1

10

11

12

13

MSU-CASA COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS BETWEEN OUSA AND CASA AND WHAT AN MSU MEMBERSHIP STATUS REPRESENTS TO OUR CONSTITUENTS

FEDERALISM: A Brief Introduction Any comparative analysis of a provincial lobbying organization such as the Ontario Undergraduate Students Alliance (OUSA) and a federal lobbying organization such as the Canadian Association of Student Alliances (CASA), would be incomplete without an initial, and very basic introduction to the way in which government is organized in Canada. This is important because the organization of government in this country ultimately has an impact on the way education is addressed. To begin Canada is a federal state. What this means is that Canadas governance system is a combination of shared rule through a central government (The Federal government) on matters common to all citizens, and local self rule, through provicial governments, on matters involving regionally distinctive issues.1 In both the Canadian Constitution Acts, 1867 and 1982, section 93 gave provinces exclusive jurisdiction over education within their boundaries. The official documents of which can be accessed here:http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/const/3.html. The provincial and territorial legislatures have developed their own educational structures and institutions, creating 13 education systems. Responsibility for education is usually exercised through one or more departments or ministries responsible for education at the provincial level. WHY LOBBY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT? Public post-secondary educational institutions in Canada derive most of their direct funding from provincial and territorial, governments. However, the federal government departments play an indirect role in funding post-secondary education. Nearly 40% (386,000) of all full-time post-secondary students receive student loans. Outside of Qubec and the North

West Territories, approximately 60% of student loans come from the federal government government. Moreover, the federal government also funds postpost-secondary education through transfer payments to the provinces through the Canada Social Transfer (CST). In total, the federal government contributes approximately $16 billion annually to the post secondary sector. A key distinction must be made here. CASA is the organization who lobbies the federal government to construct and reconfigure the national budget in order to increase (whether incrementally or substantially) the amount of funding they allocate for programs and to the provincial governments in the first place.

1 Herman Bakvis and Herman and Grace Skogstad. Canadian Federalism: Performance, Effectiveness, and Legitimacy in Canadian Federalism, ed. by Herman Bakvis et al. (Grace Skogstad. Ontario: Oxford University Press.) 3.

Therefore OUSA has the advantage of being able to lobby individual provicial governments for the way in which funding already allocated to the provinces for education from the federal government is distributed. It is key that members understand that this is one of the key reasons we tend to see so much more tangible success from OUSA in comparison to CASA. However, through intense lobbying, CASA successfully serves the function of applying continual diplomatic and strategic pressure to the federal government for increases in educational funding to the provinces. Ultimately CASA successfully ensures that the federal government remains cognizant of the fact that post secondary education must remain a priority in Canada. OUSA lobbies the provicial governments for the best ways to allocate the funding they receive from the federal government in order to maximize benefits to students in post secondary educational institutions. Therefore it is important to have a lobby organization working at the federal level even when education is primarily an issue of provincial jurisdiction. While the provicial governments have discretion over the way in which they allocate funding for post secondary education (whether it be $310 million in additional funding for 20,000 new post-secondary spaces in 2010, or $81 million in student financial assistance improvements in 2010,) it is the federal government who provides the a large portion of the funding to eventually facilitate all of these policies and initiatives. WHAT DOES A FULL CASA MEMBERSHIP MEMBERS HIP POTENTIALLY REPRESENT TO OUR CONSTITUENTS? Aside from the direct comparison between the functions of OUSA and CASA, there is another aspect to the pivotal decision the assembly must make with respect to our CASA membership. The MSUMSU -CASA membership status sta tus holds more weight then a routine

financial decision. Our membership status with respect to a federal lobby organization such as CASA whos mandate is to represent and promote the interests of post-secondary students to the federal government, is a representation of the type of student union we wish to be, and the type of student union we wish to present ourselves as, to McMaster students. Our decision to pull away from CASA is just as important as our decisions to become full members and speaks volumes as to what we as a student union consider our priorities. Becoming a full member of CASA is a message that even though we may not be able to directly change many of the most challenging aspects of post secondary education for students such as tuition rates, we are maximizing the possibility that these challenges will diminish. The decision to become a member of not only one lobbying organization but two lobbying organizations, (one at the provincial level and one at the federal level,) is proof that the MSU is truly committed to improving the university experience of every MSU student. It is certainly true that whether or not the MSU goes on to become a full member of CASA, CASA will continue to lobby the federal government to increase the level of funding they allocate to education. It is also true that since CASA will continue to lobby the federal government, the MSU will benefit from any positive changes that are achieved as a result of CASAs efforts. As a result, members may be asking themselves if it truly appropriate (especially considering the less then desirable fiscal state of the MSU currently) that the MSU decide to become a full member of CASA when they will likely benefit from any positive changes the federal government may follow through with, regardless of whether or not we are full members of the lobby organization? In deciding your answer to this question, consider the following: As student representatives we are often asked about issues we are very rarely able to have a direct influence on. How many times have we been asked by a student, perhaps ill informed of exactly what purpose the MSU serves, why we have not lowered tuition rates? Becoming a full member of CASA will allow us to at least answer the student by explaining that: Although the MSU does not possess the jurisdiction or power to lower tuition rates directly, we have as your student union collectively decided to be full members of two lobbying organizations, one of which is CASA who often lobbies the federal government on important issues such as decreasing tuition rates. Of course this is only one of many examples where the MSU has an opportunity to utilize the CASA membership to demonstrate our legitimacy and relevance as an organization to students. Furthermore, being a member of CASA will allow us to be actively involved in pushing forth the changes we wish to see for our constituents at McMaster. Through our ability to attend crucial and pivotal conferences such as the CASA Lobby conference and being an active member in the creation of key policies, we are able to directly contribute to the dialogue that must remain open between post- secondary institutions and the federal government.

Understandably and for many reasons it may be appealing to consider the possibility described above (often referred to as free riding) whereby we decide not to become full members of any federal lobbying organization and simply observe and possibly benefit from the process of change other student unions may take the lead on. However, as the McMaster Students Union we must ask ourselves the following question: If and when CASA achieves a potential victory for post-secondary educational institutions across the country, does the MSU wish to be known and take pride in the fact that they were one of the students unions who were crucial in bringing about the change students need and deserve or simply one of the students unions who will benefit from the effort of others? McMaster markets and prides itself on being a student centered university. More importantly the most decisive mandate of the McMaster Students Union is to represent McMaster students. Becoming a full member of CASA is an opportunity to maximize our fulfillment of this mandate, while contributing to a continual effort for the increase in representation of the overall interests of post secondary students to the federal Government. Internal Governance Debate This section of the analysis aims to explore the differences in the governance of OUSA & CASA. Members of assembly in previous conversations have naturally compared OUSA & CASA considering that they are both in essence lobbying organizations. Alot of these conflicts are due to the nature of the organization and its members. CASA is composed of large cap schools with full time student population of 20,000+ as well as small schools with a few thousand full time students. Subsequently their financial contributions to the organization are significantly different and that naturally creates a sense of higher entitlement amongst some members, in doing so creating major problems for a one school one vote democratic system. As a possible solution for that CASA has adopted on a trial basis a new voting system with success based on both a 2/3rds majority of schools voting for a certain motion but also 50%+1 FTE(Full Time or Equivalent students) population representation. This new model, at least in my brief observation of it at StratCon seemed to be a more fair equation, although it lengthened discussion and deliberation over decisions(eg: Hiring of the new National Director to 22 hours) because consensus now required a combination of big and small schools to be in favour of something. This voting system is up for review in the March CASA AGM, based on my experiences so far, it does seem to have a good shot at solving the long term debate at CASA to find an equitable voting mechanism. OUSA on other hand votes on a system where each school is given seats based on their size and then motions are won based on majority on the table as well as within school caucuses. Both the fee structure and internal governance dont seem to be much of an issue of discussion at OUSA given that the schools are for the most part the same size and as such its easier to draft a universally acceptable system.

Similarly OUSA has a member governance model called the steering committee which is composed of a single representative (usually the vice president education or equivalent) attending meetings via conference call or more efficiently in person. Whereas, CASA has a Board with regional representatives (i.e: One Representative for one provincial region) that obviously dont usually meet in person. Similarly all regions from the one school in Prairies to the large schools in Ontario only get a single seat. It can be argued that because of these logistics OUSA has an easier time addressing membership issues on a regular basis. Lastly, In terms of policy creation almost all OUSA Steering Committee members are tasked by the General Assemblies to work on various policy and research papers, as such there is a major policy generation advantage in comparison to CASA whose policy committee is completely voluntary (as such not all schools sign up for it) and there also is no accountability for not completing tasks. Possible solutions to explore would be for the MSU to recommend the CASA Board taking up Policy papers as tasked by the policy and strategy conference and possible bylaw repercussions (that presumably exist within OUSA) for not completing assigned tasks. However that all being said, there is no denying that CASA still has alot of ground to gain in terms of resolving its natural internal governance issues and should the MSU join as full members, future executive should consider working towards a helping CASA find an acceptable common ground a priority. Sincerely, Tanya Kuzman SRA Humanities 10/11 & Huzaifa Saeed MSU External Affairs Commissioner 10/11

Appendix A: Voting Structure

Currently a motion needs more than 2/3 of the schools in favour and more than FTEs in favour to pass. Observations: It is impossible for a motion to pass with all of the small (<6000 FTEs) or all the large (12000+ FTEs) schools opposing it. The Eastern schools are capable of blocking a motion, but neither the central nor Western schools can. Were McMaster to join and no more than one other member join, the central schools would be able to block a motion. Were McMaster to join, it would have marginally less than 10% of the FTEs. It is more ways for a motion to fail from insufficient schools supporting it than insufficient FTEs. It essentially requires that at least 4 of the biggest schools oppose a motion for it to be able to fail to meet 50% of FTEs and still meet 2/3 of the schools in favour.

Appendix B:
Fee Structure Conclusion: The new proposed fee structure adds an additional 10% cost to our current membership fees, before the adjustment for becoming a full member. Our memberships fees are currently determined primarily by the cap, rather than the internal workings of the formula, under both the current system and the proposed system. Any fee structure that removed the cap would risk a substantial increase in the MSUs fees. Any financial considerations in our membership should be based on more general questions such as whether we think the MSU is getting good value for its money rather than current revisions to the fee structure. Analysis: The most recent proposal, to replace the current formula which depends on FTEs and student union gross revenue, would shift the emphasis to FTEs, with diminishing costs for each additional student based on the size of the institution. This would raise our membership fee from $23 741.00 to $26 017.80, assuming we remained an associate member (+9.59%) or to $49 275.00 as full members (+107.55%). Full membership would currently cost us $47 482.00. This represents an increase of only 3.78% compared to what we would otherwise be paying for full membership. Based on the current voting structure, schools who have an increase in fees of up to 10% would need to support the new structure in order for it to pass unless a substantial number of schools can be convinced to abstain.

Current issues with the fees structure identified by CASA1: Does not take in account true financial state of an organization Business revenue is accounted at 100% when in reality, they only benefit from 5 to 10%(estimate) Given that the MSU is already at the proposed cap in both the existing and proposed models, this does not affect us. Students who decide to pay more in their student union to receive more service have to pay more in CASA but receive same service Already at the cap in both cases, hence does not apply. Significant difference in cost/FTE per organization Fee calculation is complex Difficulty planning future fees Assuming a constant fee structure, the MSU can expect to pay a constant percentage of the organisations costs every year. The only variable is the organisations total costs. We have less variability than many organisations. Recruitment of new members is more complex to explain the cost Applies little to our financial considerations although it strongly relates to member experience. Currently, the cap takes effect at 16739 students. We are currently 2689 students above this value. A simple removal of the cap would increase our membership by 14.73% from the current proposal. Total membership costs would then be about $56 535 instead of $49 275.

Appendix C: CASA Policy Reviews

Belief #1 Students should not accumulate unreasonable or insupportable debt. There needs to be more explicit language to define these terms. (contract language) Belief #2 PSE Should have sustainable research programs across all disciplines, with benefits shared across all levels of student body. Stating academic material costs are dramatically rising in particular within the last decade (far surpassing rate of inflation) i.e. U of Alberta 1995-2007 was 280% increase same period, inflation was 22%. Although market forces affect prices, publishers engage in practices that circumvent these forces by maintaining inflated prices through the issuing of new editions of materials with very little changes to its context. Canada has very unique regulatory legislation for the Book Importation Industry. Gov. General in 99 approved the Book Importation Regulations to allow book importers to charge a premium of 10% on books imported from US and 15% from other countries.

In other words, Canadian publishing companies can charge 10-15% more on the value of these books simply to profit from individually. **NO OTHER INDUSTRY RECIEVES SUCH PROTECTION IN CANADA** No other jurisdiction in the world has book importation regulation***

Francophone has issues if not written in Quebec or New Brunswick, translation fees increase price + they have small domestic market (in comparison to Anglophone majority Canada) Major source of textbooks from France making it international importer ( Allowing upto 15% premium on the books cost) This example illustrates that CASA is putting francophone into consideration very positive. (Not excluding smaller markets)

Course-packs Access Copyright (non-profit copyright licensing agency owned by creator and publisher groups) Fees have risen substantially in passed decade average 333% Use of Course-Packs for Scholarship APPROVED BY SUPREME COURT OF CANADA 2004 CCH Canadian Ltd. v. Law Society of Upper Canada, and SOCAN v. CAIP SUPREME COURT articulated that rights of creators must be respected, but that user rights (Research and private study) must be given liberal interpretation. Meaning, the rights of research and private study must be given interpretation adhering to commerce-friendly principles (i.e. the redistribution of this material for profit should not be negated.)

Robust Protection of those rights within the Copyright Act provides university bookstores the legal protection to produce course-packs independent of Access Copyright or other copyright licensing agencies. Meaning, that the laws in place strongly protect the rights for course-pack material to be redistributed for profit, thus enabling universities as individual entities the right to independently redistribute course-pack material as a commercial resource to generate profits.

Be it resolved that: CASA advocate the elimination of the 10% and 15% price premiums from Book Importation Regulation Essentially, revoke the Governor Generals approved regulatory system. Further Resolved:

CASA advocate that Canadian copyright laws be constructed in a way that will not derogate the expansion of fair dealing rights as interpreted in legal decisions. Meaning that laws be constructed in manner that will not give such advantageous protections to certain parties that will stand to perpetuate unfair dealing rights to be interpreted in legal decisions. How applies to McMaster 1. One of the biggest issues students tend to raise is price of course materials. --------------------------------------------------------CASA POLICY REVIEW - NOTE: Investing In The Student International Experience Policy is not found and that needs fixing Policy Statement: 1) CONDEMNING DIFFERENTIAL TUITION ON THE BASIS OF PROVINCE OF ORIGIN Adopted in 1998 Reviewed in 2006 Never amended Summary The policy essentially explains that as a result of decreased funding from the government for education, some institutions have entertained the idea of charging additional tuition to out of province students in order to capitalize on their enrollment. CASA condemns inflated tuition being charged to students who enroll in a University that is outside of their home province. They express concern about the effects of this policy on interprovincial mobility. They explain that as a result of increased specialization in universities, students often have no choice but to study outside of their home province. Furthermore the policy explains that CASA feels this issue is routed in the fundamental problem of decreased government funding for PSE. Quebec is currently the only province with a system which officially charges out of province students more in tuition then students who reside in Quebec. Additional Research The Peak, Simon Fraser University's Student Newspaper since 1965, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada V5A 1S6, e-mail: epeak@mail.peak.sfu.ca, phone: (604) 291-3597 fax: (604) 291-3786 Volume 98, Issue 7 February 23, 1998 News McGill students lose differential fee court battle by sonia verma (CUP, The McGill Daily) A legal challenge to Quebec's policy of charging differential tuition fees was rejected by the province's Superior Court, reaffirming the controversial new fee structure requiring out-of-province students to pay

about $1,000 a year more in tuition than Quebec residents.McGill University's student union launched the court challenge last September. One in four of the school's students is from outside the province.The student union and the case's name plaintiff, Paul Ruel, a third-year political science student, argued that differential tuition fees contravened the Charter of Rights by hindering the mobility of Canadian students pursuing post- secondary education and the Quebec Education Act, which prohibits discrimination.They also charged that Minister of Education Pauline Marois acted outside of her authority in announcing the new policy without an official mandate from her constituents or other members of the Parti Quebecois government.In the decision handed down Claude Tellier ruled firmly in favour of the minister and categorically dismissed each argument presented by the plaintiffs, calling the likelihood of an appeal into question."The minister has the authority from the National Assembly to impose conditions [on] universities and this authority includes the possibility of creating a tuition category based on residence," the judgement read. Tellier further stated that an increase in tuition for out- of-province students did not pose a significant barrier to Canadian students' mobility. He also ruled that differential tuition fees are not discriminatory under the Charter of Rights which prohibits discrimination on the basis of nationality or ethnicity, but not on the basis of provincial origin. QUESTIONS - Why has CASA not linked this policy to one of their other policys for the increase of government funding for PSE? - This policy- every policy should have a n action plan attached to it in some capacity and this has none? - Why has this policy not ben reviewed or updated sine 2006? Policy Statement: 2) CONTINUING SUPPORT FOR YOUTH EMPLOYMENT STRATEGIES Adopted: December 1998 Reviewed: October 2003, February 2007 Never Amended Summary The policy states that as a result of increased tuition fees and increased unemployment in this country

especially since the last recession it is imperative that the government should continue to support programs and strategies that provide employment to students who are enrolled in University. CASA also states that the existence of thee programs help to secure position for underrepresented students throughout the Canadian population such as aboriginals and students with diabilities. CASA also recognizes that the majority of employment opportunities open to students are in lower industry jobs which secure little money and little experience in the career of there choice for large amounts of exerted effort. There were several of these programs in place for the youth including the Youth International Internship Program (YIIP), The Summer Career Placement Program (SCP). In October 2006, $65 million were cut from Canadas Youth Employment programs, including the complete elimination of the Foreign Affairs Canadas YIIP and over $55.4 million cut from the SCP program. Additional Research There currently exists that International Experience Canada which appears to have replaced the Youth International Internship Program and appears to provide the opportunity to work abroad. however there is not information on how much money the government has allocated to this program, it could be considerable less than what was originally allocated to YIIP. Questions - Why has this not been updated since february 2007 - How is this policy even related to the quality of education, its seems that it should fall under innovation or affordability - Does CASA have any recommendations for how the government could introduce a program supporting youth employment while cushioning the budget? Policy Statement: 3) CREATING A PAN CANADIAN ACCORD OF POST SECONDARY EDUCATION Created: 1998 Reviewed: May 2002, August 2004, December 2004 Amended: August 2004, January 2004 Summary The policy essentially advocates that the three levels of government work together more closely and integrate each others efforts in order to secure access to affordable education for all students in Canada. They express their approval of A Pan-Canadian Accord on Post-Secondary Education: Progress through Partnerships (2004) Which is a document created by the Alliance of Nova scotia Students Association which outlined ways in which the governments can work together in order to create a pan Canadian strategy for education. Interestingly, CASA supports the right of Quebec and aboriginal communities to pursue alternative arrangements with the federal government under the pan canadian strategy. Additional Research

Link to the policy: http://www.anssa.ca/old/policy/ANSSA%20%20Pan%20Canadian%20Accord.pdf Questions -Why is there not a link to this policy or a summary of the policy on the CASA website? - Why has CASA not developed their own recommendations for or a pan -Canadian strategy on education? - Why has this not been updated since 2004? - How again is this related to the quality of education? The policy should relate to the category it is placed in in order to promote a ore cohesive and organized organization. HOW TO PROCEED WITH CASA REVIEW: IDEAS: - We need to establish how CASA is not like OUSA in that the nature of OUSA and CASA are completely different, therefore a comparative analysis of them is completely irrelevant and not beneficial - CASA must be evaluated on the merits upon which it is mandated on the merits upon which OUSA has drawn success there are completely different organizations.

