From Nov. 25 to 28, the 28th Annual National General Meeting of the Canadian Federation of Students will be held in the Ottawa-Gatineau region. A large number of proposed reforms to the Federation have been proposed by a few student unions across the country, in the hopes of making the CFS more democratic, transparent, and less litigious. U of T will receive five votes in plenary, from unions representing part-time undergrads, graduate students, and the Mississauga and Scarborough campuses, as well as the U of T Students’ Union. In this open letter, a student urges our unions and others to adopt the reform package, and to vote against certain other motions on the table. The full agenda can be downloaded here.

To U of T’s representatives, and the representatives of other students who are members of the Canadian Federation of Students:

Tomorrow, at 3:30 p.m., you will begin your Opening Plenary Session. For this meeting, I make one simple request of you: remember why you are at the CFS Annual National General Meeting, and whom you represent. You are there to represent all your individual members, the students.

There is a need for change, and I urge you to thoughtfully and thoroughly consider all motions on the table. But I urge you to vote in a manner which will make the CFS more relevant, transparent, and just for its members. What we, your constituents whom you represent and from whom you receive your salary and mandate, do not need from the CFS is increased litigation, or further inane and paranoid restrictions on federation or defederation.

I wish to bring a few motions to attention:

1) Many of the policy statements, on issues such as poverty, funding for post-secondary education, student employment, and research councils, seem to be in the best interests of students.

I am in favour of these motions.

2) Motion 6 on pages five to seven, brought forward by the Carleton University Graduate Students’ Association, presents a negative, paranoid, and hostile suggestion for dealing with legitimate concerns about the CFS on numerous campuses. Instead of addressing these openly, this motion seeks to further complicate the already near-impossible task of questioning a unions’ membership within the CFS. Of particular concern:

—Complaining about a conspiracy to hold the referendums in the same period of time (without producing any evidence, may I add), while not noting the extremely small window of opportunity in which to submit a petition and hold a referendum (requiring six months’ notice and for the referendum to finish before exams and/or April 15 only leaves maybe six weeks, maximum, in which a referendum could possibly be held).

—Raising the petition requirement for a defederation referendum from 10 per cent to 20 per cent. For UTSU, this would require over 8,000 signatures—a task which would likely be unachievable, also given the tight timelines in which to submit a defederation petition. Also ludicrous, considering the far-lower quorums for voting in many of these unions (five per cent for the UTSU), and uneven, given there are no rules requiring a percentage of signatories to initiate federation referendums.

—Limiting the number of referendums to two within a three-month period. So much for freedom of association! This is an incredible restriction on unions’ ability to reconsider their membership. Does this turn petitions into races at the beginning of each school year? Does the CFS get to decide which members are “allowed” to hold a referendum?

The deciding factor on whether a referendum should be allowed to be held should be up to the members of a student union, not on the availability of National executives and other executives to campaign far from their own campus. For all of these reasons, and more, this motion should be unequivocally rejected.

3) Freedom of the media is another essential element of our democratic society, and one that student unions should champion. Instead, far too often, the CFS and its member unions shut out media, threaten litigation, and maintain utmost levels of secrecy. However, the Kwantlen Student Association (Local 26) has motioned, on pages 17 to 18, to make CFS meetings “open to all campus media.” The Post-Graduate Students' Society of McGill University (Local 79) says on pages 51 that media “scrutiny would serve either to reign in the litigious nature of the Federation Executive branch, or to justify such legal expenses.”

Any motion recommending increased access of media to CFS events, meetings, and conferences should be firmly supported, as should all motions recommending further restrictions and reduction in litigation, which damage the CFS brand, acts against the interests of students, and contributes to the hundreds of thousands of dollars that the CFS pays in legal fees annually, which students pay for.

4) Congratulations on the motions motivated by UTSU (Local 98, pages 22 to 24 of the PDF). The three motions—on Flat Fees, the Climate Change Statement of Action for Canada, and the Transitional Year Program—speak strongly to its support of students on this campus, and issues with broad support across your membership.

I strongly support these motions, and hope they gain recognition at the National General Meeting.

5) However, I disagree with the motion put forward by APUS regarding the Pan-Am Games (pages 25 to 26 of the PDF). First off, some of its recommended actions are irrelevant, such as discouraging U of T involvement in the bid—bid’s over. Toronto won. Further, the motion disparages the attempt to “impose” a student levy, although it will be put to a referendum, and the Scarborough Campus Students’ Union president has been quoted in The Varsity as supporting the levy for a vast improvement in athletic services on that campus. The motion suggests the games will hurt student space, a baseless allegation, considering the games will occur out of the regular school-term, and that they will result in vast new amounts of student-usable space at the UTSC campus (not to mention the affordable housing that will be created in the West Donlands as a legacy of the Athletes’ Village). Considering the Pan-Am Games to be "an encroachment" on U of T is ludicrous.

This motion will only serve to reduce the standing of the CFS and any member unions that support it. It should be firmly opposed.

My requests are reasonable. They represent the interests of students. They represent the interests of the CFS. And rejecting them will only serve to confirm to CFS-skeptics that there is no possibility of positive growth and change within the organization. For the good of your constituents, your local union, the CFS, and the “student movement,” I urge you to approve these changes, and not quash the little hope I have left for the CFS.

In conclusion, please note that I—and many other students—care deeply about these issues. We will follow the proceedings closely (follow @emmagodmere on Twitter for live updates about the meeting), and we will hold you accountable when you return. We will ask what motions you supported, what motions you opposed, and why.

Remember whom you represent, and to whom you are accountable.

In democracy, Your constituent, Craig Ruttan