STEVEN BACHIU
Opinions Writer

I feel that the performance of the USSU executive, to this point in the year, has been exceptional.

I appreciate the stands taken to secure funding for student housing and against tuition increases, the progress on the Gordon Oakes-Red Bear Student Centre and the progress of the Place Riel renovations.

However, without a significant change, I will be voting against any of the USSU vice-presidents or president that choose to run for re-election.

You must be wondering what has gotten my knickers in such a knot, if you are still reading — either that, or you have a long wait for the bus. What has me in such a dither is the USSU’s handling of the BHP/PotashCorp fiasco. My objections are not with the position taken, per se, but with the way that the situation has been handled.

Speculation about the proposed hostile takeover of PotashCorp began in August, with an offer being made official on Aug. 20. Throughout September and October, various changes were made to the offer as different groups weighed in. Russian and Chinese groups made some plays for power, until finally, on Oct. 28, the University of Saskatchewan Student’s Union took a public stance against the bid by BHP Billiton. As we all know, one week later, the Canadian government adopted this same stance, and officially blocked the takeover bid. 

I drag you back through this long, drawn-out process to make a very simple point. It took over two months from the inception of this issue for a response to be formulated by the USSU. There was ample time to debate and discuss the merits of the different positions that the USSU could have taken on the issue. There was likely even enough time to hold a referendum and allow the student body to be heard. I can think of no reason why a position should have been taken on this issue without first consulting students or the University Student Council. This is, however, forgivable.

What is absolutely not forgivable is the response of the executive members of the USSU, when asked to account for their actions.

The executive’s knee-jerk response was to point fingers at the Edwards School of Business. This had little to do with the issue of whether the executive should take unilateral action, and was a clear example of deflecting attention.

The executive also attempted to justify their anti-BHP stance. This was not, and is not, the issue. I happen to agree with the decision and am glad that a decision was made. However, it was a decision that easily could have been made with the backing of all (or most) of the colleges, if time had been taken to debate the issue during USC meetings.

Finally, the USSU executive refused to soften their stance that they had done exactly the right thing. I cannot accept that it is right for the executive — or, more specifically, President Stoicheff — to speak on behalf of the entire USSU (which includes me) without consulting the various student groups he represents, when the means to do so are so close at hand.

Here is how I believe the situation should have been handled. Ideally, early in the process, in a USC meeting, the issue would have been raised and a lively debate would have ensued. This would likely have been carried over to another meeting, when a decision would have been made, with the USSU likely issuing a statement identical to the one drafted by Chris Stoicheff. However, there is a chance that there wouldn’t have been enough support for the statement, even given the evidence supporting it. If so, then the statement should not have been made because it would not reflect the opinions of students.

However, if circumstances dictated that a position had to be taken without consultation, condescension and high-handedness are not the way to deal with a group of grieved students who disapprove of actions being taken on their behalf.

An appropriate response would be an apology, along with a promise to work to prevent further misunderstandings.

When I stated, earlier in this piece, that we need a new executive, I meant it and I still do. I don’t mean to suggest that we need impeachment or to stage a coup to get rid of the current batch. I mean that the current USSU executive needs to adjust their outlook, learn to take responsibility and ownership for their actions and apologize.

I said earlier, as well, that our executive has for the most part done an exceptional job and meant that as well. Any executive member who takes action to either apologize to the student council or to prevent further issues will virtually guarantee themselves my vote if they choose to run for re-election.

– –