|
|
| Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User
|
|
| Support uws |
 |
|
|
|
|
| WPIRG referendum campaign heats up |
Contributed by: Morgan on Wednesday, March 23 2005 @ 03:46 PM CST
|
With the WPIRG referendum less than a week away, the battle between the Yes and the No committees is heating up.
No less than three fines were levied for comments made prior to the campaign period. A Friday, March 11 front-page Imprint article, entitled "Allegations Fly As Referendum Looms," contained statements from members of both the Yes and the No committees. Both sides were fined 15% of their spending limit. In addition, an opinion piece by Tom Levesque in the same issue, entitled "Sayanora and so long, WPIRG," prompted the referendum committee to levy an additional 15% fine against the Yes committee.
Both sides have been ordered to alter their campaign materials. The Yes committee, which had been using the website wpirg.com, was ordered to change their website. The referendum committee stated, "...the acronyms are identical and the Yes Team's use of it is in poor taste." They were also required to alter their posters, which claimed that $10,131.00 of fees collected from students were spent on "union dues." In fact, the money was paid to the Ontario Public Interest Research Group, a registered charity, and the Yes committee was ordered to change its posters.
For its part, the No committee was fined for comments on a website called uchangetheworld.org, as the comments were posted before the start of the campaign period. The No committee was also ordered to change wording regarding the $4.75 per term collected from students. Their website stated that the fee was refundable, without mentioning that this is only possible during the first three weeks of term. They were ordered to include this information.
The Federation of Students has not remained impartial in this debate. In a motion passed at their meeting on March 13, Students' Council passed a motion resolving that they "adopt a 'no' position on the referendum question," as they didn't feel it was a viable response to the issue of refundable fees. They also directed the executive members not involved with the administration of the referendum to advocate this stance.
This Feds decision was not without controversy. Following the motion being passed, David Wheatley resigned as a Math Co-op councillor. In a statement to uwstudent.org, he explained that once Council passed the resolution, he felt he could not represent his constituents' interests while advocating the Federation's 'official stance.' He felt that Council was taking "a universal stance on an issue [it] should remain impartial in," and that by doing so, it was "jeopardiz[ing] the referendum process."
Students will vote online on March 28 and 29 at feds.ca, and will answer the following question:
Currently each full time undergraduate University of Waterloo student pays $9.50 for every 8 month academic year to Waterloo Public Interest Research Group (WPIRG). Do you support the termination of the WPIRG levy?
|
| |
|
|
|
| Authored by: VOTE YES TO RID OF WPIRG on Thursday, March 24 2005 @ 04:44 PM CST |
| . [ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: uw student on Thursday, March 24 2005 @ 05:32 PM CST |
Disqualification of Yes Committee
Referendum Committee Decision Twelve
Throughout the referendum campaign there have been reports that both Yes and No Committee campaign materials, specifically posters, have been torn down, thrown away, moved from their original locations, or otherwise interfered with.
Campaign material interference is a violation of section 2.o of the referenda procedure, and is damaging to the referendum as a whole, as posters are an important method of campaigning to voters.
On March 24, 2005, the Referendum Committee received a specific complaint with photographic evidence showing that a Yes Team poster had been posted on top of a No Team poster.
The Referendum Committee investigated this allegation. The Yes poster in question had an official election material stamp, meaning that it had been approved by the Referendum Committee and had been stamped by a member of the Yes team prior to being posted. The poster was affixed to the No Team campaign material by masking tape and showed no signs of having been removed from a previous location and re-affixed.
This is a violation of section 2.o of the referenda procedure. Committees shall not interfere with the campaign materials of the other committee, and under section 2.v of the referenda procedure, committees are liable for campaign violations, however occurring and committee chairs are responsible for the actions of their campaign workers. This sort of violation is unacceptable.
The Referendum Committee hereby disqualifies the Yes Committee from the Referendum.
As per section d.2, subsections H, I, and J, the members of the Yes Committee will not be eligible as a committee if a new referendum is called. Furthermore, the Yes Committee will not be reimbursed for any referendum expenses.
The Yes Committee must also remove all of its posters and other campaign material within 48 hours of this decision being made public. The Yes Committee is no longer allowed to send email messages encouraging students to vote in the referendum, nor can buttons or other campaign material be displayed. The Yes Committee’s website must also be taken offline.
Any noncompliance with the above ruling will be considered a violation of the referenda procedure.[ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Craig Sloss on Thursday, March 24 2005 @ 11:51 PM CST |
Currently each full time undergraduate University of Waterloo student pays $9.50 for every 8 month academic year to Waterloo Public Interest Research Group (WPIRG). Do you support the termination of the WPIRG levy?
I have a friend who gets his WPIRG refund every term -- so it's not true that each student pays money to WPIRG. So the preamble of this question is a blatantly false. I'm surprised this particular wording of the question actually made it to referendum. My understanding is that this particular wording is used because it was worded that way on the petition.
The Feds may want to consider amending their referendum policy to require that proposed questions be factually correct, or to allow Council to rewrite the questions so that they are accurate and fair. Or, maybe a better solution is to not allow petitioners to write questions, but rather simply specify a topic and have the question written by an impartial group.
I'm not an expert on Feds policy, but I'm wondering if someone made a petition saying "Everyone student pays $500 to WPIRG each week. Do you support the termination of the WPIRG levy?" and got enough people to sign it, would the Feds be obligated to run a referendum with that question?
[ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: hmm on Saturday, March 26 2005 @ 09:23 AM CST |
NO was fined 45%, YES was fined 60%...that's only one more than the other...shouldn't they be disqualified only when they are fined up to 100%?
[ Parent ]
|
| |
| Authored by: FEDS on Monday, March 28 2005 @ 11:38 AM CST |
Referendum Committee Decision 13
March 28, 2005
On Thursday March 24, 2005, at 2:49PM, the Referendum Committee disqualified
the Yes Team from the referendum.
The Yes Team was required, under section D.2.j, to remove all their posters,
take down their committee website, and refrain from further campaigning.
The Yes Team was given 48 hours to comply with the Referendum Committee’s
ruling.
On Thursday, March 24, 2005 at 5:08PM, Yes Team chair Nic Weber sent an
email that stated in part as follows:
Mr. Sweet has withdrawn our funding and ordered our committee to remove our
posters. We will not remove our posters.
As of 2:49PM, on Saturday, March 26, the deadline as specified by the
Referendum Committee, the Yes Team’s campaign posters were still posted
around campus. As well, their website, www.uwvoteyes.ca, was still online.
This noncompliance with the Referendum Committee’s March 24th ruling is
considered a violation of referenda procedure section 2.o. Furthermore, the
Yes team’s actions have jeopardized the fairness and the dignity of the
referendum process. Continuing to campaign after being directed by the
Referendum Committee to cease campaigning shows disrespect to the referendum
process, the Federation of Students, and the student voters at the
University of Waterloo.
Therefore the Referendum Committee declares this referendum to be void, as
per section D.2.f.ii of the referenda procedure.
Voting in this referendum will be halted effective immediately and the
ballots taken offline.
-----------------
For further information please contact:
Brandon Sweet
Chief Returning Officer
Federation of Students, University of Waterloo
www.feds.ca
519-888-4567 x6781
[ Parent ]
|
| |
|
|
|