Policy 1: Developing Undergraduate Research Adopted: Oct 24, 2002 Reviewed: Oct 26, 2002, August 2006 Amended: Nov 15, 2002 Policy Overview: The policy states that undergraduate research fosters learning and encourages curiosity. It can also be coupled with subsidy programs at universities to create convenient, experiential, high wage jobs. Strengths/Positives: CASA's policy is relevant to all universities, especially McMaster, a university with a breadth of research and the opportunity to expand our work study program to include more students. It has also been well documented by other PSE bodies such as OUSA that the need for more research opportunities is a pressing issue. Weaknesses/Negatives: The main problems with this policy are simply attention to detail. It has not been amended since essentially it was first adopted in 2002 and contains data that references results by 2010. This year is almost over and CASA needs to review this

policy and see if the data used still supports the policy. The research overall on this policy is lacking with only two references. The claims that most support their reasoning are not cited, which must be changed if CASA should gain credibility with political researchers. Better data supporting the conclusions will lead to more persuasive policy. Policy 2: Funding of Indirect Costs of Research Created: Aug 8, 2001 Reviewed: Mar 10, 2003, August 2006 Amended: Mar 10, 2003 Policy Overview: CASA believes that there must greater importance put on the subsidization of indirect costs of research by the government. Currently, the Indirect Costs of Research (ICR) Programme subsidizes part of indirect costs, but the funding is slowly dwindling. CASA purposes that the federal government provide funding for the indirect costs of research at a minimum rate of 40% the value of direct research costs. Strengths: The policy is well researched and does a great job of explaining the importance of funding towards indirect costs of research. The problem is easily identifiable in terms of what is affected and the magnitude of the issue. The comparison with current funding in the USA is also useful when lobbying. Weaknesses/Negatives: CASA once again is urged to update policies more frequently, as this policy does a good job of providing a history of advances in funding of indirect costs but currently is not up to date. Fortunately, not much has changed in regards to the current funding scheme, with the budget for the ICR Programme sitting at $332 million, making this a good target for future lobbying efforts. I believe that overall, while well researched, the language and writing style in this policy could be improved to consolidate some data and making research more comprehensible. Policy 3: Increasing SSHRC Granting Opportunities Adopted: Oct 24, 2002 Reviewed: Oct 26, 2002, August 2006 Amended: Nov 15, 2002

Policy Overview: SSHRC is given the least funding by the government out of the three national funding agencies. Currently, they can only support about 3.5% of its graduate population. CASA recommends that funding by the government to better represent the funding of the NSERC and CIHR and purposes that a minimum of 15% of graduate students and 2.5% undergraduate students receive research funding Strengths: The policy does an excellent job demonstrating that the SSHRC is underfunded and that it directly affects students in the social sciences field. The writing is clear and written in a logical manner. CASA has put a substantial amount of work into research policies that go beyond the undergraduate department, which is refreshing and could provide an avenue to achieve their overarching goal of making Canadian universities more innovative. Weaknesses/Negatives: Out of date. This policy also only supports one area of study, which may not be in the best interest for a diverse institution like McMaster. The impact of this policy at Mac may only be clear when the current differentiation talks are sorted out. Also, I am nervous about CASA recommending that undergraduates receive their own funding. With limited money, I do not believe current scholars should lose funding so an undergraduate can pursue basic research. Policy 4: Intellectual Property Rights Created: October 2007 Reviewed: n/a Amended: n/a Policy Overview: This policy was created to protect graduate students IP that they often create when working with supervisors and other faculty. CASA aptly identifies that students, given that they do not have the same bargaining power administration and faculty do with regards to IP, should be protected by the university and are recommending that this be enforced at the federal level through specific guidelines stated in the policy. Furthermore, the people with which the student would be negotiating with have control over their funding, references and other recommendations, making it difficult for the student to address this issue. This policy is mainly geared towards graduate students.

Strengths: Overall, an interesting policy that does not involve requests for funding. IP and copyright issues is currently a hot topic with CASA at the federal level and this policy may be something that can be discussed with the current agenda for CASA. If nothing else, it highlights an issue often brushed aside at the student level and demands a need for more clear policy at the university level concerning, student IP. The guidelines in the recommendation section seem well thought out and clear. Weaknesses/Negatives: The policy has yet to be reviewed and contains no references. Research needs to be done to back up this worthy policy. Policy 5: Tri-Agency Funding Autonomy Created: March 2009 Reviewed: n/a Amended: n/a Policy Overview: The policy seems to have been created to target a direct concern CASA had with a recent allocation of money towards SSHRC. SSHRC according to the SSHRC Act has complete control over where the money they receive goes as long as it is used to progress research in the social sciences, however, recent federal funding has put a stipulation on 17.5 million dollars, in that it must be spent on business related research. CASA advocates for the removal of this and all future stipulations on funding towards the Tri-Agencies. Strengths: Quick and concise and directly aims to make an impact on the federal level, as it directly addresses one certain issue. I appreciate that CASA would take the time to include a policy about specific issues that come up in the media. Weaknesses: The policy could benefit from a more comprehensive approach through a policy concerning multiple issues with tri-agency funding. It seems slightly disorganized to have multiple small policies around certain issues, when they can be combined. Ideally, I believe OUSA makes their policies too complex and long winded, so somewhere in between would provide the most valuable result. More research as to why CASA believes the federal government should not have a say in the areas of research of the funding agencies would be useful as well.

Policy Statement IMPROVING ACCESSIBILITY TO AN AFFORDABLE POST-SECONDARY SYSTEM OF QUALITY FOR ABORIGINAL PEOPLES Adopted: July 25, 2005 Never reviewed or amended Summary This policy states that indigenous individuals should be able to obtain a post-secondary education irrespective of their financial, cultural, physical or social background and should not be subject to major debt in pursuit of such an education. CASA believes that it the responsibility of both the federal and provincial governments to address this issue and provide any necessary financial aid. CASA acknowledges that the government has implemented funding via the Post-Secondary Education Program (PEP) in the past. Nevertheless, this funding has not been sufficient as it has only (a) been available to Aboriginal People with status and (b) has been capped at 2% increase per year.2 In 20092010, the federal government allocated $26.4 million into Aboriginal post-secondary education. Additional Research ACDE ACCORD ON INDIGENOUS EDUCATION (2010) http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:SHldhaL6nOIJ:experience.congress2010.ca/wpcontent/uploads/2010/05/Congress-IndigenousAccord.pdf+acde's+accord+indigenous+education+2010&hl=en&gl=ca&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEEShT7I8_GN wNusKgF7cQDFfXJE5_LRDpSSRLLNDNzmMU4WRV2d-_K1gF8EJj32tL-Ic2A1J3Tj758ACOQdaESL38Egt_iI3oSMb7-9h1Ifma7YoFybM5FE_Qj92bHMK86ovRLg&sig=AHIEtbT9sepUpNy858tWyrloPdXBtSR88Q FEDERAL GOVERNMENT INVESTMENT IN ABORIGINAL PSE http://news.ontario.ca/tcu/en/2010/01/investing-in-aboriginal-students.html CMEC SUMMIT ON ABORIGINAL EDUCATION (2009) http://www.cmec.ca/Publications/Lists/Publications/Attachments/221/aboriginal_summit_report.pdf LEARN CANADA 2020 http://www.cmec.ca/Publications/Lists/Publications/Attachments/187/CMEC-2020DECLARATION.en.pdf Questions Why are the policies addressing Aboriginal PSE, such as the Accord, vague and idealized? Why is there no information about the breakdown of funding provided by the federal government, such as an action plan? Again, their funding summary is very vague.
2

http://www.cmec.ca/Publications/Lists/Publications/Attachments/221/aboriginal_summit_report.pdf

Why are the same issues being addressed every year?

Affordability -

Suggestions 1. In several policy statements listed under affordability, there is a reoccurring use of vague terminology. It is absolutely imperative to explicitly define terms to prevent the manipulation of interpretation.
i.e. LOWERING INTEREST RATES ON PUBLIC CANADIAN STUDENT LOANS The federal government must take a more progressive role in reducing student debt in Canada. More Progressive Role does CASA have a criteria of what constitutes progressive or how it is measured? Is CASA referring to fiscally progressive or socially progressive?

2. The following Policies are extremely outdated:

LOWERING INTEREST RATES ON PUBLIC CANADIAN STUDENT LOANS (2006) SEPARATION OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE INTEREST RATES ON CANADA STUDENT LOANS (2006)

The policies which have been adopted or amended by 2009 are each well written with concise-detailed explanation of the policies and where CASAs priorities should lie, as well as being accompanied with a proposal of a plausible solution. Subsequently, these 2 policies listed above have gone 4 years without any updates or amendments, reflected in their vague literature. It is necessary to not only update the 2 policies listed above, but ensure that policies are updated on a regular basis.

Appendix D: This is a response from CASA Home Office to the questions raised by committee members, it also contains upon my request an overview of their lobbying efforts on Access Copyright & Bill C-32
---------------------------------------Mr. Huzaifa Saeed McMaster Student Representative Council McMaster University Hamilton, Ontario L8S 4S4

DATE:

Review Committee,

Thank you for submitting this document for CASA to review. I have circulated your questions around the office as well forwarded them along to the Board of Directors.

We have taken the time to respond to your questions to the best of our ability. If you require any further information please do not hesitate to contact us. We understand that you are making a decision on the status of your membership; we want to make sure you have all the information you need to make the best decision for your students.

Since September our team has visited your campus twice, tabled in your students union building, presented to your executive board, the review committee, and your students representative council. We have also had the opportunity to work directly together at both the Policy and Strategy Conference and Lobby Conference. At each one of these encounters I have championed the message of member driven means driven members. I commend you on your review and drive to participate in, and improve our organization. I hope you see the continued value of your involvement, as I know we do.

To improving education in Canada!

Zachary Dayler National Director

Policy Statement 1) CONDEMNING DIFFERENTIAL TUITION ON THE BASIS OF PROVINCE OF ORIGIN

Adopted: 1998 Reviewed: 2006 Never amended

Summary

The policy essentially explains that as a result of decreased funding from the government for education, some institutions have entertained the idea of charging additional tuition to out of province students in order to capitalize on their enrollment. CASA condemns inflated tuition being charged to students who enroll in a University that is outside of their home province. They express concern about the effects of this policy on interprovincial mobility. They explain that as a result of increased specialization in universities, students often have no choice but to study outside of their home province. Furthermore the policy explains that CASA feels this issue is routed in the fundamental problem of decreased government funding for PSE. Quebec is currently the only province with a system that officially charges out of province students more in tuition then students who reside in Quebec.

QUESTIONS

Why has CASA not linked this policy to one of their other policys for the increase of government funding for PSE?

Linking the policies together is an active topic before the policy committee. The policy process of CASA is based around the idea of the policy statement. Statements are crafted by the policy committee of the day, lead by the chair of the policy committee. CASA's policy and research officer acts in a support role for the committee.

As the priorities of the organization coincide with the members of that year (part of the member driven principle), interest in specific topics ebb and flow, which can create gaps in the overall 'story' of CASA's policy.

Fortunately, very rarely are policy statements directly tabled before government. They are not written in an effective format that office holders are familiar with. When CASA communicates with government, it links the policy statements to create a narrative which is current, comprehensive and sensitive to the politics of the day (for example, consult the documents section of the 2010 Lobby Conference website at https://sites.google.com/a/casa.ca/lobbycon/meetings/issues).

The issue of CASA condemning differential tuition for out of province students is important. One of our major policy focuses has been the creation of a Pan-Canadian Strategy on PSE. I believe this is essential to ensure that students have choice and mobility when it comes to furthering their education.

A Pan-Canadian strategy has been in consideration for a number of years. To provide some context on this policy, a version was initially approved in 1998 through The Second Declaration of Real Students which focused on a number of issues, but chiefly advanced a Pan-Canadian Agreement3. The main strategy for CASA at that time was encouraging the government to recognize education as something that should have a national standard system attached to it for evaluation and improvement purposes. We advocated that the government create a PanCanadian Agreement created in accordance with the United Nations Statement of Universal Accessibility to Education. CASA maintained that this act should consider, that the interprovincial mobility of students, both academically and financially be encouraged; and that a standard, regionally and nationally equitable level of tuition be established.4

Interprovincial mobility is a key part of a Pan-Canadian Strategy and as we look to 20145 and prepare for the re-negotiation of the Canada Social Transfer (CST), we will have the research and a concrete plan to further this idea. A Pan-Canadian Accord Committee currently exists in CASA, and is developing the policy structure for when the CST is reconsidered.

Through part of an ongoing policy audit, the template page our policies are written on will be modified, so the history of the policies will be more transparent. This was a suggestion from the Kwantlen Students Association.

This policy- every policy should have an action plan attached to it in some capacity and this has none?

Over the years the Pan-Can issue has been referred to by a number of titles. Canadian Alliance of Students Associations. 1998. The Second Declaration of Real Students. Ottawa. In Office Resource. 5 2014 is the year that the current agreement will be renegotiated.
3 4

Action plans are not included in policy statements. This does not imply they do not exist.

Best practice in legislative bodies (such as CASA's general assembly) is to keep resolutions timeless--that is, to not include parts which can become outdated or will need frequent revision. A revision to a policy statement requires an amendment from the membership of CASA, which would be an unduly frustrating process, and would remove the ability of the organization to act promptly.

Actionables are set forth by committees, and by the home office. Efforts are being made to make these more transparent to the membership, but to imply there are no action plans is simply incorrect. For example, the Graduate Students' Committee is in the process of reviewing the policies on the Tri-Agencies. Through this review, they are also considering membership in a national graduate student body, to get more access to Tri-Agency directors.

Why has this policy not ben reviewed or updated since 2006?

The review of our policies is an ongoing practice. Currently, home office is conducting a policy audit to highlight those policies are due for revision. When a policy becomes too dated, it can become awkward for our government relations. In cases where policy seems out of touch with the membership, home office will consult the Board of Directors/Policy Committee for guidance on how to interpret it.

All the policies are subject to the Operating Procedure on Political Policies (OP 6).6 The policy committee is aware that certain provisions are currently not being followed in that operating procedure, but it is relatively new, and the chair has been made aware of issues with compliance. Policy Statement 2) CONTINUING SUPPORT FOR YOUTH EMPLOYMENT STRATEGIES

Adopted: December 1998 Reviewed: October 2003, February 2007 Never Amended

https://docs.google.com/a/casa.ca/leaf?id=0B1gI1mQUYzpxYmYyNDIwNWUtZGM0MS00ZmViLTljZDctYzAz ZWViZDUzODhh&hl=en&authkey=COPJyOUP

The policy states that as a result of increased tuition fees and increased unemployment in this country especially since the last recession it is imperative that the government should continue to support programs and strategies that provide employment to students who are enrolled in University. CASA also states that the existence of thee programs help to secure position for underrepresented students throughout the Canadian population such as aboriginals and students with disabilities. CASA also recognizes that the majority of employment opportunities open to students are in lower industry jobs which secure little money and little experience in the career of there choice for large amounts of exerted effort. There were several of these programs in place for the youth including the Youth International Internship Program (YIIP), The Summer Career Placement Program (SCP). In October 2006, $65 million were cut from Canadas Youth Employment programs, including the complete elimination of the Foreign Affairs Canada are YIIP and over $55.4 million cut from the SCP program.

