The tragedy of obsolescence
Why UMSU has become irrelevant
JESSE BEACH, VOLUNTEER STAFF
We are a lucky few. Though some may disparage the University of Manitoba, the simple fact remains that we are members of a well-respected university. Forget the Maclean’s rankings; a professional ranking of world universities conducted by a European educational institution has recently ranked the U of M as the second-best university in the country at “preparing students adequately for professional activities.” Akosua Matthews recently became the 87th Rhodes scholar to come from the University of Manitoba, which is more than any other Western Canadian university has produced. The university has also just announced that Mavis N. Matenge, a commonwealth scholar and human rights advocate from Botswana, is now a member of our own Arthur V. Mauro Centre for Peace and Justice, the only doctoral program of its kind in Canada and one of only a handful worldwide.
Beyond these academic achievements, the University of Manitoba is also unique in its belief that a post-secondary education is not solely the right of a small, privileged few. We maintain that every person, of whatever background, deserves an opportunity to receive an education, and our admission policy reflects that attitude. As a student, I am privileged to attend and study at what I feel to be one of the finest institutions in the country.
This commitment to the community should hold a distinctive place in the thoughts of students now more than ever, as Manitoba has seen fit to recognise Louis Riel’s commitment to the people of this province with a new provincial holiday.
Louis Riel was hung for treason on Nov. 16, 1885, an unrelenting victim of a racist government. Riel fought and died for a cause he strongly believed in, the belief that all people, even the discriminated-against Métis deserved to be treated with respect and dignity. As a student of a university that maintains the right of an education for all, I am confident that Riel would join his will with mine in the assertion of our university’s pre-eminence. After all, in Riel’s own words, “Life, without the dignity of an intelligent being, is not worth having.”
However, much like the government that set out to silence Riel, there are those among us who fail to realize our school’s dominance, those who would strip the university of its ability to offer a quality education. These people, much like the government of Sir John A. MacDonald, are the supposed “protectors” of our rights; they are the representatives of our own student union.
A group whose very purpose is to defend the rights of students has ironically decided to make it their sole mission to undermine the very university that the student body makes up. UMSU boasts an impressive number of functions on its website: advocating on behalf of students, keeping students informed of UMSU decisions, and working with elected representatives across the country to lobby for a higher quality, accessible post-secondary education. Not to mention the fact that they run the numerous services and student-owned and operated businesses across campus. However, in the eyes of many, UMSU has merely been riding the same tired old horse for the past eight years — the continuation of the provincial tuition freeze. Far from “Lobby[ing] for a higher quality . . . education,” UMSU is handicapping our university, slowly removing us from competition with the nation’s top universities.
Unlike UMSU, however, I will not beat this one topic to death at the expense of all the other functions that they are not performing. After all, acting as a lobby to the provincial government is only one of the functions listed in the UMSU constitution. One of the key aspects of this constitution, in place since 1940, is to attain continuity of student government. Sounds like nothing, right? It seems that UMSU believes so, anyway, because that is exactly what they have been doing. Attaining a continuity of student government is not, as UMSU so obviously believes, merely sustaining their own existence, collecting pay cheques and continuing programs and businesses long-since-established. It also involves attaining the continued relevance of the office, initiating new programs and new ideas, not merely continuing the stagnant ideals of those long since past.
UMSU, as an institution, has grown complacent. They are no longer expanding and meeting new goals, rather they are decaying, becoming increasingly irrelevant to student affairs. The fact that the current governing body was elected by default is evidence to this effect. Part of the problem lies with us; as a student body we have ignored the office into near insignificance. But it is also the responsibility of those elected, regardless of the quality or presence of their competition, to elevate the status of the office. The continuity of student government is not an empty term designed to justify UMSU’s continued existence; it is a clear mission statement that demands the student union facilitate personal contacts, bring the university into closer contact with the people, and make academic proposals that matter.
I am aware that UMSU runs a great number of student groups, businesses, and services. I am aware that many students use and even depend on many of these services. But in order for UMSU to fully meet their own constitutional guidelines, they cannot be merely satisfied with sustaining their own existence. They cannot rest on the laurels of previous governments, touting their predecessors acclaim as that of their own. They must expand their office, expand their services, or at least become more involved in student life on a personal level. If we are not going to remember or respect what UMSU has done, then we could at least respect their attempts to gauge the individual concerns of the student body.
Jesse Beach is a fourth-year English student.
