The World of Sam Reynolds

It was the climax of the week. Delegates had been in meetings and workshops since noon on Wednesday, shaping the policies that would guide the Canadian Federation of Students through the next year. The closing plenary was in its final hours, and tensions were running high.

Criticisms had arisen about the perceived bias of chair. Gregory Johannson, president of the Canadian Federation of Students Quebec accused said her bias was “implicit” throughout the beginning  of the plenaries, but then became obvious in the last two hours of the plenary leading up to the vote on the contentions Motion 6.

Put forward as a response to quell defederation attempts on campuses across Canada, Motion 6 states that the number of signatures required to start a deferedarion attempt from a CFS school – the act would remove a student union from CFS affiliation – must be 20 per cent of the student population, doubling the current requirement of 10 per cent. In addition, it would prohibit two defederation campaigns from taking place simultaneously, and prevent a referendum from taking place more than once every five years at any university. Critics call it the Federation’s death blow to democracy.

When the clock struck ten o’clock, an order of the day was called by a delegate in the meeting. This was ignored by the chair, and she went so far as to verbally accost the delegate who called this order. Business marched forward and a vote was called on Motion 6.

According to their own bylaws, the CFS uses Robert’s Rules of Order to dictate the procedure of voting on motions. Robert’s Rules are a staple to democratic institutions: loosely modeled upon the practices found in the United States House of Representatives, these rules of order are used in deliberative assemblies ranging in size from Church meetings to the United Nations.

During the vote on Motion 6, which was supposed to be governed by Robert’s Rules of Order, abstentions were not counted.  According to the rules, if a delegate cannot attend their vote is not counted. However, if they do attend and do not vote on a motion their vote still counts towards the total voting members. This then increases the amount required to reach a majority; the disregarding of abstentions would make it easier for this magic number to be reached.  When a delegate pointed this out to the chair, the chair did not agree.

“We’ll see you in Court!” said Andrew Haig, treasurer of CFS Quebec to the chair.

Then CFS Quebec delegates began to walk out of the meeting. One by one they demonstrated their contempt with the process by walking out of the room.

When a delegate walks out of a meeting, it epitomizes their disgust and contempt for the process currently unfolding. A recent example of this is the Canadian walk out of Ahmadinejad’s speech to the UN in September. When the unlawfully elected President of Iran took to the podium and began delivere his usual rhetoric, Canadian UN Delegate Lawrence Cannon walked out of the room followed by the French and German delegates. This showed that these delegates were so opposed to the content of the speech that they would not even tolerate listening to it. Essentially, the spectacle of an organized delegate walk out is a symbolic middle finger to the presenter, and to a lesser extent the institution that allowed the presenter on the podium.

In the case of the CFS Quebec walkout, the disposal of democracy that is motion 6 and the disregard for the CFS’ own bylaws that took place was only the tip of the iceberg. It was the last straw in a tumultuous relationship that has taken place between the National and Quebec branch. To truly understand the animosity between the two organizations, one must look into their colourful history and specifically the role of Noah Stewart.

The Saga of Noah Stewart

At the November 2007 Annual General Meeting, CFS National passed Standing Resolution 31, despite opposition from Quebec Delegates, which replaced the existing CFS Q with a “puppet” wing under the national agency. This organization ran parallel to the CFS Quebec, formally knows at the Canadian Federation of Students Quebec Component Inc, which was recognized by a supermajority of CFS delegates as being the legitimate Quebec CFS branch.

Standing Resolution 31 was approved by members at the 2007 AGM under the auspice that it was a parallel organization with the sole mandate of being a temporary stopgap while CFS Quebec was frozen in legal proceedings.  However, when the court case was lifted Standing Resolution 31 was not repealed allthough motions to repeal it were introduced at AGM.

In the 2008-2009 financial year the overlap of respective CFS organizations wasn’t a problem as Quebec representative Noah Stewart, and National Deputy Chair, was residing in Quebec and allowed both organizations to work harmoniously. However, when his term drew to a close he refused to step down so a collective of Quebec schools had to go to court in order to force him to step down. Literally hours before he was scheduled to appear in court his lawyers and CFS Quebec lawyers met and drew up an agreement which would govern the operations and transition process of CFS Quebec.

Sources claim that he has since breached conditions, though exact details are protected by a non disclosure clause in the transition agreement.

CFS Quebec executives have expressed some doubt whether he was sitting as national Quebec representative for CFS-Quebec or national representative for the parallel CFS Quebec organization created by Standing Resolution 31. These are two different positions, yet there only has been one election.

Items that the transition agreement ordered handed over when Stewart stepped down have yet to be received: CFS Quebec executives state that no minute books, general books, employee contracts, or payroll documents have been handed over. This transfer was supposed to have been completed by July of this year.

During the last year $95,000 that was paid to CFS Quebec by CFS National was delivered in a system of grants that was geared towards paying bills, employees, and other overhead. This was paid out of the money that was supposed to go to CFS Quebec, but was diverted to the national bank account. These $95,000 represents only a portion of money that was diverted from CFS Quebec to CFS National, according to CFS Quebec executives. Executives have not been able to get any information of the parallel branch of CFS Quebec to which this money was transferred by CFS Quebec as the National office refused requests for access to financial and minute books.

CFS Quebec Treasuer, Andrew Haig, has seen cheque requisitions of $300,000 to be transferred to the parallel CFS Quebec. It’s questionable as to why $300,000 went to a organization created by a standing resolution that has never had an election. Essentially, it was Noah Stewart Inc.

CFS Quebec has been in and out of court with Stewart over the transition agreement, but they would neither confirm nor deny any current legal proceedings against Stewart in regards to this missing money. The last communiqué executives had with Stewart, in the form of a letter, indicated that he had given up his residency in Quebec , therefore he was no longer under the jurisdiction of Quebec courts and claimed that any legal proceedings must be started again in Ontario, his current province of residency.

The objective of CFS National and Stewart appears to be an attempt to extract as much money as possible from CFS Quebec and the students in the province, to meet the objectives of the national office rather than the legitimate branch of CFS Quebec

Hence the impetus for the animosity.

A reform package, intended to democratize the CFS, was presented to the Annual General Meeting and was shot down. Gregory Johannson, president of the legitimate CFS Quebec, said that the “The CFS is digging their own grave” with such actions.

“We attended the conference believing we could find a compromise with the executive over the reform package, but compromise requires good faith – on both sides.” He continued.

Andrew Haig, treasurer of the CFS Quebec points out that “If they [the executive] had passed even one quarter of the proposals the CFS would have solved all of its problems by showing that it was open to reform and the concerns of its members.

Johannson concludes by arguing that “The CFS executive, by contrast, were interested in winning at any cost, rather than addressing the grave concerns of their members”

CFS Quebec had been holding CFS National to account, and thus they were undermined.