How is this policy even related to the quality of education, it seems that it should fall under innovation or affordability? The four classifications of the policies are exclusively used as an organization method, and have no bearing on CASAs advocacy efforts. Each heading comes with a principle statement, the quality statement is: CASA believes in a quality public post-secondary education system that is properly funded, effective and accountable; cooperatively maintained and enhanced by the federal and provincial governments.7 I agree that this policy is probably better housed in the innovation or affordability headings, but the policy committee and general assembly of the day thought it is best under the quality category. Does CASA have any recommendations for how the government could introduce a program supporting youth employment while cushioning the budget? It is unclear as to what you mean by cushioning the budget. CASA has two policies that detail concerns about labour market access for students and graduates: this one, and one for international students seeking work in Canada postgraduation.8 The recommendation of CASA is that the Youth Employment Strategy program is effective, and worth further investment. Employment was not identified as a priority this year by the membership though, so further policy development on this issue is not being considered at this time.

7 Canadian Alliance of Student Associations. 2010. Online. Advocacy. Ottawa. http://www.casaacae.com/policy/quality/ 8 Canadian Alliance of Student Associations. Improving Post Graduate Employment Opportunities for International Students. 2008. Ottawa. http://tinyurl.com/casapolicy.

Notwithstanding that, I have had idea discussions on everything from delivering tuition grants and bursaries through some form of gap year program, to most recently talking about how volunteerism during your studies could be used as a debt reduction tool for students. I would encourage you to bring a submission as to further suggestions you have on what such a program would look like during our open policy call (Deadline March 31, 2011).

Policy Statement 3) CREATING A PAN CANADIAN ACCORD OF POST SECONDARY EDUCATION

Created: 1998 Reviewed: May 2002, August 2004, December 2004 Amended: August 2004, January 2004

Summary

The policy essentially advocates that the three levels of government work together more closely and integrate each others efforts in order to secure access to affordable education for all students in Canada. They express their approval of A Pan-Canadian Accord on Post-Secondary Education: Progress through Partnerships (2004) Which is a document created by the Alliance of Nova scotia Students Association which outlined ways in which the governments can work together in order to create a pan Canadian strategy for education. Interestingly, CASA supports the right of Quebec and aboriginal communities to pursue alternative arrangements with the federal government under the Pan Canadian Strategy.

Why is there not a link to this policy or a summary of the policy on the CASA website?

The CASA website is a work in progress, and contains a number of holes. That said, because a policy is not on the casa.ca website, does not mean it not in force, or not known by staff. The best source to view all the CASA policies is the results of phase 1 of the policy audit, viewable at www.tinyurl.com/casapolicy. On that website, you fill find a spreadsheet which lists all the policies which are, and are not, on the website.

Why has CASA not developed our own recommendations for or a pan -Canadian strategy on education?

CASA has developed a number of policies on a Pan-Canadian strategy to date. The largest comprehensive version was developed in 1998 (The Second Declaration of Students.) Members priorities shift with the years, and as the CST is coming up for renegotiation, the membership has chosen to focus in more on the idea of a renewed Pan-Can policy. I will be recommending to the Board that this issue a major focus of discussion at the 2011 Policy and Strategy, as it is a

timely issue. If you are interested in the current state of this policy, please contact Rob LeForte, the chair of the Pan-Can committee and VP External at Dalhousie University (dsuvped@dal.ca).

Why has this not been updated since 2004?

As policy committees set their priorities year by year, the renewal of this policy has not been one. It is overdue for review, however.

How again is this related to the quality of education? The policy should relate to the category it is placed in in order to promote a more cohesive and organized organization.

Please see my previous answer to the similar question above.

Further Questions
More Progressive Role does CASA have criteria of what constitutes progressive or how it is measured?

CASA has not defined the word progressive in this policy statement, or others.

Is CASA referring to fiscally progressive or socially progressive?

The policy refers to progressive. This is to be interpreted as broadly as the word itself is. In general, the word means forward thinking, but as a personal opinion, it is one of those mostly-vacuous political words that you only use depending on who youre talking to. Removing it from the formal policy doesnt change its ask.

Does CASA have an archive on updates of government actions and legislation that directly relates to the lobbying efforts and policies of CASA?

Measurement in the field of government relations is impossible at worst and unreliable at best. CASA is in the business of influencing government, media, and stakeholders in academia. To trace back whether or not CASAs efforts have directly caused actions is impossible. We do, however, record things like: meetings held, mentions in media and follow-ups through our Basecamp and Highrise software systems. Delegates of CASA have access to these systems. We are viewed as one of the most influential advocacy groups in Ottawawe are one of fewer than two dozen organizations who meet with the Prime Minister (nearly) annually. This is quite the achievement, considering the age of the staff.

Is there an updated archive on specific lobbying efforts listing: a. What the lobbying efforts targeted (affordability, accessibility, etc.); b. When this occurred? c. What was the federal governments response? d. If federal government did not adhere to lobbying efforts, what is the next step?

Yes. CASA uses 37signals Highrise software to track meetings with MPs, Senators, senior bureaucrats, media, and stakeholders. After every meeting we have with an individual, we add a note about that meeting. Currently the database contains over 200 individuals.

Question d cannot be answered in a simple manner. Next step is a calculation based on: the persons authority, the magnitude of the ask, the climate of government, whether or not others will be receptive, media interest, among many, many other considerations. This is where the expertise of the Government Relations Officer comes into play, as they are the expert on how to influence.

What are the possibilities of making it mandatory for CASA policies to be updated annually?

This is very possible. It would require an amendment of the Operating Procedure on political policies, though. Currently, a tri-annual review is mandated by the procedure, and the chair of the committee is aware that some policies are overdue for review.

Update on Access Copyright

CASA at the Copyright Board: The Access Copyright Kerfuffle.

From: Alex Lougheed

Here's a quick overview, with submissions attached, regarding our involvement in the Copyright Board deliberations regarding introducing a new tariff on PSE institutions on the behalf of Access Copyright.

Note: this is by no means an exhaustive run-down of Home Office actions. There have been a number of phone calls, conference calls with fellow stakeholders, in person meetings, email exchanges, etc. This is a natural part of our business cycle to ensure that which we're saying is strategic, timely, on message, and impacting.

For ongoing discussion and updates, Howard Knopf's blog, Excess Copyright, is a superb source. http://excesscopyright.blogspot.com/

TIMELINE

June 12: The Copyright Board announces Access Copyright pursuit of a tariff in the Canada Gazette (as per statue). Objectors are welcomed to submit objections no later than August 11, 2010. http://www.gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p1/2010/2010-06-12/html/sup1-eng.html

August 10: Home Office submits our objection, based on CASA's copyright policy, and upon the remarks of three leading lawyers in the field. We submit our objection to sector media. http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/5250/125/

August 12: Coverage in Ken Steele's Academica Top 10 (read by all institutions.) http://www.academicagroup.ca/node/10778

September 22: Access Copyright applies to exclude all non-AUCC/ACCC objectors from the hearing. Copyright Board welcomes responses.

October 7: Access Copyright applies for an 'interim tariff'.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/39709239/10-10-13-Access-Copyright-Application-for-Interim-Decision

November 12: CASA submits it's case for why we deserve full participatory rights. See attachment.

November 15: Copyright Board rules CASA will have full participatory rights and obligations. http://excesscopyright.blogspot.com/2010/11/access-copyrights-proposed-4535-post.html

December 8: CASA presents to the House Special Committee on Bill C-32 (the Copyright Committee.) MPs ask questions on the Copyright Board proceedings. https://casaacae.basecamphq.com/projects/5031824/file/67195479/Committe%2520Comments%2520BillC32_Dec8.pdf

December 10: CASA submits its objection to the application of an 'interim tariff'. http://www.scribd.com/doc/45068580/CASA-Response-to-Access-Copyright-Interim-Tariff http://excesscopyright.blogspot.com/2010/12/objections-to-acs-proposed-interim.html

Appendix E: Responses by Student Union Execs to MSU Questionnaire

CASA REVIEW QUESTIONAIRE The McMaster Students Union (MSU) is conducting a review of our CASA membership. As part of this review, we are asking for your student unions feedback in regards to your experiences / opinions of your CASA membership. The MSU would greatly appreciate your time in completing the following questions: 1. How useful have you found CASA to be over the course of your student associations membership? Please provide specific examples of the successes / shortcomings. 2. How often have you utilized/contacted CASA Home Office Staff? a. For what reasons have you contacted CASA Home Office Staff? b. Have you seen value in your use of CASA Home Office Staff? 3. Has there been an improvement in member relations over the past few years? If so, what were the deficiencies and how have they been improved?

4. How have you found the overall quality of the organization in regards to: -governance -lobbying research -media 5. What is your impression of your institutions standing within CASA? Do you feel your voice is heard? 6. Has your associations membership in CASA been a positive or negative experience? Please elaborate. 7. Please outline your thoughts on the strengths and weaknesses that you see around the internal voting structure of CASA. 8. How valuable have you found the annual lobby conference (LobbyCon)? a. Please name some successes and/or failures you have seen. 9. Do you feel that CASA has been worth the current membership costs? Why or why not? 10. What importance do you place on federal educational lobbying? 11. Should your association choose to no longer be a member of CASA, how would you approach influencing/lobbying the federal government?

UPEIs Executive VPs View on CASA 1. CASA membership has been extremely useful to us in two key areas. First, it has enabled us to connect and communicate with other student unions in a manner that would otherwise be very difficult for us. The connections and communications we have gained from membership in CASA has provided us with valuable information and insight that has allowed us to improve our own operations. Second, the lobbying provided by CASA on the federal level is way beyond that which we could do on our own. CASA is very precise and effective in their lobbying efforts. For example, CASA's lobby week allowed its members to represent student issues directly to over 120 federal politicians. 2. Three times. A) To clarify information we would be lobbying on, to ask questions as to how to run our provincial lobbying, and to ask that UPEI attend the Partners conference. B) The home staff were very helpful and they were an extremely valuable resource in clarifying lobby issues and in helping us direct our own provincial lobbying. 3. We do not have any method to compare this with earlier years, but one would assume that the addition of the Member Relations Officer and the yearly visits by the National

Direction and the Member Relations Officer to each school would have improved this. 4. Governance, lobbying, and research has been great. The organization seems to lag in its use of media. 5. We feel that we are respected and heard at the CASA table. That said, we have felt that when it comes to provincial level discussions our provinces small size leads us to be dismissed. 6. Positive. We feel that CASA does very important federal lobbying that needs to be done. Furthermore, the opportunity that CASA provides to connect with other student unions has proven indispensable to our union. 7. Its great as it provides each school with a single vote, and thus ensures that their voice is heard at the table, and at the same time balances out the size discrepancies between schools by ensuring that a threshold of FTE's is met. It's really the best of both worlds. 8. Extremely good, one sees a direct influence on federal policy when one directly lobbies federal decision makers. 9. Yes, it has proven indispensable in our attempts to connect with other schools and to lobby the federal government in a concise and effective manner. 10. It's the most important on Prince Edward Island due to the large amount of our post secondary funding which comes from the federal government. 11. As we see no other viable and safe option for our membership, we would not engage in federal lobbying. University Of Lethbridge: VP Operations & Finance How useful have you found CASA to be over the course of your student associations membership? Please provide specific examples of the successes / shortcomings.

Overall, I have found CASA to be a useful and effective organization. I feel that the organization does an effective job at advocating the needs and concerns of students to the federal level of government. I feel that CASA makes sound pragmatic arguments to senators, members of parliament and other political policy-makers to draw the governments attention at post secondary education. How often have you utilized/contacted CASA Home Office Staff? I contact the CASA staff approximately once every two weeks. The primary reason that I have contacted the CASA staff is due to committee work. The staff has been helpful for the committee related business. I only utilize the staff for CASA related business Has there been an improvement in member relations over the past few years? If so, what were the deficiencies and how have they been improved? I would say that I have seen membership improvements over the course of the past year. I feel that it was very beneficial that CASA has employed someone focused on this rather than relying on the National Director. Last year, there were situations where member associations were unclear where and to whom they would address their possible concerns. Some would contact the Chair of the organization while others would contact the National Director or other CASA staff members.

How have you found the overall quality of the organization in regards to: -governance -lobbying -research media GovernanceI am satisfied with the governance of the organization. I feel that governance officers have done a effective job so far this year. Lobbying I am very satisfied with the lobbying efforts of the organization. I felt that the last lobby conference went very successfully. A majority of the MPs , Senators and civil servants that the CASA members met with during the lobby conference were very receptive to the recommendations that CASA made. I also have the uttermost confidence with CASAs current Government Relations Officer and with their previous one.

Research To the best of my knowledge CASA does an adequate job in the area of research. The Canadian Student Survey was a successful endeavor that led to the creation of some interesting reports. What is your impression of your institutions standing within CASA? Do you feel your voice is heard? I am satisfied with my institutions standing within CASA. My student association has never had any issues where we felt that our voice was marginalized or neglected. If my organization or I have an issue, we do not feel that there are any barriers for us to express them.

Has your associations membership in CASA been a positive or negative experience? Please elaborate. My organization has been satisfied with the experience that we have had overall within CASA. We feel that CASA does a very effective job at advocating the needs and concerns of our students to the federal level of government. My organizations biggest concern and issue with CASA has been related primarily related to matters relating to internal business. It has been somewhat frustrating at times because it feels that the membership spends more time focused on internal business than on advocacy.

Please outline your thoughts on the strengths and weaknesses that you see around the internal voting structure of CASA. 2/3 of Member Schools & 50%+1 of Total FTEs -higher threshold for decision-making -more likely to encourage compromises to pass certain types of motions -compromise between proportional representation and one school, once vote -takes into better account the amount of students that a member association represents -can be a very difficult system to use when voting for items that have multiple options (e.g. National Director search) -this system results in different associations having different amounts of voting power

Simple Majority (One Member, One Vote) -every member has a equal voting power -this system is more advantageous to smaller schools but this could be seen as a tradeoff because the CASA fee structure heavily favours larger schools -does not take into account the amount of students that a member association represents -simpler

How valuable have you found the annual lobby conference (LobbyCon)? Please name some successes and/or failures you have seen. I found the lobby conference to be a very positive and interesting experience. Over the course of week, CASA arranged 112 different meetings. We had meetings with several high profile Ministers and party leaders such as Michael Ignatieff, Gilles Duceppe, Jim Flaherty, James Moore, Rob Moore, Peter MacKay, Steven Fletcher and Rona Ambrose. A majority of the MPs , Senators and civil servants that we met with during the week were very receptive to the recommendations that CASA made.

Do you feel that CASA has been worth the current membership costs? Why or why not? I am satisfied with the costs that are associated with being a member of the association. My school does not have the financial resources to efficiently have a presence at the federal level on its own and in order to have any impact federally we need to pool resources with other schools. The federal level of government has an impact on the quality of education for my students and my organization feels that it is important student voices and opinions are raised.

What importance do you place on federal educational lobbying? I consider the primarily mandate of my organization to advocate on behalf of the students that I represent. My organization does this on a campus level and on a municipal, provincial and federal level. The two most important areas that I feel that my organization should be focused on is the on-campus and provincial levels. Because no other

organization, for the most part, would be focused on advocating the needs of my students on the municipal level I would place federal advocacy as least important area of advocacy. That being said, I still feel that the federal level of government plays an important role in post-secondary education. It is still important to lobby the federal level of government because they can play a vital role in controlling student debt and in increasing the accessibility and affordability of a post-secondary education.

Should your association choose to no longer be a member of CASA, how would you approach influencing/lobbying the federal government? Realistically, if my association decided to leave CASA, we would in all likelihood abandon federal advocacy altogether. My school does not have the financial resources to efficiently have a presence at the federal level on its own. While we would still have access to some local MPs, that does not necessarily mean that they would have the ability to significantly influence change in regards to postsecondary education. Anonymous Student Executive from a New Brunswick University 1. How useful have you found CASA to be over the course of your student associations membership? Please provide specific examples of the successes / shortcomings. Better than CFS. We have had representation at the federal level, and it has been productive for our organization. 2. How often have you utilized/contacted CASA Home Office Staff? a. For what reasons have you contacted CASA Home Office Staff? I have not contacted them. b. Have you seen value in your use of CASA Home Office Staff? At conferences, yes; overall, Im still not sure how they spend their time. 3. Has there been an improvement in member relations over the past few years? If so, what were the deficiencies and how have they been improved?

Ive heard good things from having an MRO. From what Ive heard, they removed the position, & the organization hit the rocks. 4. How have you found the overall quality of the organization in regards to: -governance -lobbying -research media Beneficial for all. 5. What is your impression of your institutions standing within CASA? Do you feel your voice is heard? Our school is provincially a big fish in a small pond. Federally were a small fish in a big pond. Theres no winning for us. 6. Has your associations membership in CASA been a positive or negative experience? Please elaborate. We see it as beneficial, as there has been times over the years that we needed assistance, and the organization has been there to assist. 7. Please outline your thoughts on the strengths and weaknesses that you see around the internal voting structure of CASA. Strength: Bringing together schools from across the country. Weakness: Getting all crucial needs of students across to the government. 8. How valuable have you found the annual lobby conference (LobbyCon)? a. Please name some successes and/or failures you have seen. Although not attending, there were benefits, according to our representatives. They saw face time with the decision makers as valuable, and the ability to speak to the leaders of the country was a good experience.

