donate

The Martlet

Board rejects pro-life funds

Youth Protecting Youth club wasn’t informed funds were at stake

Mar 05, 2009 | Volume 61 Issue 25 | 8 Comments
Share |

The pro-life student club Youth Protecting Youth was denied clubs funding again by the UVic Students’ Society, despite Clubs Council voting in favour of the group receiving funding.

In the fall, when YPY last sought funding, the majority at Clubs Council voted that YPY could be recognized as a club, but should not receive funding from students. That decision was upheld by the UVSS board of directors, which has the final say on funding issues.

At the time, all the executive members of the board said it was best to uphold the decision of Clubs Council.

“Those are students [on Clubs Council] telling us what they want,” Director of Services Christine Comrie told the board last November. “We should support that majority and not overturn their decision.”

But this term Comrie, who chairs clubs council, told the board the recent council vote was less representative of students’ wishes because fewer clubs attended the meeting.

However, both meetings had 18 voting clubs. At the fall meeting only four clubs supported funding YPY, while in the more recent one a 12-club majority agreed they could have funds.

Comrie and other board members also said the meeting was undemocratic because YPY brought over 10 of its members to the meeting, as well as a reporter from a Christian media outlet, and students complained they felt intimidated to speak — though each club present only gets one vote on matters.

But YPY president Anastasia Pearse said people who wanted to vote against the club receiving funding did so. A majority supported their funding.

“We’re really frustrated,” said Pearse. “Clubs funding is for Clubs Council to decide on, not the UVSS.”

Director of Academics Edward Pullman suggested at the board meeting that if they were unsure if the vote was democratic Clubs Council should have another opportunity to vote on it. Other board members said this would just put off making a decision that ultimately would come back to them anyway. Pullman’s motion to send the question back to Clubs Council was defeated.

When the vote to deny funding came up, Pullman and Director-at-Large Dylan Hardie abstained. Meaghan Kerr and Erin Lacharity, the two directors-at-large who voted to give the club funding in the fall, were again the only ones who voted to give the club funding.

The remainder of members at the meeting voted as a majority to deny the club funding.

No member of YPY was present at the board meeting to defend the club’s position. Pearse said she did not receive notice of the meeting, despite a point in clubs policy which states: “Clubs must be given one week notice of any Clubs Council or board of directors meeting where a complaint against them is to be heard, and must be allowed to attend and state their case.”

However, there was no specific complaint filed against the club and the motion to deny funding was added mid-meeting by Luam Kidane, the board rep for the Students of Colour Collective.

Comrie said after the meeting that the club should have known to attend the board meeting because the same process happened last semester.

But YPY changed presidents since last semester.

Pearse said the board also failed to notify them after the meeting that they wouldn’t receive funding.

She was only informed of what happened by the Martlet, and subsequently contacted the board herself to appeal the decision at the next board meeting.

But Comrie said it’s unlikely the board will overturn their decision.

“I don’t think they’ll go in favour of giving them funding,” said Comrie. “Their feelings are pretty clear on this. We’ve discussed it so many times at different meetings.”

While clubs do not have to comply with the students society’s policy, the UVSS is mandated to support freedom of choice on the matter of abortion.

When YPY asked students at an Annual General Meeting in 2005 if they supported scrapping their pro-choice stance, more than 600 showed up to vote to uphold the mandate.

Share |

8 Comments

The Martlet has an open comments policy and will endeavour to promote healthy discussion. We strive to act as an agent of constructive social change and will remove racist, sexist, homophobic, or otherwise oppressive comments.

Leave a Comment

  • Kelsey Hannan March 5, 2009, 9:32 p.m.

    It's one thing to be against providing funding to controversial political groups like YPY, but its another to be disingenuous. UVSS Directors are not fooling anyone with their semantic games that they are following the democratic will of the clubs council. By overturning the democratic decision of clubs council, members the UVSS board have proven that their ideology trumps any sort of respect they have for the so called democratic will of clubs council.

    I have spoken to a number of people who have attended the clubs council meeting, and I can assure you the meeting was not coerced like Comrie claims. In fact, I have been told by a club representative that I am a part of that only 4-5 YPY members were present during the meeting and that they were well mannered during the proceedings.

