It’s vaguely amusing to imagine a beige canvas bag as the source of political debate on campus. This year, five orientation groups — Innis, St. Mike’s, Trinity, University College and Engineering — have decided to distribute their own frosh kits, instead of purchasing or distributing the customary kits provided by the University of Toronto Students’ Union. In doing so, they’ve set off the latest in a series of debates that have engrossed U of T campus politicians and ideologues for years. This might all seem a bit strange to incoming first-year students: why would the colleges opt out of kits provided by UTSU?
The answer is, of course, complicated. It’s hardly a new problem. Initiatives such as the Student Commons project or UTSU’s move to join the Canadian Federation of Students have previously polarized opinions on campus regarding the role of the union. Recent elections have seen slates organized around the question of UTSU’s priorities: should the union maintain its current political engagement and activist initiatives, or shift instead to a more internal approach, focusing almost exclusively on events and services? This question has led to a growing colleges-vs.-UTSU division on campus. Worse yet, over the last three years, each cycle of college councillors and UTSU executives has had to deal with the inherited resentments of their predecessors.
This corroding relationship between college councils and UTSU has begun to manifest itself in several ways. A few years ago, the St. George Round Table was formed as an avenue for informal discussion and collaboration between college presidents, and its constitution notably excluded UTSU, denying union executives speaking rights. Last year, the Trinity College Meeting — Trinity College’s student government — began publicly discussing the idea of “defederating” — in effect, seceding from UTSU.
College orientation heads have pointed to promotional and activist material in UTSU’s kits as one of the main reasons for opting out and distributing their own. As a result, however, college-built kits actually cost 34 cents more per unit than their UTSU equivalent, an amount paid for with college levies. Though a seemingly inconsequential amount (in total, college kits will cost each of the five orientation groups $238 more on average than if they had gone with UTSU’s version) this sets an unacceptable precedent. Instead of negotiating and working with the central union, colleges would rather turn their backs on UTSU and make their respective students pay the price.
Students aren’t the only ones shortchanged, however. By failing to effectively negotiate a compromise with college orientation teams, UTSU risks losing relevance to its student body. Students don’t care where their frosh kits come from — they just care that they get them.
College councils do not exist to obviate UTSU, and UTSU does not exist in spite of these councils. Things need to be better this year. A focus on cooperation and compromise, not vilification and neglect, is the solution; any alternative expedites the further fracturing of an already fragile student body. One can only hope that this frosh kit fracas proves to be the exception, and not indicative of another divisive, bitter year of U of T campus politics.
