11 minute read
NEWS
HEGEMONIC HEALTHCARE Migrant Student Union hosts town hall on healthcare for international students
The rise in international student health fee causes financial stress
PRANJALI J MANN // NEWS WRITER
The Migrant Student Union (MSU) chapter at SFU organized a hybrid town hall for students on universal healthcare fees on June 23 alongside the Simon Fraser Student Society. International students from SFU, other Designated Learning Institutes in BC, and students from American universities presented their thoughts on the medical healthcare and dental fees international students pay.
The event was held in collaboration with other on campus groups and community organizations including the Teaching Support Staff Union (TSSU), Graduate Student Society (GSS), Sanctuary City Vancouver, and BC Health Coalition.
At SFU, new undergraduate, graduate, and exchange program international students are required to have medical insurance through Guard Me. Additionally, new international, exchange, and study abroad students are also required to apply for BC Medical Services Plan coverage.
An international student from Kwantlen Polytechnic University opened the discussion by saying he knew the pain and hardships international students faced, in addition to living away from family. He underlined the additional financial burden of any kind “adds up a lot of depression. And so I think this needs to be removed so we can help international students in a much more integrated way and in a positive way.”
A former SFU student also brought out the issue of exploitation of international students. They said, “It’s just getting worse. Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada is being The concern was echoed by Eshana Baran, SFSS vice president external and community affairs. Her presentation noted this healthcare fee is an unfair measure which negatively impacts international and migrant students.
Baran stated the international student health fee as of now is $75 per month, per person. Baran called it a “violation of Canada Health Act.” The Canada Health Act contains a principle of universality, where all residents of Canada are entitled to uniform terms and conditions.
She noted this fee was a double charge, imposed due to the health care switch from Medical Services Plan to the Employer Health Tax (EHT). Explaining further with some statistics, she noted students with families are burdened with as much as “around $150 per month, per family.”
Baran said, “In 2018, international students contributed $3.9 billion in GDP, $2.45 billion in labour income, and $392.9 billion in income tax.” According to Baran, “Essentially, Canadian universities and colleges are relying on international students to manage the budget shortfalls.
“The institutions just rely on international students to fund post-seconday education.”
Currently, international student healthcare fees are mandatory. PHOTO: Dom Fou / Unsplash
more horrible than ever, in terms of making sure everyone is precarious. Folks mentioned the inflation rates, but really it’s just like mental health crises — you just don’t have the support you need.”
An undergraduate student at SFU noted, “I realized that I have to get two jobs just to make ends meet, pay my tuition, paying rent, and groceries and everything like that [ . . . ] How I look at it is that migrant students, a lot of the time, subsidize everyone else’s education.” It was mentioned a government mandated 2% cap exists on tuition fee increases for domestic students but not for international students. Hence, for international students, “campuses can actually increase it by 10%. And students can’t do anything.”
SFU ALUMNI
A toolkit was also shared with attendees for those interested in learning more. Follow @msu.at.sfu for campaign updates.
Council discuss changes to policies on in-camera discussion
Council members concerned over the transparency of the executive’s governance
PRANJALI J MAN // NEWS WRITER
Policy amendment for in-camera sessions
At the June 22 Council meeting, Judit Nagy, SFSS vice president internal and organizational development, introduced a motion to suspend policy PM-1.2., which dictates how policy is notified and changed. This is because “a time sensitive situation has come up surrounding the amendment of old policies,” and would therefore “allow [the] Committee on Councillor Breaches of Confidence (CCBC) to continue its work expeditiously.” The motion passed and PM-1.2 was suspended.
After PM-1.2’s suspension, Council discussed time sensitive changes to R-9 and SO-22. The motion proposed only councillors and invited third-parties will be allowed into in-camera meetings. Additionally, if a councillor is not present for an in-camera meeting, they will not be given the information that was discussed.