    As a member of a club (UVic Young Liberals) that voted at the clubs council meeting, I can assure you that our club came to our decision to restore YPY's funding in a democratic manner. We held a special online discussion among club executives where we discussed the issue at hand, and after a long discussion over the merits of funding, we came to the unanimous agreement that YPY should receive funding. Our club, while unwavering in our support for a women's right to choose, recognized that it would be a dangerous precedent to deny club funding to YPY because they were in opposition to UVSS issue policies. We take this position because the UVic Young Liberals of Canada and by that extension, the Liberal Party of Canada, holds many political positions that are counter to official UVSS issues policies (NATO, Free Trade). If we were to take the logic that YPY should be denied funding for being in contravention of the UVSS issues policy on a women's right to choose, then the UVic Young Liberals and a number of other politically active clubs must be logically denied funding for also being in violation of UVSS Issues policies. As a result of this worry, our representative went to the clubs council with the full democratic will of the club behind him to vote in favour of funding YPY.

    However, overturning the democratic will of clubs council on this issue strikes to something more important. The UVSS board's claim that they wanted to honour the decision of clubs council is rubbish. The UVSS board's decision was nothing more than a nuanced political position they took for the sack of political expediency. However, now that this position has backfired badly for them (clubs council has reversed its decision), perhaps the board could learn something: We elect our board members to vote and take positions they campaigned on. By reverting to nuanced positions on matters like YPY for the sack of political expediency, our current UVSS board has shown a reckless disregard for democratic governance.

    Here's an idea for current and future board members: When it comes to controversial issues, call a spade a spade, get some bravery, and reveal your position. Let's face it, we all have opinions on YPY funding, and by hiding it through deceptive nuance that attempts to please everybody, you are avoiding confrontation on an issue that by its nature requires uncomfortable but necessary discussion.

  • Kelsey Hannan March 5, 2009, 9:32 p.m.

    It's one thing to be against providing funding to controversial political groups like YPY, but its another to be disingenuous. UVSS Directors are not fooling anyone with their semantic games that they are following the democratic will of the clubs council. By overturning the democratic decision of clubs council, members the UVSS board have proven that their ideology trumps any sort of respect they have for the so called democratic will of clubs council.

    I have spoken to a number of people who have attended the clubs council meeting, and I can assure you the meeting was not coerced like Comrie claims. In fact, I have been told by a club representative that I am a part of that only 4-5 YPY members were present during the meeting and that they were well mannered during the proceedings.

    As a member of a club (UVic Young Liberals) that voted at the clubs council meeting, I can assure you that our club came to our decision to restore YPY's funding in a democratic manner. We held a special online discussion among club executives where we discussed the issue at hand, and after a long discussion over the merits of funding, we came to the unanimous agreement that YPY should receive funding. Our club, while unwavering in our support for a women's right to choose, recognized that it would be a dangerous precedent to deny club funding to YPY because they were in opposition to UVSS issue policies. We take this position because the UVic Young Liberals of Canada and by that extension, the Liberal Party of Canada, holds many political positions that are counter to official UVSS issues policies (NATO, Free Trade). If we were to take the logic that YPY should be denied funding for being in contravention of the UVSS issues policy on a women's right to choose, then the UVic Young Liberals and a number of other politically active clubs must be logically denied funding for also being in violation of UVSS Issues policies. As a result of this worry, our representative went to the clubs council with the full democratic will of the club behind him to vote in favour of funding YPY.

    However, overturning the democratic will of clubs council on this issue strikes to something more important. The UVSS board's claim that they wanted to honour the decision of clubs council is rubbish. The UVSS board's decision was nothing more than a nuanced political position they took for the sack of political expediency. However, now that this position has backfired badly for them (clubs council has reversed its decision), perhaps the board could learn something: We elect our board members to vote and take positions they campaigned on. By reverting to nuanced positions on matters like YPY for the sack of political expediency, our current UVSS board has shown a reckless disregard for democratic governance.

    Here's an idea for current and future board members: When it comes to controversial issues, call a spade a spade, get some bravery, and reveal your position. Let's face it, we all have opinions on YPY funding, and by hiding it through deceptive nuance that attempts to please everybody, you are avoiding confrontation on an issue that by its nature requires uncomfortable but necessary discussion.

  • Jeremy March 6, 2009, 11:23 a.m.

    Amen to the above. Amen.

    Comrie said after the meeting that the club should have known to attend the board meeting because the same process happened last semester.

    Yeah, except last semester, Clubs Council denied YPY funding and so they obviously attended the Board meeting to try and get them to reconsider. It was that same Board meeting at which they were so absurdly lied to, assuring YPY that the UVSS Board not overturn their [Clubs Council's] decision. This semester, Clubs Council voted IN FAVOUR of YPY funding, and if YPY were to take UVSS at their word, then there would be no need for YPY to attend the UVSS Board meeting.