9. Do you feel that CASA has been worth the current membership costs? Why or why not?

The membership to CASA costs less for us than our membership to the provincial group, so by comparison, yes, it helps. However, it is still costly overall. 10. What importance do you place on federal educational lobbying? I think its beneficial to have our voice heard on the federal level. If our concerns were not voiced to the federal government, what would be the point of existing? 11. Should your association hypothetically choose to no longer be a member of CASA, how would you approach influencing/lobbying the federal government? We would not. Waterloo GSA (Two year experience with CASA) 1. How useful have you found CASA to be over the course of your student associations membership? Please provide specific examples of the successes / shortcomings. CASA has been very useful with respect to policy development. Having the GRO and PRO usually available at times throughout the day by phone or email allows for some good back-and-fourth in the writing phase of a policy. Successes: Having one of the PMO staffers come up to me at the reception in March '10 and tell me how he specifically found CASA's Monster Scholarships policy smart and counter-intuitive definitely counts as a success. Failures: CASA learned the hard way how to deal with internal issues in '09-'10. Tensions flared a decent bit at the plenary table and the format of the AGM in Halifax was not very conducive to getting solid work done on compromises for internal issues. I believe this was a contributing factor to having some members drop from full to associate status within the last year (SAIT and MRU I believe, not totally sure there).

2. How often have you utilized/contacted CASA Home Office Staff?

It really depended on the week. It ranged from no contact to multiple emails per day. a. For what reasons have you contacted CASA Home Office Staff? I contacted them mainly for help/research updates on policy development for the Grad Committee. While I sat on the CASA board I also contacted the ND on issues of concern. I also kept contact with the staff to stay up-to-date on current issues of interest. The staff I usually contacted were the Policy and Governance Officers (at the time, Spencer Keys and Rick Theis, respectively). b. Have you seen value in your use of CASA Home Office Staff? Undeniably so. As chair of the Grad Committee they were invaluable in researching figures/facts about issues we were developing policy on, as well as being able to add clarity to any matter which I was uncertain about. Whenever they couldn't answer a question, they researched the answer and got back to me promptly. 3. Has there been an improvement in member relations over the past few years? If so, what were the deficiencies and how have they been improved? Until May 2008, CASA had no members that were autonomous graduate student associations, so from the GSA's perspective, member relations was mostly defined by CASA's ability to integrate graduate student issues into its traditionally undergraduate-focused lobbying. This depended heavily upon how lobby documents were formed and the general memberships' reception to graduate concerns. Both were seen as satisfactory during my time at Waterloo. 4. How have you found the overall quality of the organization in regards to: -governance -lobbying -research -media Lobbying: On a regular basis, CASA is often engaged with committees on the hill and key stakeholders in the PSE sector. The GSA had no

dissatisfaction with how CASA conducted its regular business. I'll leave my impressions of the lobby conference portion of the lobbying to question 8. Research: One of CASA's greatest strengths. Media: This is a bit of a mixed bag. Sometimes the press releases are a little off the mark or at least not what one would expect but overall they have good form. The YouTube videos didn't do a whole lot for me but since I was usually rather well-informed I wasn't exactly the target of those videos. Governance: The governance structure that should be in place soon that was passed in March 2010 I believe will be good for CASA. Having to use the old 2002 governance model was definitely frustrating in June and is a symptom of the troubles CASA has had in cleaning up its constitution and bylaws. Overall, the GSA was happy with the governance model used in 2009-2010 and was enthusiastic about the coming structure.

5. What is your impression of your institutions standing within CASA? Do you feel your voice is heard? The GSA, at the time, had somewhat of a special standing within CASA as its only member which was an autonomous graduate student association. I'm not sure how that standing has changed with the addition of Athabasca's grads. The GSA definitely had its voice heard at the CASA table. Most of the GSA's focus within CASA has been on external issues and the GSA has had much success in having its voice heard in policy development with the Grad Committee and was consulted to ensure approval of the graduate issues put forth in lobby documents. 6. Has your associations membership in CASA been a positive or negative experience? Please elaborate.

GSA-UW's experience in CASA has, overall, been rather positive. Office staff have traditionally been responsive to the requests of the GSA, the progress of the Grad Committee has been satisfactory (which I say with clear bias as I was its chair for most of the time I've been involved with CASA, although recently the committee has taken off quite well with Eric Snow as its chair!) 7. Please outline your thoughts on the strengths and weaknesses that you see around the internal voting structure of CASA. Strength: Having a 2/3 majority threshold helps to build a stronger consensus, and the 50%+1 FTE threshold allows larger schools to feel more secure, for whatever reason. Weakness: Building a 2/3 majority can take a long time and the 50%+1 FTE threshold makes votes, in a sense, weighted. It dampens the sense of equality around the table when thinking about it as a matter of ethics, although in practice I don't believe any vote that has failed the FTE threshold has not also failed the 2/3 threshold. 8. How valuable have you found the annual lobby conference (LobbyCon)? The LobbyCons I attended (March '09 and'10) were quite valuable for a few reasons. First and foremost, it puts politicians in direct contact with students, allowing for more direct anecdotal evidence to be used during lobbying which can be quite effective and sometimes rather touching/infuriating for them (infuriating in the sense that it gets the politician passionate about the issue). LobbyCons also raise the profile of PSE issues for the week they take place. For the students who are lobbying, it develops lobbying skills which are useful in the day-to-day contact between SUs and their administrations. a. Please name some successes and/or failures you have seen. Successes: Securing a meeting with every party leader in March '09,

private members bill commitments from MPs, amongst others. Failures: Mostly delegate-caused with inappropriate tongue-in-cheek remarks, I have seen a few meetings get cancelled in this manner. 9. Do you feel that CASA has been worth the current membership costs? Why or why not? CASA has definitely been worth the membership cost for GSA-UW as it has allowed the GSA's issues to reach the national stage and into policy. 10. What importance do you place on federal educational lobbying? For graduate students, federal lobbying gains significantly-extra importance as most external funding for professors to supervise students comes from the tri-agencies (NSERC, SSHRC, CIHR). Generally it is important because there are issues on the federal level that affect education (student financial assistance, copyright laws, aboriginal issues, amongst others). 11. Should your association choose to no longer be a member of CASA, how would you approach influencing/lobbying the federal government? I'm not really sure, since I had a really hard time figuring out what to do provincially with the GSA. The CFS isn't an option for GSA-UW with the bylaws in their current state as Bylaw 13 states " For each external group that the GSA joins, a clear mechanism must be specified regarding the conditions under which the GSA may leave the external group. This mechanism must be administered by the GSA and solely conducted by the GSA".

Ella Henry: President St Thomas University, New Brunswick. 1. How useful have you found CASA to be over the course of your student associations membership? Please provide specific examples of the successes / shortcomings.

CASA has provided a space to meet executives from other students unions. However, outside of this I have found CASA to take up a significant amount of time that could be used more productively. While meetings with MPs and having a national organization speak at pre-budget meetings etc. is helpful, and would be difficult to accomplish on the same scale as an individual students union, I have found the content and method of CASAs lobbying to be ineffective at best or to undermine the needs of students at worst. Most of the time I spend at CASA conferences, in communication with CASA staff and on CASA committees is taken up by internal concerns with the organization, and very little time is devoted to developing a plan to accomplish our goals and advocate for students. 2. How often have you utilized/contacted CASA Home Office Staff? I am in contact with CASA staff fairly regularly, more frequently in the lead up to conferences, and less frequently at the end of the year. a. For what reasons have you contacted CASA Home Office Staff? Most frequently I am in contact with CASA staff to talk about concerns with the organization or logistics for a conference rather that to use the expertise of home office staff. b. Have you seen value in your use of CASA Home Office Staff? No. 3. Has there been an improvement in member relations over the past few years? If so, what were the deficiencies and how have they been improved? I have seen brief periods of improvement of member relations, however they are not consistent. The goal should not simply be to send out an informational email to members every month or so and to call members when they have concerns. Member relations should at minimum meet the standards for communication and transparency set out in motions passed by the general assembly (CASA currently does not fulfill these, for example posting minutes etc. on the website passed twice by the GA in the last two years). Member relations must involve members in decision-making, and ensure members are informed. CASA seems to understand member relations as the staff being friends with representatives, rather that fulfilling obligations of transparency and accountability. 4. How have you found the overall quality of the organization in regards to: governance -lobbying -research media Governance: Terrible. In the two years I have been involved in CASA the organization still has not fixed the confusion over which constitution they are operating under. In addition the organization spends most of its time arguing over governance issues rather than working productively to advocate for students.

Lobbying: I believe CASA is incredibly nave when it comes to lobbying. CASA seems to think that consistently asking for small changes that do not cost much will eventually achieve bigger long-term goals. Rather than building public support for bigger, more long-term goals, and developing a clear consistent argument, CASA seems to favor thing such as tweaks to the student loans program. CASAs refusal to run campaigns and build public support for its ideas renders it incapable of achieving bigger goals. So, instead, CASA relies on a discourse emphasizing realistic and practical goals that can be achieved by presenting politicians with a well-researched case. The problem with this approach is that we cannot achieve the changes students need through by asking for small changes a government is willing to make without public pressure. Realistically, governments will not make the substantial investment to post-secondary education needed to make it affordable for students and to restore funding that has been cut in the last 20 years without a public push. Changes that CASA can make, such as changes to student loan policies almost always only displace the actual problem, rather than solving the root cause. Instead of arguing for an increase in grants or summer job funding because summer unemployment is leaving students unable to pay for school, CASA argues for a change to the loan calculations allowing students to take on more debt. The problem with this is that we already have a crisis with student debt, where students are not attending PSE because of aversion to debt and students graduating with debt are putting off things such as buying a car or working in the field of their choice. In addition CASA has, several times, taken credit for investments in PSE that CASA was not the primary organization lobbying for. The AUCC had been advocating for funding for accumulated deferred maintenance funding for years, CASA then asked for funding for deferred maintenance and the national director of the time was quoted in an article saying that CASA was the only PSE lobby organization asking for this funding. CASA takes credit for the Canada Student Grants program when they were advocating for a different initiative (the Millennium Scholarship Foundation), while the Canadian Federation of Students was advocating for the Canada Student Grants program. Research: Despite CASAs claim that it is a research-focused organization and the advantage of CASA over other PSE lobbying organizations is the quality of their research, I find CASAs research to be sub-par. The primary research document produced by CASA (the Canadian Student Survey) has significant flaws. The expense to CASA of $30,000 was not approved by the general assembly before the contract was signed. I was also personally lied to about aspects of the project by the national director at the time. The NBSA chose not to participate in the project due to concerns with the methodology of the survey. I initially was doing the work to get the study approved at STU. I found it to be substantially more work than CASA informed me it would be. I was asked to put my name on the research ethics board application, which I felt damaged my reputation with some professors when the application had spelling errors and missing sections. Our research ethics board decided the study was outside their jurisdiction (academic research being conducted at the university), but noted: for educational purposes, we wanted to alert you that the project as it is currently articulated raises multiple ethical concerns.

See the section on lobby con for my concerns with the quality of research in the lobby document. Media: CASA is quoted fairly often in the media. However, CASA often puts out glowing press releases about the actions of government or political parties. CASA should be holding politicians accountable, not showering them with praise. I get google alerts on PSE issues, and there are consistently more articles quoting CFS representatives on student issues than CASA (not counting blog posts or student paper articles about the inner workings of either organization). CASA sometimes misses media opportunities such as not issuing a press release in response to increased Canada Summer Job program funding last week. 5. What is your impression of your institutions standing within CASA? Do you feel your voice is heard? Because my union is sometimes critical of CASA I think motions and ideas we bring forward are dismissed without thought, serious debate and conversation. Ill give a couple examples. We brought forward a motion last year that called on CASA to operate under the 2007 constitution (which, according to the information we had at the time, was the last consititution approved by the appropriate regulatory body). We felt this was a serious issue, and CASA should be operating under the constitution they were legally under (in addition the 2007 constitution said that no changes to the constitution could take effect until they were registered with a regulatory body). The motion was not even voted on due to a ruling of the chair based on a rule not applied to other motions, and was notnot in the bylaws or Roberts Rules. Months later CASA staff informed the general assembly that the last constitution approved by a regulatory body was from 2000 and therefore we should be following that constitution. At this point everyone agreed, however, the majority of the membership ignored our concern 6 months earlier. At the most recent conference we attempted to bring forward a motion suggested by a member of our council asking CASA to run a campaign for lower tuition fees. We knew tuition is not an issue many at CASA would like to talk about, however, we wanted an opportunity to at least present an argument for how it is related to the federal government. No one seconded the motion, and we were unable to present the argument that while provinces regulate tuition, funding for PSE comes from transfers from the federal government and increases in tuition fees have coincided with decreases in federal transfers. 6. Has your associations membership in CASA been a positive or negative experience? Please elaborate. I cant speak for our associations experience a decade ago, but since I have been involved in our students union membership in CASA has been a negative experience. We have spent most of our time working on internal issues within CASA and relatively little time working on the issues we should be.

7. Please outline your thoughts on the strengths and weaknesses that you see around the internal voting structure of CASA. I think the voting structure and the fee structure are issues that have dominated CASA for years, resulting in long debates not about how we might push effectively for more PSE, but instead about internal disputes. I think it is evidence of CASA being a dysfunctional organization that leads to members being more concerned about the weight of their vote and the level of their fees than whether CASAs advocacy is effective. 8. How valuable have you found the annual lobby conference (LobbyCon)? Lobby con provides an opportunity to meet with many MPs and Senators from across the country, and certainly bringing students from across the country to talk to politicians with a unified message has an impact beyond what each student union could accomplish on their own. However, this is substantially undermined by several things: first, the priorities in the lobby doc provided by CASA consistently differ significantly from the priorities voted on at the policy and strategy conference (in my time at CASA the priorities voted on at policy and strat did not match up with the priorities in the lobby doc, and I believe the problem goes back longer in CASA since other student unions were complaining about it in previous years), and second, the lobby doc prepared by CASA undermines the goals of students, or at least the priorities of my union. By advocating only for small changes we allow government to claim to be supporting students without making significant changes or increases in funding. Whatever any councils position on the structure, positions etc. of the Canadian Federation of Students, I think it is useful to compare CASAs lobbying to that of the CFS, as it is the only other similar national organization. This is particularly useful in areas where CASA claims to be providing members with substantially more value. CASA claims to be very research focused, however, while the CFS lobby document from this year is fully cost out, uses public opinion polling to support their requests, and suggests where the additional funding for post-secondary education can come from, my experience meeting with MPs using the CASA document was that many MPs were disappointed that asks were not fully cost out. What I feel is the most important section in the lobby document (on a dedicated transfer), was added hastily at the last minute. The research was poor, leaving many delegates confused as to what we were asking for. a. Please name some successes and/or failures you have seen. CASAs lobby document has been disappointing for the past several years. The number of meetings that CASA managed to secure this year and last year was substantially less than the number of meetings the Canadian Federation of Students had at their most recent lobby week. Training for delegates is inadequate, and in my experience I have seen this result in undermining CASAs credibility (for example, at a meeting I was in, a delegate telling an

MP that CASA supported the new Access Copyright tariff, when in fact, CASA had submitted a document opposing the tariff). 9. Do you feel that CASA has been worth the current membership costs? Why or why not? No, based on my analysis of CASA throughout this questionnaire, as well as issues of financial management (in particular, spending money without approval Canada student survey, east coast media tour, member relations tour). 10. What importance do you place on federal educational lobbying? Federal advocacy is incredibly important for student unions because funding for PSE comes primarily from the federal government even through PSE is under provincial jurisdiction. However, I find that CASA relies on being a national organization to avoid debating some issues that are relevant to students such as tuition fees, discrimination and poverty. I also think it is wasteful to pay a national organization, a provincial organization and then pay for the two of them to go to partners conferences to talk to each-other. I feel like we are paying to talk to ourselves. Maintaining separate organizations makes it difficult to coordinate between national and provincial lobbying, and creates needless bureaucracy. 11. Should your association choose to no longer be a member of CASA, how would you approach influencing/lobbying the federal government? Getting a broader group of students involved in advocacy so that it is not limited to those on the executives, and sometimes councils, of student associations. In addition, I think it would be important to work with other students unions to present a united message to MPs across the country.

Appendix F: CASA Review from Brock. This monumental review was instrumental in helping me contextualize federal representation as a concept. Brock & McMaster despite many differences also share some similarities in terms of student population, student union business and services structure and membership within OUSA.

The National View:

An Examination of the Brock University Students Union efforts as representative and lobbyist to the Federal Government.

Prepared by: Brad Humble, Research and Policy Assistant Rob Lanteigne, Vice President University Affairs

Brock University Students Union

Table of Contents

Section 1: Purpose

1.1 1.2 1.3

Introduction.. 3 Scope and Motivation... 4 BUSUs History with External Federal Representation...

Section 2: General Information

2.1 2.2

Other CASA Reviews

8 13

The Nature of Student Government..

Section 3: Federal Lobby Organizations in Canada

3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6

History and Development of CFS.. 15 History and Development of CASA.. 18 Criticisms of CFS... Criticisms of CASA... 21 23

Current State of Affairs at CASA.. 25 S.W.O.T Analysis and T.O.W.S. Matrix of CASA... 28

Section 4: The Brock University Students Union

4.1 4.2 4.3

BUSUs Approach to Federal Lobbying The Cost of CASA to BUSU. 43

41

The Cost of Federal Alternatives to BUSU...

