The Martlet

The opinions article, “Advocate equal funding,” printed Jan. 14, asserts that it is time to look at advocacy funding — that all the groups should get the same amount, or it’s not fair.

But students are not all the same, and our needs are not all the same. Where there is disability there is almost always extra (sometimes enormous) expense, and extra (sometimes enormous) effort. There is nothing fair about ignoring this fact.

Concepts of equality have evolved to distinguish between formal equality and substantive equality. Formal equality is not always fair because it gives everyone the same thing. Substantive equality recognizes diverse needs and adjusts accordingly.

However, the most important point that the article misses is that advocacy groups are not just passive recipients of handouts from their fellow students. Each advocacy group has won whatever amount they receive through their own hard work.

Access UVic was more successful in our fundraising efforts last year than the other four advocacy groups and, I think, there are a few reasons for this. Most of the analysis after the election focused on possible sexism, racism or homophobia as an explanation.

However, the joint referendum from the Women’s Centre, Pride, the Native Students Union (NSU) and the Students of Colour Collective (SOCC) asked for a larger amount than we thought would work for student voters. Additionally, the joint referendum question was put on the ballot by a vote at a UVSS Board meeting. Access wasn’t able to get our referendum question on the ballot this easily, which turned out to be a blessing in disguise.

Collecting 3,000 signatures on a petition for our referendum, as we did in September 2008, meant we had personally interacted with one of every five students. It was a tremendous outreach effort that, I believe, earned their respect.

I was surprised, following the referendum, at the lack of recognition that we were the agents of our own success. It did not seem to occur to anyone that we might have done everything right.

We selected a reasonable amount to ask for and our campaign was well thought out. Access is well organized, with great leadership and dedicated members.

My girlfriend, who is blind, was petitioning near the fountain and actually fell in. She went home to change clothes and headed right back out to collect more signatures.

I have cerebral palsy and found the outlay of energy exhausting. I also did some classroom speaking during the campaign. It was frustrating to find that the large classes in the MacLaurin Building, for example, were not accessible. There is supposed to be an elevator, but the professors didn’t have keys or know where to get them. So I could not even get to the front of these classes to speak. This in itself underlined the urgency of our cause, but was still tough to deal with. I persevered, as we all did.

We were rewarded with a “yes” from students, and we all deeply appreciate the new funding.