    A DIRECT violation of the UVSS Constitution. I don't know how much farther this can go down the discrimination road.

  • Jeremy March 6, 2009, 11:23 a.m.

    Amen to the above. Amen.

    Comrie said after the meeting that the club should have known to attend the board meeting because the same process happened last semester.

    Yeah, except last semester, Clubs Council denied YPY funding and so they obviously attended the Board meeting to try and get them to reconsider. It was that same Board meeting at which they were so absurdly lied to, assuring YPY that the UVSS Board not overturn their [Clubs Council's] decision. This semester, Clubs Council voted IN FAVOUR of YPY funding, and if YPY were to take UVSS at their word, then there would be no need for YPY to attend the UVSS Board meeting.

    A DIRECT violation of the UVSS Constitution. I don't know how much farther this can go down the discrimination road.

  • Monica Murphy March 7, 2009, 5:52 p.m.

    Kelsey Hannan's comments about the UVic Young Liberals clearly show how disagreement does not preclude reasonable discussion in a democratic spirit.

    Christine Comrie's opinions show something entirely different. It is preposterous to claim that the Council meeting was undemocratic because YPY brought a number of supporters along.

    Does a party become less democratic in proportion to the number of its members? Is an election's democratic character inversely proportional to voter turnout? Does a meeting become less democratic if one side outnumbers the other?

    At the last Board appeal, YPY presented an unpopular, minority opinion to a hostile audience. It would not be surprising if YPY members felt intimidated when they heard Board members accuse them of hate and misogyny; when Board members snorted with laughter in the middle of speeches supporting YPY, or got up and left the room; when they were likened to racists; or when the Board was presented with posters as evidence of misogyny which YPY had never even posted. YPY did not claim, however, that the Board's decision was undemocratic. In fact, YPY acknowledged that the exercise of democratic freedoms is frequently uncomfortable.

    If the Board really believes that YPY's posters spread violence, they should refuse to approve the posters instead of granting approval and then punishing YPY for using them. The Board's current practice of paying lip service to freedom of speech and democracy only betrays its duplicity.

    A final note: the 600 students at the 2005 meeting did not all attend in order to uphold the mandate; the vote was split about 50/50 and hence didn't meet the requirements of a 2/3 majority.

  • Monica Murphy March 7, 2009, 5:52 p.m.

    Kelsey Hannan's comments about the UVic Young Liberals clearly show how disagreement does not preclude reasonable discussion in a democratic spirit.

    Christine Comrie's opinions show something entirely different. It is preposterous to claim that the Council meeting was undemocratic because YPY brought a number of supporters along.

    Does a party become less democratic in proportion to the number of its members? Is an election's democratic character inversely proportional to voter turnout? Does a meeting become less democratic if one side outnumbers the other?

    At the last Board appeal, YPY presented an unpopular, minority opinion to a hostile audience. It would not be surprising if YPY members felt intimidated when they heard Board members accuse them of hate and misogyny; when Board members snorted with laughter in the middle of speeches supporting YPY, or got up and left the room; when they were likened to racists; or when the Board was presented with posters as evidence of misogyny which YPY had never even posted. YPY did not claim, however, that the Board's decision was undemocratic. In fact, YPY acknowledged that the exercise of democratic freedoms is frequently uncomfortable.

    If the Board really believes that YPY's posters spread violence, they should refuse to approve the posters instead of granting approval and then punishing YPY for using them. The Board's current practice of paying lip service to freedom of speech and democracy only betrays its duplicity.

    A final note: the 600 students at the 2005 meeting did not all attend in order to uphold the mandate; the vote was split about 50/50 and hence didn't meet the requirements of a 2/3 majority.

  • Jeremy March 9, 2009, 1:31 p.m.

    Preposterous indeed. Talk about a double standard. If that were true, then whoever had the most club members show up could decide whatever they want.

  • Jeremy March 9, 2009, 1:31 p.m.

    Preposterous indeed. Talk about a double standard. If that were true, then whoever had the most club members show up could decide whatever they want.

 

Martlet Video

Sustainable Ecological Aquaculture:

The Martlet on Twitter

  • May 15, 2012, 9:32 p.m. #UVic President David Turpin is retiring in June 2013. And so the hunt begins. . . #yyj
Join our mailing list