46

Section 5: Conclusions and Next Steps

5.1 5.2 5.3

Conclusions

47 49

BUSUs Expectations of a Federal Lobby Group.. What Does the Future Hold .. 51

Section 6: Appendices

6.1

Summary of VPUA Interviews.. 52

If democracy is to work, it would seem to require a certain level of political competence on the part of its citizens. Robert Dahl

To be complex does not mean to be fragmented. This is the paradox and genius of our Canadian civilization. Adrienne Clarkson

1.1

Introduction

The Brock University Students Union (BUSU) has taken upon ourselves to explore and examine our ability to represent and advocate for the interests of our members to Federal Government. Currently, BUSU is a member of the Canadian Alliance of Student Associations (CASA) and has been since 2002. CASA is student-led, member-driven organization that is an advocate for the interests of its members, and works to influence the policy direction of the Federal Government with regard to postsecondary education (PSE). BUSUs membership in CASA empowers CASA to speak on behalf of BUSU and its members to the Federal Government. After almost seven years of membership in CASA, BUSU will assess its ability to represent and advocate for the interest of its members. In doing so, BUSU will compare and contrast the approaches taken by CASA and the Canadian Federation of Students (CFS) to being a representative and advocate for its members. An organizational analysis of CASA will be conducted that features a Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT) Analysis of the organization Furthermore, an analysis of the impact a CASA membership has on the BUSU budget will be included. Furthermore, this report will scrutinize CASAs ability to provide BUSU the opportunities needed to have the voices of Brock University students heard by the Federal Government. Ultimately, this report will provide recommendations and deliverables that will guide the future efforts of BUSU to represent and advocate for its members interests to the Federal Government. This report was prepared primarily by Brad Humble, BUSUs Research and Policy Assistant and under the supervision of Rob Lanteigne, BUSUs Vice President University Affairs (VPUA) for 2008-09. Special contributions come from interviews held with Kithio Mwanzia, BUSUs VPUA in 2005-2006 and President in 2006-2007, Brad Humble, BUSUs VPUA in 2006-07, and Damien OBrien, BUSUs VPUA in 2007-2008. This report is intended for submission and consideration of the Brock University Students Administrative Council, and, once adopted, presentation to CASA.

1.2

Scope and Motivation

In the summer of 2008, BUSU learned through unofficial channels that a student had intentions to put forward a petition regarding CASA, which would lead to a referendum in the 2008-09 academic year. It is unclear as to the nature of this petition, whether it would have been to affirm membership, remove ourselves from CASA, or create a per-student ancillary fee. Faced with this prospect of referenda, BUSU decided to take a proactive step and began exploring and examining its relationship with CASA and its efforts as a representative and advocate for the interests of its members to the Federal Government. At the same time, such a report has been suggested by previous Vice Presidents within BUSU. Moreover, Brock students have never explicitly voted via referendum in favour of CASA membership. In this context, it is important to understand BUSUs wants, needs and expectations as an organization and as individual Brock students, and to examine whether CASA serves those wants, needs and expectations to the best of its ability. Lastly, with a slew of recent organizational and structural changes within CASA, it is important to establish if the organization as it exists now is one BUSU wishes to be a member of, as it did in 2002. In taking such a proactive step many things needed to be considered. This report will consider general information such as the practices of external federal representation review and the history and development of the Canadian Federation of Students (CFS) and the Canadian Alliance of Student Associations (CASA). Interviews with past BUSU Vice Presidents University Affairs have been conducted and contribute to a SWOT Analysis and the development of the BUSU brand of federal advocacy. In conclusion, this report will evaluate CASA as an organization, BUSUs efforts as a member and offer suggestions with regard to the future direction with regard to this relationship and effort.

1.3

BUSUs History with External Federal Representation

Like many students unions and associations, the development of a presence at the federal level of government for the BUSU was both an eventuality and a long process. For BUSU, there were three events that stand out in the development of BUSUs presence on the federal stage of political representation. In 1981, BUSU was a part of the founding conference for the CFS. A referendum was run 1991 that asked the students of Brock University to become full members of the CFS. And in 2001, the Brock University Students Administrative Council (BUSAC) passed a motion that laid the foundation for BUSU membership in CASA, for which a referendum of the student body would follow. In 1981, the need for a unified voice within the student movement that spoke to the federal government about post-secondary education came to a head. October of that year saw representatives from over 70 Students Unions and Associations from across the country come together at Carlton University to take part in what would become the Founding Conference for the CFS. BUSU sent a lone delegate, Pat Meagher, and was accepted as prospective member of the CFS. BUSU was not an overly active participant in the Founding Conference, as beyond our noted attendance, BUSU was only noted to have spoken once over five days of roundtable discussion that decided the membership, shape and policy direction of the CFS. In this speaking turn, BUSU commended the partnership of CFS with organized labour, as they were victims of similar hardships.9 Documentation is scarce with regard to BUSUs affiliation with CFS throughout the 1980s as the relation was seemingly nonexistent. BUSU sent representatives to the General Meetings in 198310 and again in 1989,11 and each time BUSU was re-ratified as prospective members. In 1991, BUSUs relationship and association with the CFS became front page news, as a referendum of the student body was held which asked the students of Brock University to approve a full membership within CFS. The vote was held on March 26, 27 and 28, 1991, but the debate began earlier that month and would end with a deeply divided executive and an overwhelming No vote. The front page of the March 6, 1991 edition of the Brock Press featured an article detailing the spending limit for the upcoming referendum, as there were concerns that CFS was buying referendums.12 This concern was echoed in another article in that same issue of The Press entitled CFS told to limit hired guns on campus. BUSU Vice President Administration Jeff Wilson proposed a

Minutes, Founding Conference, Canadian Federation of Students, Held in Carlton University, October 14-19, 1981. Available at www.studentunion.ca. Accessed August 2008. 10 Minutes, General Meeting, Canadian Federation of Students, 1983. Available at www.studentunion.ca. Accessed August 2008. 11 Minutes, General Meeting, Canadian Federation of Students, 1989. Available at www.studentunion.ca. Accessed August 2008. 12 Press Staff Writer, CFS campaigner given spending limitations., The Brock Press, St. Catharines, ON.,March 6, 1991.

motion to prohibit CFS staff members from being on campus during the referendum because they were professional lobbyists, something the No side could not afford.13 The debate would continue in the Brock Press over the next month with both sides being spoken for. The Pro-CFS side claimed to be the student group which federal governments turn to when it needs the student opinion, and claimed the successes of preventing GST from being applied to tuition, and the introduction of student loans for part-time students.14 Apart from toting their lobby initiatives, the value of the services CFS provides to its members as part of their membership fees is also noted.15 The antiCFS side did not believe the CFS was an effective lobbyist, and did not believe the claims of successes which the pro-CFS side was advocating.16 The Brock Press endorsed the No side of the debate, as it did not like their focus on non-educational issues, while citing a referendum at Queens University in which eighty percent of those student voted No to CFS.17 The No side won the hearts and minds of Brock students, successfully convincing the voters that CFS was ineffective as a lobbyist, poorly operated, stagnant in their governance, and would present little value for the $30 000 membership fee. In the end, 78% of the students of Brock University voted No to becoming a full member a CFS.18 Since then, there are no records of BUSU associating with anything related to the lobby effort of CFS. In 2001, discussion about CASA representing BUSU on the federal stage of politics began. At the April 6, 2001 meeting of BUSAC, a motion was passed that laid the groundwork for BUSU to become a CASA member.19 It is unknown how the motion actually read as minutes from that meeting have been lost; however, news articles surrounding the issue read as if it was understood that a referendum of the student body would be held in the near future.20 This vote was ultimately held on March 26, 27 and 28, 2002. The debate surrounding this referendum shaped up with a Yes side which was pro-CASA, and a No side which was pro-CFS and would assume a No vote to CASA would mean students were voting Yes to the CFS.21 This led the Yes side to take an anti-CFS stance, using the same issues as the 1991 No team, while adding criticism about legal issues that other student unions have had with the CFS

Press Staff Writer, CFS told to limit hired guns on campus., The Brock Press, St. Catharines, ON., March 6, 1991. 14 Tammy Everts, CFS a powerful lobbying force., The Brock Press, St. Catharines, ON., March 6, 1991. 15 Jane Arnold, CFS offers students important federal representation., The Brock Press, St. Catharines, ON., March 20, 1991. 16 Jeff Wilson, Doubt CFS saved students from GST., The Brock Press, St. Catharines, ON., March 6, 1991. 17 Brian Tracy Kelly., Say No to CFS., The Brock Press, St. Catharines, ON., March 20, 1991. 18 David Schimpky, Brock votes against CFS membership., The Brock Press, St. Catharines, ON., April 3, 1991 19 Pat Byck, Lobby group, bookstore on the referendum ballot., The Brock Press, St. Catharines, ON., March 5, 2002. 20 Ibid. 21 Nathan Holmes., CASA vs CFS., The Brock Press, St. Catharines, ON., March 12, 2002.

13

previously.22 Regardless, only 350 students cast a ballot in the referendum, well short of the 950 needed to meet quorum.23 A little over six months later, the question of BUSUs membership in CASA would go back to referendum, but would suffer a similar fate. On October 8-10, 2002 students would once again vote on BUSUs membership in CASA.24 There was seemingly less fanfare surrounding this referendum than the one in March, as only a Yes/pro-CASA side was actively campaigning. There was an unofficial No side led by those who had lead it in March, but their efforts were not near what was displayed earlier that year. Nevertheless, the referendum did not meet quorum as only 548 voted while 945 were needed for quorum.25 Vice President University Affairs Bret Bergie believed that two tries with the students was valiant, but noted that BUSU needed to resolve the issue. As per BUSU bylaws, non-constitutional and non-monetary referendums that fail to reach quorum twice consecutively are subject to the fate of BUSAC, who can determine the outcome of the question with a vote at council. Bergie believed a motion should be put to BUSAC to affirm the membership,26 and at their October 21, 2002 meeting, BUSAC voted to affirm and ratify BUSUs membership in CASA.27 Neither referendum question had asked for a direct ancillary fee, and thus BUSU pays the CASA membership fee from its operating budget.

Chris Dart, Crystal Langille., Anti-CASA campaign heats up., The Brock Press, St. Catharines, ON., March 26, 2002. 23 Crystal Langille, Longest student election ever draws to a close., The Brock Press, St. Catharines, ON., April 3, 2002. 24 Renee Tomovick., CASA referendum: Round II., The Brock Pres, St. Catharines, ON., October 9, 2002. 25 Troy Brooks., Referendum Explanation., The Brock Press, St. Catharines, ON., October 22, 2002. 26 Renee Tomovick., Students choose not to vote., The Brock Press, October 15, 2002. 27 Renee Tomovick., Brock now a CASA School., The Brock Press, November 5, 2002.

22

2.1

Other CASA Reviews

As the Brock University Students Union (BUSU) assesses, analyzes and reviews its efforts as representative and lobbyists of its members interests to the federal government, it does so fully conscious that it is neither the first, nor will it be the last, student union/association to undertake such an endeavor. Careful consideration is given to those unions/associations that have conducted and documented similar ventures as they will provide BUSU with a fundamental direction for its own efforts. This section of The National View will scrutinize these other reports and examine their arrangement, organization, construction and conclusions. Four separate reports will be considered: Re-focusing the Lens: Assessing the Challenge of Youth Involvement in Public Policy, University of Waterloo Federation of Students Student Council OUSA/CASA Review Committee Final Report, Student Society of McGill University Review of Federal Student Lobby Groups and University Students Council of the University of Western Ontario External Political Representation Review: CASA. Re-focusing the Lens: Assessing the Challenge of Youth Involvement in Public Policy was published in June of 1999 and was written as a joint project of The Ontario Secondary School Students Association (OSSSA) and The Institute on Governance (IOG). While it is not directly a review of the federal lobbying efforts of a student union/association, it does examine the strengths and weaknesses of the Canadian Alliance of Student Associations (CASA) as a lobbyist, which is what this report has in common with those written by student unions/association. Re-focusing the Lens examines the ability of young people to influence public policy in Canada and the barriers to greater involvement28 as government always talk of the importance of youth but struggle to include them within the decision making process. This report uses a case study methodology based on a youth and governance typology graph designed for this report to examine and evaluate selected models in which youth have both succeeded and failed to influence.29 The examination and evaluation within each case study takes into consideration nine factors that contribute to successfully influencing public policy. These nine factors are listed within the report in no order of importance and are as follows30

1) Understand the political process and the art of influence. 2) Develop a clear mandate and focus, and know who your constituency is. 3) Develop strategies to manage the loss of organizational capital.
28

Phillip Haid, Elder C. Marques & Jon Brown., Re-focusing the Lens: Assessing the Challenge of Youth Involvement in Public Policy, The Ontario Secondary Schools Student Association and The Institute on Governance, Ottawa, June 1999. 29 Phillip Haid, Elder C. Marques & Jon Brown., Re-focusing the Lens: Assessing the Challenge of Youth Involvement in Public Policy, The Ontario Secondary Schools Student Association and The Institute on Governance, Ottawa, June 1999. 30 Phillip Haid, Elder C. Marques & Jon Brown., Re-focusing the Lens: Assessing the Challenge of Youth Involvement in Public Policy, The Ontario Secondary Schools Student Association and The Institute on Governance, Ottawa, June 1999.

4) Create an effective communications strategy. 5) Balance the inherent tension between safeguarding complete autonomy and successfully influencing policy. 6) Produce policy-relevant work and be responsive to the media and views of your membership. 7) Learn how to seek out diverse funding sources and implement sound financial management practices. 8) Build partnerships with the like-minded individuals and groups, including intergenerational collaboration. 9) Empower all members of the organization rather than just the top.

The Youth and Governance typology graph organizes various youth orientation organizations by the level of youth autonomy against the geographical and political scope of their work. Each group represented within this graph as a case study within the report. CASA is classified as youth-run, the highest level of autonomy, and national in its geographical and political scope. A side but important and curious note, the Canadian Federation of Students (CFS) is not included in this graph and thus is not a case study in a report on that explores how young people influence various levels of government. The complete graph is as follows31

Youth & Governance Typology

Level Youth

Youth-Run Youth Wing Youth-Adult

OSSA

CASA AYC

Autonomy

Organization Created for Youth

CAYFO

AYPAC

St. Trustees

CPJ

YRTE

Phillip Haid, Elder C. Marques & Jon Brown., Re-focusing the Lens: Assessing the Challenge of Youth Involvement in Public Policy, The Ontario Secondary Schools Student Association and The Institute on Governance, Ottawa, June 1999.

31

Local

Provincial

National

International

Geographical/Political Scope

The case study of CASA offers general details of how the organization came to be, and how it conducts its business as well as list its strengths, existing gaps and the lessons learned from CASAs model. Re-Focusing the Lens believes CASA understands the political process and has developed relationships with decision-makers as a result of presenting them with achievable objectives that are not at odds with the political climate.32 Further to that and as a result of being a youth-run organization, CASA has a great of deal legitimacy as a voice of the young people who they represent and has developed a very strong consensus culture within itself. Finally, the cost of membership in CASA provides those members with value for their money for the service offered.33 Nevertheless, CASAs reliance on its National Director is a very large weakness of the corporation, so much that a mere average National Director would cost CASA a great deal of opportunity. This reliance on the National Director is also a result of CASAs reliance on the goodwill and commitment of its membership34 who are typically elected members of student governments or volunteers. Also, it is discussed that the CASA image with average students is almost non-existent, or strained at best as their communication strategies are not overly effective. What this study learned from CASA is that a focused and concise mandate offers an organization the ability to earn the art of influence within their sector, and that overdependence on few resources will strain the organizations ability to be effective. As this report was designed to examine the ability of young people to influence public policy, and not a directly review the effectiveness of CASA as federal lobbyist, it does not offer no concise or direct conclusion on the matter. While it explores and details the strengths and weakness of CASA ability to influence decision makers on behalf of young people it does not weight these success against the short-comings in as a cost/benefit analyses would. Re-focusing the Lens is essentially a for your consideration study that examines rather than evaluates. Nevertheless, it is a valuable document as its age is a reference point when charting CASAs development and is a third party study that can offer objectivity those involved in student government will struggle to bring.

Phillip Haid, Elder C. Marques & Jon Brown., Re-focusing the Lens: Assessing the Challenge of Youth Involvement in Public Policy, The Ontario Secondary Schools Student Association and The Institute on Governance, Ottawa, June 1999. 33 Phillip Haid, Elder C. Marques & Jon Brown., Re-focusing the Lens: Assessing the Challenge of Youth Involvement in Public Policy, The Ontario Secondary Schools Student Association and The Institute on Governance, Ottawa, June 1999. 34 Phillip Haid, Elder C. Marques & Jon Brown., Re-focusing the Lens: Assessing the Challenge of Youth Involvement in Public Policy, The Ontario Secondary Schools Student Association and The Institute on Governance, Ottawa, June 1999.