Nagy stated the policy suspension had already been put into place in the last Board meeting in March. “This is highly, highly important to pass. We have work to do. This needs to be handled now,” said Nagy. our in-camera discussions are not granted any access to the in-camera discussions.” He added, “It’s very frustrating and very concerning. This is highly irregular, and I don’t see how you could desire it.”
Reed continued, “There’s just a lack of transparency that has taken place with regards to this. This was proposed within the last 24 hours, we were given no clear information about this, and now we’re asked to vote on it.”
Nagy responded, “That’s actually incorrect.” She said directors who are not present for in-camera meetings are not allowed to view the discussions, which “is not actually irregular.” She added, “I highly encourage Council to let CCBC do its job, and do it well.”
Rea Chatterjee, vice president equity and sustainability, added, “I just want to reiterate a sentiment that a lot of people have been saying: this is becoming increasingly concerning with the lack of transparency, and also the lack of time that was given to everyone for a decision this big. This undermines the democratic nature of the society as well.” After voting, 56% of Council voted in favour of Nagy’s policy amendment. This fell short of the two-third majority it required to be passed. The motion was not carried.
SFU Bridging for Future Initiative
Arthur Lee, sociology and anthropology councillor, presented the SFU Bridging for Future Initiative to Council. This initiative aimed at assisting and supporting students who are directly or indirectly affected by civil and international conflicts.
Lee highlighted the initiative as a support tool for students in response to major international conflicts, such as the Russian invasion of Ukraine. He stated this was in accordance with similar past attempts of the SFSS to support students through implementations like the Palestine policy.
This proposal is set out to roll in a three-step basis. The first step would include communicating with the university regarding what has been done already. This would be followed by consultations with SFSS and students to get an understanding about what the SFSS can do to support the student body. The third step would be to implement measures agreed upon in their student consultation in coordination between the SFSS, staff, and students.
You can’t champion your country’s human rights when serious inequalities remain unaddressed. PHOTO: JP Valery / Unsplash
We need to stop celebrating Canada Day
Why Reconciliation Day would be a better reflection of positive Canadian values
OLIVIA VISSER // STAFF WRITER
Content warning: mentions of anti-Indigenous violence and discrimination, residential schools Canada Day is a celebration of national pride. From endless hiking trails, to universal(-ish) healthcare, and Tim Horton’s, many Canadians get to celebrate their quality of life. However, not everyone shares this privilege to the same degree. And it’s due to our failure to provide those Canadian privileges to Indigenous peoples that we should cancel Canada Day in favour of a Day for National Reconciliation.
In this country, Indigenous people have historically suffered from and continue to endure systemic injustices that our government both caused and refuses to tangibly address. A celebration of a country’s history that takes place while a large segment of its citizenry is actively suffering isn’t innocent, it’s nationalistic. We’re minimizing the country’s colonial history and continuation of genocide in favour of an artificially positive vision of the country.
Canada’s history, inextricably linked, as it is, to violence and discrimination against Indigenous peoples is nothing to be celebrated — particularly when that celebration inevitably turns to talk of how Canada is uniquely multicultural. The treatment of Indigenous peoples makes the country’s claim to multiculturalism ring hollow.
Beyond having their land violently dispossessed, Indigenous people experienced cultural genocide by being forced into residential schools and forcibly stripped of their Indian Status through the Indian Act’s policy of enfranchisement. The enfranchisement process involved losing “their treaty and statutory rights as Indigenous peoples, and their right to live in the reserve community.” The Act also banned practices like potlatchs and the Sun Dance in a deliberate show of racism. The government was intentionally trying to establish its own eurocentric culture, yet nowadays people praise Canada for its public commitment to diversity. The central Canadian myth — that we value multiculturalism — is undermined by the history that we choose to celebrate every July 1st .
