THE UNIVERSITY OF SASKATCHEWAN’S MAIN CAMPUS IS SITUATED ON TREATY 6 TERRITORY AND THE HOMELAND OF THE MÉTIS.
THE UNIVERSITY OF SASKATCHEWAN’S MAIN CAMPUS IS SITUATED ON TREATY 6 TERRITORY AND THE HOMELAND OF THE MÉTIS.
Excerpt of University Students’ Council meeting
VICTORIA MARTINEZ
Senior News Editor
University of Saskatchewan Student’s Union President Chris Stoicheff let emotions boil over when a councillor questioned the USSU’s official anti-BHP Billiton stance presented two weeks ago.
While the PotashCorp bid in question — in which BHP Billiton once again attempted a hostile takeover — was rejected last week by the federal government, the aftermath is still causing heated debate at the U of S.
Stoicheff was the face of the public USSU stance against the hostile takeover Oct. 28. The move was discussed afterwards at council, as many councillors expressed discomfort with the stand being taken without student council’s input. But Stoicheff missed the Oct. 28 meeting to be in Washington and vice president external Blair Schumlich adressed the questions.
Edward’s School of Business councillor Reid Nystuen reiterated the concerns at the Nov. 4 student council meeting to give Stoicheff a chance to explain the executive’s motivations.
“Last week the executive made a unilateral decision to support blocking the BHP bid. Now the time has come and gone for that decision to be made,” said Nystuen. “When making a major decision [the executive] should consult students and council.”
He emphasized ESB’s publicly neutral stance on the PotashCorp bid and that the takeover has been ongoing for the past two months. He felt that council could have been warned in those two months that the executive was thinking of taking action. His comments set off a debate that required the extension of the question and comments period.
Stoicheff embarked on a 10-minute response to Nystuen’s comments and the minutes of the previous week. During his response, he failed to address Nystuen through the chair of the board, making personal comments to the councillor and his college. He denied that the decision was by any means “unilateral,” called into question the neutrality of ESB on the potash bid and defended his actions as non-partisan.
All major political parties pushed to block the BHP takeover and the USSU lined up with that stance. The USSU decision was made along with the University of Regina students’ union.
“I don’t think I’ve once accused you of partisan politics… but obviously that’s something you felt the need to address,” Nystuen clarified in his reply to Stoicheff’s comments. He also highlighted the university administrations’s neutrality, in contrast to the USSU’s action.
University president Peter MacKinnon told reporters before the bid was rejected, “It’s not for the university to take a position [on BHP’s bid].”
ESB councillor, Alicia Nagy, felt “blindsided” by the executive’s decision.
“It’s not the reason behind the decisions that councillors take issue with…. [It’s] taking a stance we were not even consulted on is what the councillors are taking issue with,” she explained.
The USSU executive has the ability to make decisions not directly pertaining to students, from an operating bylaw, and acted within those rights.
The bylaw says that the executive has the right to formulate decisions, and must be accountable to council.
“That’s what I’m doing right now; I’m answering your question,” he said to Nystuen.
Stoicheff defended the executive’s decision. “It is odd to say you want to be consulted without having any issues with the decision. This was the right decision to make at the time.”
“We are being asked if we have disagreements in retrospect,” replied arts and science councillor Katie Salmers. Along with several other council members, she asked that the executive, “Let us know that that’s what you’re doing… so at least we knew that window [to act] was coming.”
See related: The USSU vs. BHP Billiton: Stoicheff explains
Engineering councillor Leejay Schmidt suggested the use of email for time-sensitive decisions.
Vice president Scott Hitchings added: “We have the right to act on issues like this, but we also have the responsibility to do it…. In this instance we had to pull the trigger.”
With reference to the exact timing of the executive’s statement against BHP’s hostile takeover, Stoicheff enumerated 12 reasons the executive made its statement on the Oct. 28 specifically.
As evidence of ESB’s PotashCorp bias, the USSU president pointed to the U of S rally held in the ESB reading room five days before the federal PotashCorp decision was made.
PotashCorp pep rally
The U of S PotashCorp rally organizers have stated that the event was held solely to celebrate previous PotashCorp donations, like to the football field, and that the date was decided back in April.
“The pep rally was something held by the university…. We can’t really say ”˜you can’t book a room in our college,’ ” responded Nystuen.
Stoicheff also cited conversations with the ESB student president Amber Johnson as contributing to the executive’s decision.
Last year, the executive publicly condemned Brad Trost’s anti-LGBT comments, attacks on freedom of assembly in Iran and supported safe sex initiatives in Africa.
Stoicheff said that the precedent for the executive’s decision without council’s consultation was set with those decisions. He singled out the returning ESB representatives Nagy and Nystuen for having “never once brought up wanting to speak up,” about those decisions.
