|
By Steve Weatherbe
THE University of Victoria Student Society’s
board of directors has reversed a decision of its clubs council to fund the
campus pro-life club – without giving the club an opportunity to
defend itself.
Giving Youth Protecting Youth (YPY) notice that the
issue would come up, or that a hearing would be held, was not necessary,
according to board chair Caitlin Meggs.
She took this stance because, she said, the board was
merely reaffirming a decision it made last term, when the issue was
thoroughly aired.
“The board is made up of elected representatives
of the student body, and have the final decision on how their money is
spent,” Meggs said.
“There’s no guaranteed funding – and
we had to decide whether we should fund a group whose message we believe is
anti-choice.”
The student society is indeed pledged to support
women’s unrestricted access to abortion.
But when YPY fought for funding last term, it contended
that the student society’s own constitution stated a club could be
penalized by defunding only if it were found to have
“intimidated” students with its actions or messaging. The
constitution required a hearing with due notice on the question, once a
complaint was made.
Last term, the clubs council voted not to fund YPY,
after a women’s rights club complained. YPY appealed and the board
supported the clubs council.
This term, the clubs council voted overwhelmingly to
fund YPY – and the board summarily overruled it.
YPY president Anastasia Pearse, who had prepared to
argue the issue at the clubs council meeting but found no one present who
wanted to speak in opposition, was surprised that the student society board
would make a decision without warning.
“This decision contradicts clubs policy and
contradicts the board’s actions last term,” she said.
Continue article >>
|
Apart from failing to provide notice and a fair
hearing, the board also reversed itself on supporting the decision of clubs
council, she argued.
Furthermore, she charged, the student society is
attacking her group’s right to free speech, by taking away funds as
punishment for publicizing the club’s pro-life message.
But Meggs responded: “I don’t see how we
are taking away their right to free speech. They can still put up posters
and use school or society spaces for their events. I don’t think the
loss of $70 to $100 is going to stop them, especially since they have
outside support.”
However, the original complaint against YPY last year
was launched when posters the club put up with student society approval
were deemed offensive by campus feminists and torn down.
Pearse says YPY will appeal the decision at the next
board meeting, and carry on with its activities. She says the board’s
ruling is part of a concerted effort by pro-choice student societies across
Canada to exclude pro-life messaging from campuses.
This campaign, she notes has been condemned even by the
ardently pro-choice Canadian Civil Liberties Association, as an attack on
free speech.
April 2009
|