Today, Indigenous people continue to suffer the consequences of Canada’s genocidal past. The last residential school was only closed in 1996, so many survivors are still alive today. New unmarked graves are continuously added to over 1,300 that have been confirmed to be discovered so far at residential schools. For most Canadians, this is a devastating reminder of our history, but for Indigenous people, it’s a traumatic manifestation of the violence that still burdens survivors and their loved ones.
Before we begin to celebrate Canadian culture, we need to address our present-day injustices. The Canadian government still violates Indigenous rights by encroaching on their lands for resource development and denying basic needs like water and healthcare. We also need to seriously address the crisis of missing and murdered Indigenous women by moving away from performative gestures and towards measurable action. Land acknowledgments are essential but don’t generate substantial change on their own. The Canadian government can start by addressing the material well-being of those living on reserves by increasing funds for essential resources and restoring land rights. Reconciliation by our government is performative if many communities still lack access to safe drinking water, and live on land owned and controlled by the Crown.
Reconciliation isn’t as simple as holding hands and pretending everything is all sunshine and rainbows. A step
as simple as adding “Reconciliation Day” to the calendar, as the country did last year, isn’t enough. It is performative in the same way Canada claims to care about reconciliation, while still actively harming Indigenous communities — because every Canada Day we still celebrate being on stolen lands.
Reconciliation is just the starting point, not the endpoint, in accounting for the trauma that’s been forced onto Indigenous communities. It involves respecting Indigenous land rights, honouring treaties, and recognizing the contributions that Indigenous people have made to our society. It’s time to ditch Canada Day in favour of an alternative that actually accounts for our country’s dark history, and celebrates multiculturalism in a genuine manner.
We also can’t sit back and expect the government to entirely fix a problem caused in part by civilian complacency. Reconciliation involves individual as well as systemic solidarity. Canadians can donate to Indigenousrun mutual aid organizations as a way to directly support those affected by colonization. Indigenous Mutual Aid is one organization that offers emergency funds, medicine, and community resources to Indigenous people in need. Because these funds bypass government involvement, independent organizations like this can allocate their resources more effectively, with firsthand knowledge of where support is needed.
Canada is far from meeting the mark on reconciliation, but that doesn’t mean it’s a hopeless feat. The only real way forward is for everyone to recognize their place in this system that has targeted Indigenous communities since it began. Every settler in this country benefits from contributions made by Indigenous people who were subjected to genocide. Because of this, Canada Day should be permanently replaced with a Day for Reconciliation. We should have a holiday that reflects the values our society emptily articulates and should genuinely strive toward.
WHAT GRINDS OUR GEARS?
Two+ midterms
What do “midterm exams” really mean in a word with more than one midterm exam?
ILLUSTRATION: Angela Shen / The Peak
Course selection week! The best time of the semester — when we’re all absolutely drowning in school work. I gloss over prospective course syllabi and suddenly find myself in the shits; I’ve just found out the beloved required course for my degree has midterm exams . . . Plural. This is, of course, absurd. By definition, midterm means halfway. There can’t be more than one halfway point in the term. So then how can there be more than one midterm exam!?
Seeing the course syllabus on the SFU website already gives me anxiety. How are you gonna make me write more than two tests and call it “midterms”? Here, let’s make it easier for you. “Mid” is shorthand for “middle.” “Middle-term” exam. Feeling pretty silly having two or more of them now, aren’t you? The only acceptable definition of multiple midterms would have to be in the MIDDLE of TWO terms. Unless I’m pursuing TWO degrees at TWO different universities, I should not be taking TWO MIDDLE term exams. Do you know how embarrassing it is to have two midterms? Especially during a conversation when your friends ask, “What do you mean you have a midterm? The semester is done in three weeks.” Like what is that about? Oh, and why the hell are you giving out a “midterm” exam two weeks after the semester has started? I digress. You want students to take your class with minimal test anxiety? Don’t call it a “midterm exam,” just call them unit tests. Midterms are exactly what it describes. Mid. It may be the most insignificant things students complain about during our time at SFU, but don’t fucking push me on it.