32

The third-party objectivity provided by Re-focusing the Lens cannot be provided in the following examples, as these respective student unions/associations have taken it upon themselves to examine and evaluate their efforts and relationship with CASA, CFS and the Federal Government. The Federation of Students Student Council, University of Waterloo and the Student Society of McGill University (SSMU) Review of Federal Student Lobby Groups are more evaluative, with a concise conclusion, and direct action as a result of these reports. In September of 2002, the Federation of Students Student Council at the University of Waterloo established the CASA/OUSA Review Committee with a mandate to investigate the relative costs and benefits of the Canadian Alliance of Student Associations,35 which produced a final report in January 2003 while the SSMU report would be made public in February 2003. Both these reports come at a time when CASA was undergoing an extensive internal review and was seeing changes in its membership.36 The Federation of Students Student Council OUSA/CASA Review Committee focused its attention on the past successes and failures, organizational structure and consonance with Federation Goals, while detailing the development and current position of both organizations. Furthermore, the committee was asked to establish a position37 and evaluate CASA on its ideological position, activism, member, media and government relations among many things. Aside from these aspects, the report itself provides a birds eye view of CASA which details the day to day workings of the organization, such as CASA financial management, staff structure and decision making. The OUSA/CASA Review Committee list 13 separate incidences over a span of six years (19972003) where CASA policy and advocacy priorities were implemented by the Federal Government. These priorities include shifting from a split of merit and needs- based scholarships to a predominately needsbased scholarship model through the Canada Millennium Scholarship Foundation, a tax exemption for the interest on a student loan, and increasing the deductible tax limit of scholarships. These achievements are consistent with the report findings that believe CASA research and policy and government relations to be their strengths as an organization. Conversely, the report finds CASAs member and media relations, as well as their activism and campaigns to be lacking, citing infrequent communication from home office with regard to initiatives and activities, a lack of ambition to overtly publicize its efforts, and insufficient coordination on campaigns as root causes for the inadequacies in these areas. Fundamentally, the report believes CASA has great potential, but a large part of it is unexercised. It notes that, as CASA has grown as an organization, specifically in its number of members, it has struggled to remain focused and as driven as it had once been, due to member apathy and a lack of strong leadership. The report concludes in a neatly worded concise statement that recommends the Federation of Students at the University of Waterloo remain member of CASA.

Liam McHugh-Russell, Federation of Students Council OUSA/CASA Review Committee Report., Federation of Students, University of Waterloo, January 2003. 36 Liam McHugh-Russell, Federation of Students Council OUSA/CASA Review Committee Report., Federation of Students, University of Waterloo, January 2003. 37 Liam McHugh-Russell, Federation of Students Council OUSA/CASA Review Committee Report., Federation of Students, University of Waterloo, January 2003.

35

In February of 2003 when the Student Society of McGill University (SSMU) published its report it was still a member of CASA; however, this report would recommend a change. SSMU Community and Government Committee prepared this report which explores specifically CASA and CFSs structure, policy and strategy, as well as first person testimonials of various individuals who have been associated in various capacities with either group in the past. The conclusions and recommendation of the report are open-ended and provide general direction but nothing is definitive. It would also be important to note that the SSMU report did not directly consider which option best fits them as a student union and thus their report was a strict comparison of the two groups. Throughout the examination of CFS and CASA, the report presents CFS in an objective manner, while it criticizes and evaluates CASA. An example of this is a statement concluding the CASA Policy section of the report, Despite any trends or patterns, it is clear CASA remains a conservative group. A group that calls for a tuition-freeze and changes to the tax system, rather than proclaiming more radical demands, such as the elimination of tuition.38 The CFS policy section only lists and offers brief explanations of various policy stances, while offering no evaluation of them. The testimonials are also evaluative, as both the representatives from CASA and CFS are promoting and defending their respective views of their organizations. The Discussion and Recommendations section of this report list its findings in manner that demonstrates CASAs inability to compare with CFS. For example, The CFS has a Federal and Provincial components, while CASA has only a Federal Office, and, The CFS has a service wing as well as dealing with political issues, while CASA is an exclusively political body. 39 The report concludes with this statement As a loosely organized group with an easy-in/easy-out policy, there is no reason to be tied down to an organization that is ineffective.40 While this report expresses a desire to leave CASA, no other direction beyond that is offered. The fourth and final report that will be examined in this section is similar to the previous two, as it comes from within a member organizations student union/association, but differs from these two in its approach. The University Student Council (USC) at the University of Western Ontario conducted an external political representation review and presented its findings in February 2007. The review was not conducted to discuss if the USC should end its relationship with CASA, but to indentify the strengths and weakness of CASA and work within the framework of the organization to build on the strengths and find ways to address the weakness. In doing so, the USC established its expectations of an external political representative in a set of principles, outlines what it believes to be the shortcomings of CASA within a concerns section and offers direction for the future of CASA and the USC relationship with CASA.41 The value of this report lies in the concerns outlined with regard to the weakness of CASA and productive and progressive nature in which they are discussed. Concerns with the voting structure, lack
SSMU Community and Governance Committee, Review of Federal Student Lobby Groups,. Student Society of McGill University ,February 2003. 39 SSMU Community and Governance Committee, Review of Federal Student Lobby Groups,. Student Society of McGill University ,February 2003. 40 SSMU Community and Governance Committee, Review of Federal Student Lobby Groups,. Student Society of McGill University ,February 2003. 41 Paris Meilleur, External political representation review:CASA., University Students Council, University of Western Ontario, February 2007.
38

of coordination with provincial groups, and inadequate entry points for student involvement are concisely articulated and draw attention to these issues.42 Furthermore, each area of concern has a coinciding recommendation which attempt to address the issues. This style lends itself quite well to the development of performance indicators for further evaluation, as the identification of these issues establishes a baseline for progress while the recommendations are the first step in achieving that progress. The next step would be to track any progress on the issues, but the report offers no indication something like this is the next step in evaluating external political representation.

Paris Meilleur, External political representation review:CASA., University Students Council, University of Western Ontario, February 2007.

42

2.2

The Nature of Student Government

It has become known around the inner-circles of student government that, as a business model, these unions, association and collaborations should not work. Every year, students across the country vote and elect sets of executives that will be responsible for the direction of their student unions or associations for the upcoming year. As a business model, such consistent turnover at the executive level brings incredible instability to that organization. More specifically, as executives come and go annually, so does the direction of the organization, and this cycle should logically cripple the business of student government. This annual succession limits the organizations ability to plan with any kind of certainty beyond that year. The cycle can also have a devastating effect on the corporate memory of an organization. Ultimately, the identity of such an organization changes with each new executive. Each of these factors on their own would severely hinder the ability of a corporation to do business, while a combination of two or more would be devastating to that business. Yet in spite of these perils, student governments continue on. The dynamic and ever changing direction of student governments allow these organizations to consistently evaluate their direction. Often a short memory is needed to breathe new life into a project left for dead. Moreover, a consistent shifting identity creates a great deal of opportunity for members to shape it. It does stand to reason that the nature of student government should not allow it to function as it does. The annual election of what equates to a Chief Executive Officer (CEO), Chief Financial Officer (CFO), Government Relations Officer (GRO) and Services Manager brings a new direction to such an organization with each new officer. As it is with other political and elected offices, it is understood that a new government is not under any obligation to continue under the same path, push the same initiatives or pursue similar goals as that previous to it. Thus any multi-year plan created by one executive team can quickly go from a document designed to guide the strategic growth development of the organization for years to come, to a dusty file tucked away in an obscure folder. Furthermore, this volatility can create a short-sighted nature in those elected; as they know their own expiry date from the very beginning. Nevertheless, while the annual turnover of the top level executives in student government is susceptible to a short-sighted nature, it is also an atmosphere that allows for and is tolerant of a consistently evaluative atmosphere. In any other organization, a new CEO would be given multiple years and numerous resources to achieve the vision, and would only be evaluated on macro level. With that said, it is conceivable that it will take the course of those multiple years and the cost of those numerous resources to learn if that direction that CEO was taking the organization was for the best. In a student government, a CEO, for better or worse, has only one years worth of resources to expend. Essentially, the yearly turnover can be a damage control measure that produces an annual clean slate that will allow for macro and micro evaluation of the previous administration in order to move forward. The annual turnover of the top level executives in student government also can compromise the corporate memory of that organization. Arguably, a strength of any organization can be its ability to

retain its staff, as they will develop over time and eventually possess detailed knowledge of the operations of that organization. This memory will contain how success were previously achieved and provide insight into missteps from the past so as they are not repeated. It is conceivable that this information is available in the files left by predecessor; however, those files are often secondary sources to the verbal accounts of an individual who was there. With the annual turnover of a student government, a substantial portion of that memory leaves each year. More importantly, the ability to answer for the success and failures of that year are compromised, as those who can answer are often no longer part of the organization. With respect to the direction of an organization, a purge of the old is not entirely bad. As it is in sports, after letting in a bad goal, throwing a bad pass or swinging at a bad pitch, it can be beneficial for that goalie, quarterback, and batter to have a short memory, forget about that mistake, and focus on the opportunity to make the next save, complete the next pass, or hit the next pitch. This forward thinking helps the progression of an organization as it does not allow it to overly dwell on the past. Perhaps this nowhere more true than in student government. Often there is a desire for one administration to distance itself from another, and dwelling on the past will not help them achieve that distance. On there own each of these consequences of the annual turnover of student government executives has its pros and cons; however, one must envision the whole as greater than the sum of its parts. An ever-changing direction and the short-sightedness that are often complimented by the struggle to maintain a corporate memory, can leave an organization with a consistent lack of identity. Student governments are consistently reinventing themselves, sometimes into brands that were previously ineffective. This consistent reinvention does not allow for any kind of certainty for the identity of a student government. The constant need for reinvention, while limiting in some respect, also presents an incredible opportunity for those new to the organization. These new individuals are given the freedom to define their terms in office, and thus can present those in the respective roles with a very strong sense of empowerment and ability to genuinely impact those who they serve. With this reinvention comes the renewed energy and enthusiasm that will dictate the identity of the year to come.

3.1

History and Development of CFS

In 1981, representatives from over 70 Student Unions and Associations met at Carleton University on October 14 19 for what would be the founding conference of the Canadian Federation of Students (CFS). The formation of CFS was the amalgamation of two existing student lobby organizations: the National Union of Students (NUS) and the Association of Student Councils Canada (AOSC). Both of the organizations had members, governing documents, financial and capital resources that would be transferred to the CFS at the conclusion of the conference.43 At this conference, a Constitution for the CFS was in the process of being finalized and was yet to be ratified by the membership. Nevertheless, committee composition, membership and the general direction of this new organization were discussed and ratified.44 The CFS operates under a set of seven principles as well as a Declaration of Students Right. The principles are as follows45

To organize students on a democratic, co-operative basis in advancing our own interests and in advancing the interests of our community; To provide a common framework within which students can communicate, exchange information, and share experience, skill and ideas; To ensure the effective use and distribution of the resources of the student movement, while maintaining a balanced growth and development of student organizations that respond to students' needs and desires; To bring students together to discuss and to achieve necessary educational, administrative or legislative change wherever decision-making affects students; To facilitate co-operation among students in organizing services that supplement our academic experience, provide for our human needs and which develop a sense of community with our peers and other members of society; To articulate the real desire of students to fulfill the duties, and be accorded the rights of citizens in our society and in the international community; To achieve our ultimate goal - a system of post-secondary education that is accessible to all, which is of high quality, which is nationally planned, which recognizes the legitimacy of student representation, and the validity of student rights, and whose role in society is clearly recognized and appreciated.

The Declaration of Students Rights further articulates several of these principles, as it discusses a students right to education, employment, organize, justice in the education community and services.46 CFSs approach to upholding these principles and maintaining these rights is three-pronged approach that includes: research and development of policy and proposals for submission to various levels of government; lobbing and maintaining regular contact with governments; and preparing petitions and organizing mass demonstrations of its membership.47 Ultimately, the CFS believes it derives its ability to effectively represent its members and affect change as a result of the strength it has in its numbers.
Minutes from the Founding Conference, Canadian Federation of Students., October 14-19, 1981. Available at www.studentunion.ca. Accessed August 2008. 44 Minutes from the Founding Conference, Canadian Federation of Students., October 14-19, 1981. Available at www.studentunion.ca. Accessed August 2008. 45 Available at http://www.cfs-fcee.ca/html/english/about/principles.php. Accessed October 2008. 46 Declaration of Students Rights, Canadian Federation of Students., Available at www.wstudentunion.ca., Accessed August 2008. 47 Available at http://www.cfs-fcee.ca/html/english/about/approach.php. Accessed October 2008.
43

Currently, CFS represent over one-half million students in over 80 student unions/associations across Canada.48 Representatives from each of the member institutions meet four times annually at Provincial and National Congress to set the direction, policies and priorities of CFS. 49 The growth, development and diversification of the CFS over the last 27 years is extensive as a services division was developed that now offers such programs as the Ufile tax service, a travel agency, and student housing website to students directly; as well as National Student Health Network for Student Unions and Associations.50 The CFS also has a wide ranging set of policies and lobby efforts. Their post-secondary education policies include such things as the cost of tuition, student debt, and loan programs. The CFS catalog of polices extends beyond PSE as international trade, the treatment of aboriginal persons, and date rape are displayed on the CFS website.51 A students union/association can be either a Full or Prospective Member of CFS. Full membership is achieved when a student union/association has run a successful referendum of its membership to approve their membership in the CFS. A Prospective Member is a student union/association whose has passed a motion at a level of their government, be it at the executive, council or board level, which indicates their intention to join CFS.52 A Full Member of the CFS is entitled to a vote a National Congress and full access to the resources and service available through the CFS, where a Prospective Member is entitled to a vote at the Congress but is limit to which and how much access they, as a student union/association, have to the resources and services of CFS.53 The CFS has recently changed their bylaws with respect to joining and leaving the organization, with either type of referenda requiring a minimum of 10% of the membership voting to achieve quorum. A referendum must also be overseen by a four-person panel, two of whom are appointed by the CFS. A member of the CFS is also a member of CFS-Services, a separate legal entity, but a body which shares the same bylaws and decision-making structure as the CFS. In addition, a member must also be a member of the related provincial component. With respect to Brock and BUSU, this would be CFS-O, or the Canadian Federation of Students-Ontario. This three-part membership is mandatory, and thus there are very few student unions that choose to be a member of the CFS (and CFS-Services, and CFS-O), while also holding membership in an alternate federal or provincial lobby group. In Ontario, only the University of Windsor Students Alliance has dual-representation provincially, and is only represented by CFS federally. The cost of a membership in the CFS is not readily apparent on the CFS website or in documents. The most accurate indication of their fees comes from examining the ancillary fee schedules for students
48 49

Available at http://www.cfs-fcee.ca/html/english/about/index.php. Accessed October 2008. Available at http://www.cfs-fcee.ca/html/english/about/index.php, Accessed October 2008. 50 Available at http://www.cfs-fcee.ca/html/english/programmes/index.php., Accessed October 2008. 2008.
51

Available at http://www.cfs-fcee.ca/html/english/programmes/index.php., Accessed October

By-law I, Canadian Federation of Students., Available at www.studentunion.ca., Accessed August 2008. 53 By-law I, Canadian Federation of Students., Available at www.studentunion.ca., Accessed August 2008.

52

who are in CFS member schools, but these numbers are not consistent with each other. Nipissing students are charged the most for a CFS membership, at $15.75 per student per year54, while Laurentian students are charged the least, at $11.00 per student per year.55 The Brock Graduate Students Association (GSA) is a member of the CFS, and full-time students pay $7.15 per semester ($14.30 per year), while part-time students pay $3.28 per semester ($7.16 per year).56 At Guelph and Trent, the fees are broken down between federal and provincial membership fees. Guelph federal fees per year are $7.76, while provincial fees total $6.46, for a membership cost of $14.22.57 Trent federal fees are $7.80 per year, while provincial fees are $6.50, for a membership cost of $14.30.58

Available at http://www.nipissingu.ca/finance/studentcharges_fees_incidental.asp. Available at http://www.laurentian.ca/Laurentian/Home/Departments/Student+Fees/FEES/DOMESTIC+STUDENTS/D omestic+Undergraduate/U+FT+Incidentals+P.htm?Laurentian_Lang=en-CA. 56 Available at http://www.brocku.ca/finance/studentfinance/graduate/200809fallandwintersessionfees. 57 Available at http://www.uoguelph.ca/registrar/studentfinance/index.cfm?app=tuition&page=index&level=ug&year=200 9&semester=win&cohort=2008&campus=uofg&feepage=canft. 58 Available at http://www.trentu.ca/admin/finance/students/Fees/2008AY/DO0808FTP.pdf.
55

54

3.2

History and Development of CASA

The Canadian Alliance of Student Associations was officially incorporated in June of 1995,59 but its beginnings predate its incorporation by almost five years. In 1990, representatives from various student associations/unions gathered at the University of Alberta for the Winds Have Changed Conference. Many of these student unions had become disenchanted by the CFS switching focus and taking stances on a number of non-student issues, including Free Trade, and the Iraq war. This conference was designed to have these representatives discuss the challenges faced by a student while attending their respective institutions.60 The Winds of Change Conference became an annual event, and by 1994 this collection of student unions/associations felt they were ready to take the next step and form a new national post-secondary student organization. Using the framework of the Winds of Change Conferences, five student unions/associations ratified a constitution in January of 1995 to create the Canadian Alliance of Student Associations.61 CASA was founded on four basic principles that are as follow62

1) CASA will be member-driven in that the members of the Alliance would set the organization's policy agenda and define its goals. 2) CASA will focus on issues specific to post-secondary education, establishing a strong orientation toward policy development rather than social development. 3) CASA will ensure that membership within the alliance would not unfairly burden member associations. Joining CASA would be made easy through clear and flexible by-laws. Membership fees would be capped and kept to the lowest possible level. 4) CASA will focus its attention on those challenges facing post- secondary education students within federal jurisdiction only. Provincial advocacy would be best left to member associations. In effect, CASA established principles and practices that would promote a strong, grassroots, pragmatic alliance focusing exclusively on the problems facing postsecondary education students in Canada.

