JesseAtGazette
MaddieAtGazette
AmberAtGazette
AaronAtGazette
CamAtGazette
CherylAtGazette
GloriaAtGazette
JasonAtGazette
JesicaAtGazette
JulianAtGazette
KaitAtGazette
KalAtGazette
NicoleAtGazette
NairaAtGazette
SophiaAtGazette
The University Students’ Council is taking a novel approach with its campaign to renovate the University Community Centre.
Wednesday night, the USC decided against using a yes/no campaign, which would pit two sides against each other to win student votes for a referendum this February.
Instead, the council voted in favour of an information campaign, which offers “just the facts” about the renovations, according to USC president Emily Rowe.
This will be the second referendum on the future of UCC space usage, with the first campaign getting shot down by students last February when the “no” side of a yes/no campaign argued successfully against the proposed $95 student fee increase.
This year, the USC is trying again with a $25 fee and a new approach.
Matthijs Van Gaalen, a senator-at-large for the USC, was one of approximately four people at this week’s council meeting who argued in favour of a yes/no campaign.
“With a contentious issue like this, I believe students are better informed by debate happening where people are responsible for providing alternative perspectives,” Van Gaalen, said. “Issues are more enlightened when debate is ongoing.”
By night’s end, council voted nearly unanimously in favour of an information campaign.
Melissa McClelland, president of the media, information and technoculture students’ council, spoke in favour of the information campaign.
“In the interest of representing the students we should take a step back,” she explained. “The information somewhat speaks for itself.”
Three of four referendums and plebiscites since 2006 used yes/no campaigns with mixed results. Only the bus pass referendum in March used an information campaign.
“If you look at the bus pass, an information campaign got the information out to so many more students and the voter turnout was massive,” Rowe said.
She argued using an information campaign was appropriate because surveys have shown for years students want renovations.
While a yes/no campaign pits two groups against each other to win student votes, one side traditionally gets more promotion and attention, which results in more votes, she said.
David Simmonds was the USC vice-president external affairs in 2008 when a plebiscite on selling cigarettes in the UCC was conducted using a yes/no campaign.
He took on the no campaign and lost, arguing the yes side had more support from councillors who were actively promoting their position.
But he said a yes/no campaign is preferable because it encourages students to care about the issues.
“To suggest that you can provide information to someone without being biased, it’s a little naive,” he said of this year’s information campaign. “I don’t know how providing information on the benefits of increasing student fees is without bias.”
Rowe responded, saying information about the result of a yes vote will naturally appear to favour that position.
“The situation itself sounds so biased but realistically it’s not,” she explained, adding the USC is looking at what they will do if the renovation is refused so they can better represent that possibility during the campaign.
“If the students says no, we’re happy to cater to what the majority says,” she said.
Van Gaalen also took issue with the referendum question, which includes a list of ways the renovation will improve the 90,000 square feet of space in the UCC including “additional lounge, 24-hour study, programmable, meeting and storage space.”
Van Gaalen argued it doesn’t explain what will happen if the referendum is shot down.
“We don’t know what’s going to happen if we vote no, and we do know what’s going to happen if we vote yes,” he said. “A yes vote is ‘certainty,’ a no vote is ‘uncertainty.’ A person will usually vote for certainty.”
Sasha Kumar, vice-president finance for the USC, said there is no money to renovate the space without the referendum passing, meaning they will have to seek alternatives.
“It’s a very likely possibility that we will give the space to UWO and we won’t have control over what happens to the space,” he said.