You will have the opportunity to vote on four referenda during this year’s exam period: three are fee increases brought forward by the AMS and the fourth is a student-petitioned referendum which would require the AMS to write a letter demanding UBC cut ties with Israeli universities claimed to uphold apartheid. The Ubyssey endorses a yes-vote for all four referenda.
Editor’s Note: The new Editorial Board is a pilot project launched for this year’s elections. From now on, that term refers to the group of journalists who write their views as a collective in the newspaper’s name, linking us with centuries of newspaper tradition.
Our pilot Editorial Board consisted of Features Editor Elena Massing, Politics Columnist Maya Tommasi and AMS Columnist Quyen Schroeder, who served as the board’s chair.
Over the past few weeks, they contacted every candidate, held interviews, attended debates and studied platforms before deliberating among themselves who The Ubyssey will endorse. Their deliberations were private and isolated from the rest of the newsroom, including from me, the Opinion Editor, until drafts had been filed. Like all of our journalists, they practised according to the Canadian Association of Journalists’ Ethics Guidelines.
— Spencer Izen, Deputy Managing Editor and Opinion Editor
The largest of the fee increase referenda asks students to add a $5 fee to support student services. Usage of AMS services like the Food Bank, Peer Support and Safewalk have increased dramatically in recent years. These services are facing severe strain — in need of more permanent staff and equipment to continue to provide quality service to thousands of students. Though endorsing a fee increase amid financial pressures seems contradictory, it is exactly now that we should support our most vulnerable classmates with these services. For those who would call on the AMS to reduce overhead rather than asking for more money, the AMS has done exactly that. Since the 2022-23 year, the cost per interaction has dropped by an average of 22 per cent.
If you can vote yes for only one fee increase, it should be the Student Services Fee. We need to support our peers, whether they’re struggling with food insecurity, academics or mental health.
This year brought the controversial 350 club limit. Throughout the campaign period, many candidates have discussed the importance of clubs to finding community and forming campus culture. To help build these bonds, clubs need support from the AMS. Certainly financial support, but also logistical support, such as room bookings. All of this costs money.
As it is, not only will the clubs cap remain in effect, but existing clubs will continue to see degraded support — fewer and smaller grants, slower responses to room booking requests and perhaps a further reduced club cap. This is why the AMS is asking for a $4 increase to the Clubs Benefit Fee, of which you will be able to opt out.
This fee increase provides security to the Clubs Benefit Fund, allowing the AMS to not just maintain current support, but expand it. While the nature of this fund’s usage will be up to future executive teams, increasing club grants and improving the room booking process are near certain. Given clubs are often cited as the first place students find community, we think an additional $4 is a fair price to pay — we’ll be voting yes on this referendum.
We’ve been using the Nest for over a decade. If we want our shared space to be maintained and improved, this $3 increase will be critical. Right now, both the audiovisual upgrades and the food bank plumbing renovation have been stalled, awaiting funding that might take years to arrive without this fee increase. We need to take care of our space, lest it fall into disrepair. We endorse a yes-vote for the Capital Projects fee increase.
Finally, the student-petitioned referendum would require the AMS to send an open letter to the university requesting to cut ties with certain Israeli universities organizers say are upholding apartheid in Palestine.
We acknowledge that cutting ties with three universities is a symbolic gesture. It alone is unlikely to materially affect the conditions of Palestinians subject to apartheid and genocide. However, it is an important moral position for the student union to take. We must take a stand in current conflicts, it would also be in keeping with the AMS’s history of taking stances on contentious political issues such as South African apartheid in ‘87, abortion in ‘72 and the Vietnam War in ‘67.
It is worth noting that the AMS could have easily taken a stance on the Israeli genocide without holding a referendum. It is only required because the union historically refused to take a bold stance unprompted; instead they only act when directed to by a referendum, and even then they only follow the results to a ‘T.’
To the current AMS council’s credit, they narrowly voted to endorse this referendum (though the AMS hasn’t publicly campaigned for it or publicized their endorsement). The Ubyssey’s Editorial Board believes we have a moral imperative to take a stance. Students want this — proven by last year when 2,500 more people voted yes on the student strike referendum than for any elected candidate. A yes stance on this year's referendum will not only serve as a potential linchpin for a broader divestment push, it will also strengthen our ethos as a student union.
You should vote yes to all four referendum items.
Editorials are opinion essays, and while they represent the views of the Editorial Board, they may not speak for every person at our newspaper. They are subject, however, to the same standard of fact-checking as anything else in our report.