From these founding principles CASA developed a Vision and Mission statements that describe the ultimate goal of CASA and how they plan to achieve it. These statements are as follows63

Vision Canada will achieve an accessible, affordable and high quality post-secondary education system, whose students enjoy an excellent quality of life.

59 60

Available at http://www.casa.ca/index.php/history-of-casa.html. Accessed October 2008. Available at http://www.casa.ca/index.php/history-of-casa.html. Accessed October 2008. 61 Available at http://www.casa.ca/index.php/history-of-casa.html. Accessed October 2008. 62 Available at http://www.casa.ca/index.php/history-of-casa.html. Accessed October 2008. 63 Guiding Statements, Supplementary Materials of the Annual General Meeting, March 2008.

Mission Through its member-driven structure and grassroots approach, CASAs mission is to advocate for students through policy development and research, awareness campaigns, government relations, and partnerships with other stakeholders.

As stated within the founding principles and again in the Mission, CASA has a very strong policy focus and puts a lot of emphasis on presenting realistic policy initiatives on post-secondary education to the federal government64. This is where it believes it derives its strength as a student lobby organization. CASAs policy development is based on a set of fundamental values that are believed to be central to a post-secondary education, those being accessibility, affordability, innovation and quality. Currently, CASA has 45 policy positions listed on its website, complete with background information, that detail CASAs position on numerous issues including Ancillary Fees, Interest Relief, a Pan-Canadian Accord on Post-Secondary Education, Early Outreach Initiatives, a PSE Data-Collection Strategy, and Intellectual Property rights. The General Assembly is recognized as the highest governing body within CASA as it is responsible the direction, control, and inspiration the organization through the careful establishment of broad written policies reflecting the General Assembly's values and perspectives.65 Each member Student Association has one vote during each assembly. The National Director is a hired staff member responsible for the day-to-day affairs and management of the corporation,66 which include CASAs revenue and expenditures, human resources and general home office management.67 The General Assembly elects a Chief Governance Officer (CGO) from within its membership, to chair the Assemblies, and act as a representative and spokesperson of the organization to outside parties. The National Director and Chief Governance Officer both sit as Officers of the Corporation.68 Membership in CASA is attained when a membership agreement is established between General Assembly and the member institution.69 The terms of this membership are not detailed in either CASA Constitution or Governance Manual, and each application for membership is handled on a case-by-case basis. Generally, CASA encourages each member to join the organization according to the processes outlined by each Student Associations unique bylaws. Further, General Assembly can grant a student
64 65

Available at http://www.casa.ca/index.php/what-is-casa.html. Accessed October 2008. GP #2a Governing Style, Governance Process, Governance Manual, Canadian Alliance of Student Associations., Supplementary Materials for CASA Transition Conference, May 2008. 66 Article 8: National Director, Constitution, Canadian Alliance of Student Associations., Supplementary Materials for the CASA Transition Conference, May 2008. 67 Governance Manual, Canadian Alliance of Student Associations., Supplementary Materials for CASA Transition Conference, May 2008. 68 Constitution, Canadian Alliance of Student Associations., Supplementary Materials for CASA Transition Conference, May 2008. 69 Constitution, Canadian Alliance of Student Associations., Supplementary Materials for CASA Transition Conference, May 2008.

association/union a Prospective Membership70, but what rights or responsibilities this membership entails are not substantially detailed. A member can terminate their membership agreement provided it presents General Assembly with such a motion twelve months in advance of the action, or a member may be expelled from CASA should such a motion pass at a General Assembly. Again, the governing documents of CASA provide little information with regard to these processes. The cost of a membership in CASA is based on a formula that takes into consideration the number of full-time and part-time undergraduate students (the full-time equivalency of the unions membership), and the total annual gross revenue of the respective student association.71 The actual formula is ((FTE + 2 * TAGR/1000)-1000)*2.09, with 2.09 being indexed to inflation. Regardless of the figure produced by the calculation, a member association/union will pay no less than $3672 and no more than $46 446.72 Currently CASA has 23 member student associations/unions, which represent approximately 300 000 students, across Canada.73 One pays the minimum, six members pay the maximum, and BUSU pays $46,265, the most of any school which is not paying the cap.

Constitution, Canadian Alliance of Student Associations., Supplementary Materials for CASA Transition Conference, May 2008. 71 Membership Fee Estimates 2007-2008, Canadian Alliance of Student Associations., Supplementary Materials for CASA Transition Conference, May 2008. 72 Membership Fee Estimates 2007-2008, Canadian Alliance of Student Associations., Supplementary Materials for CASA Transition Conference, May 2008. 73 Available at http://www.casa.ca/index.php/what-is-casa.html., Accessed October 2008.

70

3.3

Criticisms of CFS

Having explored the history structure of CFS, it is also necessary to examine some of the criticisms of the organization. While the rest of this report is researched and cited, criticisms are much harder to document. The majority result from word-of-mouth and situational reactions, and are not formally documented anywhere. While any organizations website will tout its own positives, there are often hidden negatives and negative perceptions that exist, which may or may not be an accurate portrayal of the true picture. The following section is not a reflection of BUSUs perception, and these views are not necessarily held by BUSU. It is intended to round out the background information using perceptions of the organization that some others may hold. Perhaps the largest criticism of CFS is its protectionist stranglehold on any member associations who attempt to leave the CFS. The CFS bylaws require a 5% quorum for any defederation referendum (according to available documentation, though there is discussion about raising this threshold to 10%), regardless of the normal standard used by that association, or the quorum that was required when that member joined. Any defederation referendums also require a four-member oversight panel, of which two members are appointed by the CFS. This panel will often suspend or overrule local bylaws in favour of higher spending limits, and allow very liberal campaigning practices. Pro-CFS material is typically distributed on campuses prior to the campaign period without violating the newly-set rules, while antiCFS material is severely restricted, or ground to a halt when the referendum committee deadlocks 2-2 when considering whether to approve the material. Dozens of CFS Office staff and representatives from other CFS schools often appear on the campus during federation and defederation votes, and campaign for the pro-CFS side. The CFS also has a perception of being an overly litigious organization, and is very quick to threaten legal action against its detractors. Often the anti-CFS campaign in referenda is threatened by lawyers to remove statements or claims from their official documentation. If a subsequent vote determines that the member will leave the CFS, more litigation might follow claiming violations of campaign rules, grasping to keep hold of the member association. Campus and national media have been threatened with legal action in many stories, when proof is not immediately evident or referenced. The CFS legal representatives are also very meticulous about the differences between the CFS, CFSServices, and CFS-O (or other provincial associations), and will sometimes threaten legal action when the wrong organization is mentioned in a negative way. The perception that the CFS will use student money to threaten legal action against other student associations, which then needs to use student money to defend the allegations, leads to a very bad taste in many peoples mouths. Local autonomy is another area in which CFS is criticized. The perception is that member Locals (as they are referred to), are not always free to develop their own stances on some issues if they do not align with CFS policy. The CFS is heavily structured like a union, with members at conferences being addressed as Local ###, rather than by their association name. The mentality of union solidarity often leaves member associations unable to speak freely about topics of their choosing. Members will often

automatically side with any other union during labour disputes, and some subjects are considered taboo to discuss at a campus-level. With a history and mentality of unionism, the CFS is often alleged to have close ties with with the New Democratic Party (NDP). CFS and NDP policy frequently align, and while the CFS remains officially non-partisan, it recently passed a motion supporting the opposition coalition which was trying to topple the federal government in December 2008. NDP members are known to rally around CFS demands, and to assist the CFS in some of its activities. As one story is relayed, CASA had planned to use a prominent room in Centre Block on Parliament Hill for a media announcement. This room is only made available to the public when it is not being used by an MP. On the day of the event, CASA was greeted by officials that stated a member of the NDP needed the room for their business, and CASA was bumped from the room. It was later discovered that numerous members of the CFS had been present and had influenced the MP to book the room and thwart CASA. The CFS has also been known to counter-organize at other student events, including some held by CASA and OUSA. Within the last few years at Brock, members of the Graduate Students Association (GSA) were able to successfully disrupt a peaceful BUSU rally on campus, with CFS materials visible. The CFS and CFS-O sometimes send out negative press releases attacking CASA and OUSA efforts, positions, or responses to government announcements. Its aggressive mobilization tactics also include annual gatherings at or marches to government buildings to protest action or inaction on some issue. Critics decry these tactics as coordinated loud noises that receive media attention, but are poorly received by the decision-makers and do not further the groups policy efforts. The organization is also perceived to recruit pro-CFS candidates in student union elections, hoping to turn non-aligned or CASA schools towards CFS membership during their term. With respect to policies, the CFS is criticized as being too farsighted and unrealistic in some demands. With an ultimate goal of free tuition (among other policies), this message is seen as ignoring some of the baby-steps that need to be taken in order to achieve that goal. It is quite obviously something that is not going to happen overnight, and there are many stages and hurdles in the way. Rather than attacking the hurdles, the CFS continues towards this ultimate goal without addressing some issues that could be improved or addressed within a shorter time period. Beyond the ideological differences between some CASA and CFS policies, the CFS is criticized for developing policy beyond the educational realm. While issues such as free trade, foreign wars, abortion policy and date rape are undeniably hot topics and reasonable causes, many people believe that student associations should not be in the business of creating policy in these areas, and should limit the focus to educational policy. Finally, the CFS is sometimes criticized for using over-equality or hyper-equality while conducting business. In addition the provincial representatives, the national executive includes an aboriginal representative, a francophone representative, a graduate students representative, a students of colour representative, and a womens representative. Member locals are expected to bring an equal balance of men and women to conferences, and diversity caucuses (including the above, and one for non-heterosexual orientation) meet at conferences. This is perceived by some as an over-use of political

correctness, and demeans the perception that any one representative from a student association is able to effectively relay the concerns of their members without a special interest caucus.

3.4

Criticisms of CASA

Having explored the history structure of CASA, it is also necessary to examine some of the criticisms of the organization. While the rest of this report is researched and cited, criticisms are much harder to document. The majority result from word-of-mouth and situational reactions, and are not formally documented anywhere. While any organizations website will tout its own positives, there are often hidden negatives and negative perceptions that exist, which may or may not be an accurate portrayal of the true picture. The following section is not a reflection of BUSUs perception, and these views are not necessarily held by BUSU. It is intended to round out the background information using perceptions of the organization that some others may hold. The largest criticism of CASA is that it is no more than a special interest group the represents a small sample of a much larger demographic. This is largely due to the fact that CASA only represents little more than half of the post-secondary education students that CFS does. Following the line of reasoning, how can a group that represents, at best, one-third of the demographic it attempt to speak for claim to be an authority of their wants and needs? Many people within student union and government circles continue to see CASA as little more than a splinter group offshoot of the real national association in the country. As the CFS is criticized for its loose affiliation with the NDP, CASA is said to have a similar association with the Liberal Party. This is a result of CASAs praise for Liberal Party initiatives when they formed the government of Canada in the 1990s and into the 2000s. As governing party is now the Conservatives, some of that sentiment has seen to be cooling off. Still, the Liberal Party touts many of the policy positions that have been developed by CASA, and CASA still rated the Liberal Party highest on its 2008 Election Report Card. The 2008 Liberal platform contained a plethora of CASA policy suggestions, including the elimination of tax credits in favour of up-front grants, the creation of 300,000 bursaries per year, a reduction in interest rates on student loans, and a longer interest-free grace period after graduation before repayment. Some suggest that CASA has coziness with whatever party forms the government, refusing to push too hard for needed changes to PSE in Canada. The suggestion is that there are battles which need to be won in the name of students, but CASA chooses instead to fight the battles that can be won in order to reinforce its relevance. By picking easy targets instead of tough battles, choosing practicality over principles, CASA can continue to claim successes without much effort, and governments can give themselves a pat on the back when they reward CASA with a win. This claim, of course, implies that CASA is only asking for crumbs when the students of Canada need the whole pie. While CFS is criticized for overly aggressive mobilization, CASA is comparatively the opposite. CASA is criticized for its lack of mobilization effort, resulting in too little attention and relevance. If there are no students willing to stand up and march behind CASAs efforts, CASA must not be asking for the things that students want. Marches and demonstrations attract attention and responses; they are attractive images and stories for the media, and are hard for politicians to ignore. If CASA is not able to

convince its own members to follow their lead, what makes politicians think that students at CASA schools will cast votes according to their education policy suggestions? And of course, if people arent going to vote, why would their policy suggestions hold any relevance on Parliament Hill? CASA is also perceived as a relatively closed organization. Beyond the President, a Vice President, and maybe a staff member sent as a delegate to a CASA conference, there are no opportunities to get involved in CASA efforts, and no way to influence the policy for an average student. Unless one joins the ranks of student government, which is a very time-consuming and public process, there is no way to gain access to the organization, help further its goals, or understand the mechanisms and the machinery. This disconnect creates resentment or disinterest on member campuses, and many students wonder what their money is actually achieving. To contrast this with the CFS, there are often CFS representatives or ambassadors among the student ranks, solid results can be seen from the CFSServices division, and there are ample opportunities to become involved in protests and petitions. A closed organization such as CASA pales in comparison, especially in years where CASA is unable to achieve policy wins. There is a criticism of CASAs lack of bilingualism within the organization. CASA holds only one Francophone school within its membership (Universit de Moncton), and this school accepts that the business of the organization will be conducted in English. While any members are free to speak French at any time, there are no simultaneous translation services provided, and the French-speaking staff members must then translate the speech back to English for the benefit of everyone else. While documents are produced in both official languages, the lack of a true bilingualism and the lack of any members from French-speaking Quebec (the only Quebec member is Bishops University, which operates solely in English) hinders the organizations perception as a true representative of Canadian students. The staff of CASA is also perceived by many to be too involved, and too inexperienced. CASA staff is typically young, with many coming into their jobs straight from university experiences. A typical staff member lasts only a few years with the organization before moving onto other opportunities, leading to a severe lack of institutional memory within CASA. The highest ranking staff member is the National Director, who is often perceived to have too much control over the agenda and direction of the organization while in power. A poor National Director could sink CASA, while an overeager National Director could influence their staff, and have staff members set policy and direction for the organization. Any group which does not let its members set the agenda and direction typically heads towards unnecessary priorities, and membership dissatisfaction. With an easy-in, easy-out policy, many student associations have chosen to terminate or downgrade their memberships due to short-term dissatisfaction with the way staff guide the organization. Lastly, CASA is often perceived to be too obsessed with what it is not. CASA members typically define their mutual interests through negatives: they are not CFS; they do not take stances on social issues; they (typically) do not engage in protest action; they are not a services organization; and they do not have as much restriction on local autonomy. This unhealthy obsession over what CASA is not (or what CFS is) often pre-empts the discussion of what CASA is, and what CASA should be. It hinders

forward progress, and may often eliminate some positive direction and ideas just because CFS is already doing that. This preoccupation reinforces the perception that CASA is insecure about its status as the current junior representative on the national level.

3.5

Current State Affairs at CASA

The CASA 2008 Annual General Meeting (AGM), held in March of that year, brought about some organizational and structural changes. These changes were the approval of a new constitution, and a new governance manual that rendered previous such documents obsolete. Also presented to the membership at this AGM was the Annual Report of the National Director, a SWOT Analysis, a Comprehensive Communications Plan which was designed to improve CASAs communications efforts in the upcoming year, and a strategy for growth management. When the membership left this conference CASA was a very different organization than when they arrived. A review of CASAs governing documents began with a motion passed at the 2007 CASA AGM calling for an the development of governing documents that will effectively balance the diversities, growth, and interests within the organization including the voting, fee, committee, and subcommittee/caucus structure.74 The dialogue surrounding the membership fee and voting structure presented the issues as synonymous, as a change in one would provoke a change in the other; the National Directors 2008 Annual Report summarizes the dialogue surrounding the voting and fee structure and presents a rationale for the decision made. This year, responding to some continued member concerns, CASA conducted another review of our membership fee assessment model, identifying issues in our current formula and researching alternative options. Several alternatives models were presented at the AGM, however, after significant discussion and debate it was decided unanimously by the membership to keep the same voting structure based on the following logic:

1) CASA views an associations capacity to financially contribute to CASA as an important facet in the calculation of fees, making gross revenue of a student association an important consideration in addition to full-time equivalencies (FTEs); 2) an entirely new funding formulas, such as fee bands or an FTE-only formula, could lead to debilitating volatility in the fees paid by smaller schools; 3) any perceived injustices in the funding formula affect all schools equally, which means any change in rules for what is calculated in the Total Annual Gross Revenue would not lead to a significant re-distribution of fees; and
4) the best way to ensure an association is getting value from its CASA membership is to improve its effectiveness, rather than slight changes in the fee structure.75

The dialogue surrounding the committee and sub-committee/caucus structure is summed up within CASA Governance Manual. Committees will be used sparingly and ordinarily in an ad hoc capacity and

Zach Churchill, National Directors Annual Report:2008., The Canadian Alliance of Student Associations, Supplementary Materials for CASA Transition Conference, May 2008. 75 Zach Churchill, National Directors Annual Report:2008., The Canadian Alliance of Student Associations, Supplementary Materials for CASA Transition Conference, May 2008.

