The ongoing campaign by some members of various CFS locals to decertify from the federation has recently received considerable attention. The CFS, or Canadian Federation of Students, presents itself as a nationwide body that provides a platform for student groups to have their collective voices heard on a national scale. However, there have been ongoing issues with the body that are now finally coming to a head. The basic concept of the federation is a positive and desirable one. However, given the obvious geographical and cultural challenges of accounting for the needs of all Canadian students, as well as its lack of financial transparency, local groups are certainly wise to defederate and move towards a more efficient system.
After reading a number of articles related to the issue, the most pertinent issue raised was the lack of information given by the CFS in regards to its salaries. Brandon Clim, a money blogger, has published the CFS’ budget for 2014. Yet again, despite numerous campaigns, salaries are not accounted for. Given that the CFS is supported by student fees, to a total of over $4 million in 2012, financial transparency ought to be the primary concern.
Along with the obvious financial issues, it is also impossible to assume that every campus across the country could possibly be accounted for on a national scale. The CFS represents around 80 universities across the country, but almost half are located in Ontario. With little representation from the prairies and the East Coast, it is inevitably unequal, opening the debate as to the extent that non-Ontario schools are represented. In fact, the CFS is so far removed from the daily routines of student groups that they were “shocked” when informed that decertification petition drives had been launched for many of their local affiliates.
In the process of decertification alone, the almost absurd amount of associated bureaucracy proves the inefficiency of the entire system. It seems as though the mere act of certifying, decertifying, and making change within the system through alternative, less aggressive measures places the entire political structure in peril. The cost of lawsuits was also absent from the published budget. If the CFS is spending more time defending it’s presence than providing a presence at all, it is a redundant system, which ought to be removed from the political framework.
The CFS holds that the potential loss of 15 local groups across the country would weaken the overall message and tarnish the institution. But it seems, given the uproar, a lack of transparency and failure to equally represent Canadian universities has not justified the CFS in its collection of annual tuition fees. Unless a major overhaul is enacted, the CFS ought to be replaced with a more efficient system that can represent students’ needs more effectively.
Olivia Forsyth-Sells is studying English and philosophy.
