. Talk about jumping the gun, Nicholas.
Reply
Nicholas FitzGerald Reply:
December 1st, 2009 at 1:22 pm
Read the note at the end “We have been asked to pass on this message.”. That means they were asked (I’m gonna go out on a limb and say “by Blake Frederick”) to send the letter specifically to those on their mailing list. And again, unless they got the permission of the majority of all members of the club, it’s not appropriate for a member of the clubs executive (whomever sent this email from VDAY) to be sending partisan political messages which have nothing to do with their club’s purpose, in their capacity as UBC VDay executive.
And yes, he ALSO sent the message from the AMS Council mailing list – which is ALSO an abuse of power since he doesn’t have the backing of the rest of the council.
Reply
M Dec 1
once again council goes on an immature power trip. what else is new?
Reply
Marloe Brundy Dec 1
This picture is just disgusting. You make me ashamed of being a student here.
Reply
FD Dec 1
“Another motion was brought forward by Mona Maghsoodi, Graduate Student Society councilor, to ask VP Academic Johannes Rebane and VP Finance Tom Dvorak to resign, as they had signed off on the contract with Pivot Legal Society—the law firm with which Frederick and Chu filed the complaint.”
This a priceless little nugget that’s being glossed over entirely here, considering that, only last year, Mona Maghsoodi, as president of the Graduate Student Society, made an executive decision (with only a handful of like-minded GSS execs) to withhold the now infamous 2008-2009 Graduate Handbook because she personally disagreed with its content – fully prepared to spend thousands of student dollars for a censored reprint. An action for which, even by the majority of councilors who themselves disagreed with said content, she was rightfully chastised, but not impeached. Now, she suddenly appears to have so great problem with student executives making what should obviously be voting decisions behind closed doors that she even wants the middlemen fired for it. I’ll leave the outraged cries of hypocrisy to someone less jaded, but the obviousness of the fact that this is not about procedure, but about only politics, that it is alright if a center-right exec does it, but disdainful when it’s a naive leftist wanna-be radical, is too hilarious to not point out.
Reply