74

dissolved at the completion of their mandate.76 With this, CASA has no standing committees and the mandate of any ad hoc committee must be approved by the General Assembly. The committee structure of CASA was not the only aspect of its internal operations that was addressed and significantly modified. Previous to this conference, CASA elected a Board of Directors who would elect a Chair internally. The Chair acted as the spokesperson for the organization. This Board was filled with representatives from each region, who were each elected from a regional caucus, making for a seven member Board. These Directors also acted as regional representatives, acting as an intermediary on behalf of the members in their region.77 With these amendments, the CASA Board of Directors no longer exists, and the authority was consolidated within the Chief Governance Officer (CGO) and Chair, who is a specially empowered officer to the General Assembly.78 The authority of the CGO consists in making decisions that fall within the topics covered by General Assembly policies on Governance Process and General AssemblyManagement Delegation, and may represent the General Assembly to outside parties in announcing General Assembly-stated positions.79 Though the new constitution does out outline or reference these positions, the General Assembly also elects a Secretary, and a Treasurer who ensure the integrity of the General Assemblys documents and are responsible for the assurance of organizational performance against General Assembly-specified Executive Limitations policies.80 Though not mandated to act as such, the functioning practice is that the Chair, Secretary and Treasurer form a three-person Governance Officers(G.O.) team which functions as an executive, and oversees the work of the National Director (N.D.). With the elimination of Regional Directors comes the creation of Regional Coordinators (R.C.s). Also not established in CASA legislation, this is a seven-member group which is elected from within regional caucuses. There are two representatives from the West, two from the Central, two from the Atlantic, and one from the Prairie regions. These R.C.s function as a communication tool between the membership and the National Director in-between conferences. R.C.s are expected to establish monthly conference calls within their region, and pass on comments and updates both from the N.D. to the membership, but also from the membership to the N.D. There is also an additional expectation of additional consultation and strategic planning by the RCs and G.O.s together, and an expectation of some leadership and facilitation during conferences. The SWOT Analysis was prepared by home office staff and presented to the General Assembly at the Annual General Assembly in March of 2008. It list CASAs strengths as the presence it has in Ottawa,
Governance Manual, Canadian Alliance of Student Associations., Supplementary Materials for CASA Transition Conference, May 2008. 77 CASA By-laws, Canadian Alliance of Student Associations., Supplementary Materials for CASA Transition conference, May 2006 78 GP #2e General Assembly Chair & Chief Governance Officer, Governance Manual, Canadian Alliance of Student Associations., Supplementary Materials for CASA Transition Conference, May 2008. 79 GP #2e General Assembly Chair & Chief Governance Officer, Governance Manual, Canadian Alliance of Student Associations., Supplementary Materials for CASA Transition Conference, May 2008. 80 Governance Manual, Canadian Alliance of Student Associations., Supplementary Materials for CASA Transition Conference, May 2008.
76

and the access to decision makers that presence gives the organization, policy development that focuses on strictly post-secondary education, and the significant representation CASA has from Atlantic Canada. The list of weaknesses doubles the length of the strengths, and address concerns regarding CASAs ability to attract and retain qualified and experienced staff, the turnover that compromises the organizational memory and direction, underrepresentation from Ontario, Quebec, Graduate Associations, Colleges and Technical Institutes, and an inability to mobilize students. This list of weakness produces opportunities to improve its voice and representation in the Graduate, College and Technical Institutions market. Threats include the perception that CFS and the Federal Government are not as approachable as they used to be. Ultimately, this SWOT Analysis offers the casual viewer a glimpse of the organization, but little new information for those who are actively part of it. CASAs Comprehensive Communications Plan was designed to be a fluid document that works to improve CASAs public relations and communication strategy. This plan was originally adopted in June of 2007 at the Annual Policy and Strategy Conference and thus been in effect for over a year. The plan reads as the opportunities section of a SWOT Analysis would, as it highlights areas and aspects where the organization can improve their efforts. Those include building partnerships and networks, as well as the branding of CASA.81 There is one concrete goal outlined within this document, and that is to make the implementation of a new website a priority for the 2008-2009 year. The document also suggests discussion is needed to develop an evaluation template for the plan. In general CASA finds itself approaching a very interesting time as an organization. Along with all the amendments to the governance structure and continuing efforts to improve their communication efforts, CASA has added four new members to the organization. These new memberships have and will increase the CASA operating budget, as the associated fees of membership are CASAs main source of revenue. A report was presented to the General Assembly at the 2008 Policy and Strategy Conference that will ensure that CASA is in a position to manage financial growth effectively and grow in a fashion that directly serves the interests of our membership and is true to our principles and our mission.82

Comprehensive Communications Strategy: Improving CASAs Public Relations and Communications Strategy 2008, Canadian Alliance of Student Associations., Supplementary Materials for CASA Transition Conference, May 2008. 82 Zach Churchill, National Directors Annual Report:2008., The Canadian Alliance of Student Associations, Supplementary Materials for CASA Transition Conference, May 2008.

81

3.6

S.W.O.T. Analysis and T.O.W.S. Matrix of CASA

A SWOT Analysis is a simple framework for generating strategic alternatives from a situational analysis83 and is a scan of the internal and external environment84 which is usually part of a strategic planning process. The SWOT Analysis provides information that is helpful in matching the firms resources and capabilities to the competitive environment which it operates.85 An analysis of the internal environment and operations of an organization typically produce the strengths and weaknesses of that organization while an analysis of the external environment make up the opportunities and threats to the organization.86 The internal analysis of an organization usually focuses on the corporate culture, company image, organization structure, operational capacity and efficiency and financial resources of the organization.87 An analysis of the external environment typically considers the competition, market trends, partners and socio-economic environment with which the firm does its business.88 The TOWS Matrix is the next step in a strategic planning process as it uses the SWOT Analysis as its foundation. The TOWS Matrix discusses the relationship between the different aspects of the SWOT Analysis and helps to identify strategies to build on strengths and capitalize on associated opportunities and overcome weakness and threats in pursuit of such opportunities.89 This section of the report will have a SWAT Analysis of CASA, as an organization and an external representative of BUSU, and a corresponding TOWS Matrix designed to guide the development of the Conclusion and Next Steps sections of this report.

3.6.1

SWOT Analysis

This SWOT Analysis is primarily constructed out of interviews of former and current BUSU VPUAs that focused on CASA, as an organization, BUSUs relationship with CASA and what BUSU expects in a external representative. Various documents produced by CASA that indentified similar issues as those discussed in VPUA interview are incorporated as well. A summary of the VPUA interviews is attached to this report as an appendix.

Strengths

83 84

Available at www.netmba.com/strategy/swot/. Accessed September 2008. Available at www.quickmba.com/strategy/swot/. Accessed September 2008. 85 Available at www.quickmba.com/strategy/swot/. Accessed September 2008. 86 Available at www.netmba.com/strategy/swot/. Accessed September 2008. 87 Available at www.netmba.com/strategy/swot/. Accessed September 2008. 88 Available at www.netmba.com/strategy/swot/. Accessed September 2008. 89 Available at www.quickmba.com/strategy/swot/. Accessed September 2008.

1. Presence in Ottawa/Lobby Conference

In a SWOT Analysis conducted by home office staff at CASA, CASAs presence in Ottawa was listed as a strength of the organization. CASA believes that having their home office in Ottawa gives the organization the consistent ability to access decision makers. Not only does Ottawa give CASA that access to decision makers, but national media as well, which gives them the opportunity to circulate responses to government announcements.90 BUSU agrees with CASA analysis of this strength. Further to that, BUSU has been consistently impressed with the effect of CASAs Annual Lobby Conference and the access CASA is able to provide for BUSUs delegation at this conference. It is clear that the ability of CASA to provide such an opportunity for BUSU is a result of CASA presence in Ottawa.

2. Focused Mandate

The focused mandate of CASA is also listed as a strength in CASAs self-SWOT Analysis and is another strength that BUSU believes CASA to have. CASA believes such a focused mandate allows the organization to have a clear direction in their work and arrange their resources accordingly. CASA is essentially a special interest group representing like-minded people on one specific issue (the federal governments role in post-secondary education). As a member of CASA, BUSU works to forward the goals and objectives of the organization, and thus a small level of our BUSU autonomy on this topic is compromised as those goals and objectives are decided upon by student government representatives from across the country. Compromising on post-secondary objectives is something BUSU willingly undertakes and desires, whereas compromising on other issues outside the realm of PSE is not necessarily beneficial for Brock students.

3. Member Driven

This is characteristic of CASA that will appear in each section of this SWOT Analysis as it presents winwin and lose-lose situations for CASA and BUSU collectively. Simply put, CASA will never achieve more than what the membership asks of it, or contributes to it. As a strength, this presents incredible opportunity for CASA and BUSU. As a member, BUSU has the freedom and autonomy to decide what the direction of CASA should be, how it should go about achieving it, and what BUSU is going to do to contribute to that success. A commitment from BUSU to proactively work towards the goals and objectives of CASA is a win-win situation for both organizations, as these goals and objectives will forward the mission of CASA and also result in an improvement to the post-secondary education that a

SWOT Analysis, Canadian Alliance of Student Associations., Supplementary Materials for CASA Transition Conference, May 2008.

90

student has at Brock University. As a member driven organization, CASA can achieve what it has set out to do with a commitment from its members and BUSU can be that impactful on CASA as a member.

4. Recent Growth and New Members

Seemingly for the first time in the recent history of CASA, the organization is openly discussing internal operating policy and growth management strategies. Four new full members joined CASA in the 20072008 year, and the organization believes strongly that there are more to come. With that, CASAs financial capacity has increased, as membership fees are CASAs primary source of revenue. At the annual CASA Transition Conference, it was made known that CASA was developing a comprehensive growth management plan in an effort to ensure CASA new financial capacity works as best it can to serve the membership and the direction of the organization.

5. Positive Image

Searching media content and public image, very little negative media attention was given to CASA. The majority of CASAs media is in reaction to federal government announcements concerning postsecondary education, and a representative, typically the National Director, is commenting on the announcement. While this attention is brief, CASA makes good use of the little time they get as their comments are relevant to the announcement and do not stray far from the CASAs messaging. More importantly, CASAs message and image is rarely if ever tarnished by allegations of improper influence onto member campuses, or other criticisms noted in previous sections of this report. In contrast, the CFS is often portrayed in a negative light among PSE decision-makers and student circles due to some organizational tactics. CASAs message and image are not clouded or compromised by such incidences and as a result, CASA is perceived well in the circles important to the success of the organization.

6. Motivated and driven staff

Human resources is an area where CASA has, to put it simply, been very lucky. As it is generally understood, human resources is not by any means an exact science, and with a documented overreliance on the home office staff, especially the National Director, filling positions with motivated and driven staff is a must. While there are exceptions, generally CASA has attracted quality people to these positions. CASAs SWOT Analysis also list their staff as a strength of the organization noting that these individuals often sacrifice immensely to meet the needs of the organization. Interestingly, CASA notes in its SWOT Analysis that the salaries of their staff are below the national level for an organization their

size. To put it another way, CASA feels it gets more from its staff that it compensates them for, and thus is easy to see why these individuals are a strength within the organization.

7. The heavy lifting of Policy Development.

This was something all four BUSU VPUAs mentioned when asked what they perceived were the strengths of CASA. It is important to note, as the VPUAs did, that the policy topics, and the development of policy solutions, are two different discussions. The VPUAs believe that regardless of subject matter or topic, CASA policy development process is sound and achieves beyond what BUSU could do independently. As noted in their interviews, policy development, when done properly, is a slow process that involves consultation, research, fact-checking, and organization of the information. Once this is processed, it must be output into something that is relevant to a large discussion on that topic, is in the best interest of those who a decision on the issue will affect, and marketable to the decision makers associated with the issue. The depth, scope and diversity of CASA policy is not something BUSU could achieve individually. In turn BUSU benefits from CASA policy development as these resources are made available to us by CASA.

8. Affordability

This strength takes into consideration two separate factors: 1) what BUSU receives for its costs of membership and, 2) the cost of the alternatives. CASAs policy development, human resources and presence in Ottawa are already understood to be a strength of CASA as they have demonstrated value for the resources dedicated to them. Beyond these, there is a great deal of value in the CASA experience for BUSU. CASA has now 23 member schools from across Canada, and presents BUSUs representatives with incredible networking opportunities to discuss the business of student government with others in similar situations. This value cannot be adequately measured, as it is more of a situational factor that BUSU benefits from. With respect to quantifiable financial cost, BUSU membership fees are among the highest within CASA, as we are the highest-paying non-capped school, excluding secondary costs associated with membership. In contrast, CFS (federal component) membership fees are approximately double that of CASA, also excluding the secondary costs. Should BUSU decide not to be a member of either organization and allocate resources to maintaining a federal presence alone, BUSU would need much more resources than we currently spend. Clearly, the affordable nature of CASA is an attractive benefit and strength to BUSU.

Weaknesses

1. Lack of Mobilization Efforts

The inability of CASA to mobilize a student voting block, or even the representatives who are sent as delegates to CASA conferences, substantially hinders the organizations ability to bring attention and public pressure to various issues. This is especially concerning, as demonstrating how these issues resonate with the general public is a vital component to influencing public policy. Beyond the inner circle of those involved with the federal lobbying, there is little awareness of CASA and its efforts. CASA identifies this as a weakness in its own SWOT Analysis and BUSU feels this is a fundamental flaw within the organization.

2. No Brand and an Unstable Identity

CASA has no brand or banner to which our members and students can rally around. We have no simple definition of who we are. This affects our public image, our image with student groups, and our image with government.91 This was part of CASAs SWOT Analysis that identified, like has been done in this report, the lack of brand or unstable identity as a weakness of the organization. It is concerning that such a weakness affects the three primary constituencies that CASA works with: the public, other student groups including members, and government. This raises the curious question of what CASA actually sells or offers, if it feels that it has no stable identity. Moreover, what is BUSU buying into as members if no brand exists?

3. Unbalanced National Representation

This was an issue identified in CASAs own self-SWOT Analysis but is separated into several sections, each of which address CASA market share of a demographic. CASAs SWOT Analysis identifies the heart of the issue, (CASA) does not represent the largest share of student unions and associations or students in the country. We are lacking in representation from Ontario, but especially from the prairies and Quebec.92 To say CASA is underrepresented in these regions does not balance well with the strength of: market share of students pursuing a post-secondary education in Atlantic Canada is extremely high.93 This unbalanced national representation, and the small number of student unions, associations, and

SWOT Analysis, Canadian Alliance of Student Associations., Supplementary Materials for CASA Transition Conference, May 2008. 92 SWOT Analysis, Canadian Alliance of Student Associations., Supplementary Materials for CASA Transition Conference, May 2008. 93 SWOT Analysis, Canadian Alliance of Student Associations., Supplementary Materials for CASA Transition Conference, May 2008.

91

students across the country hinders CASAs ability to have a voice that is representative of the collective view of the nation, and contributes to the view that CASA is more of a special interest group.

4. Incongruence between votes at General Assembly, the Student Population represented and Membership Fees.

Concerns were raised in the VPUA interviews over what was considered regionalism, which is where they believe the extremely high market share representing Atlantic Canada votes as a block. The Atlantic region is not alone in the accusations of regionalism as other regions are equally as guilty; however, this said to be more representative of like-mindedness than of an established voting block. The larger issue within regionalism is the incongruence between votes at the Assembly, students represented, and membership fees paid. The CASA Comparison graph, which follows, explores that incongruence.
CASA Comparison
60% 50% Percentage 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Atlantic Region Totals Central Region Totals Regions Western Region Totals Student Population Votes at GA Membership Fees

5. Member Driven

CASAs member driven structure is as much a weakness of the organization as it is a strength. CASAs self-SWOT Analysis identifies this as a weakness of the organization as well; however, the issue is split between what is considered dynamic ownership, which deals with corporate ownership of the organization, and dynamic membership, which centers on the annual turnover of the representatives from each member student union/association.94 This weakness is a result of the nature of student government, as both the dynamic ownership and membership compromises the ability to maintain
94

SWOT Analysis, Canadian Alliance of Student Associations., Supplementary Materials for CASA Transition Conference, May 2008.

corporate memory and, with any certainty, long term objectives and goals. From a BUSU perspective, this is a weakness because it can result in overburdened individual student unions/associations. As a member of CASA, BUSU has dedicated numerous resources, including time, effort and money, as have many other schools. However, BUSU, like any other member of CASA, is under no direct obligation to dedicate any resources beyond our membership fees to the organization. While BUSU chooses to dedicate the additional resources, others do not. In order to be successful, CASA needs its members to dedicate more than the minimum contributions, and nothing within the CASA structure compels them to do so.

6. Over Reliance/Domination of Staff

The relationship between the membership, General Assembly and CASA Staff was discussed repeatedly in the VPUA interviews. Looking at the discussion as a whole, a lose-lose situation is presented. One of the studies considered in a prior section of this report outlines a concern regarding an over reliance on the National Director, citing varying levels of activity from member associations95 as root cause for this reliance. Essentially, the driven and motivated staff which are a strength of CASA, are forced to compensate for these varying degrees of activity and thus the membership becomes over reliant on their efforts. This creates the first part of the lose-lose situation. The second part forms the corollary of the first. When CASA staff fills the void left due to the non-participation of member schools, this reinforces a reliance on their efforts. This reliance can also be seen as domination of the membership by the staff, as CASAs staff appear to be setting direction, undertaking initiatives and driving action without input or involvement from the membership. It is easy to see how such a situation can spiral in a direction that is not in the best interests of any involved.

7. Ability to recruit and retain experienced and fully qualified staff.

This is a weakness pulled directly from CASA self-SWOT Analysis and is as follows

Because of CASAs not-for-profit status and fiscal circumstance, CASA has developed a culture of established salaries that are below the nation average for not-for-profits of our financial size. This has made it difficult for the organization to recruit and retain experienced and fully qualified staff members who are professionals in their field, and who are willing to remain with the organization for extended

Phillip Haid, Elder C. Marques & Jon Brown., Re-focusing the Lens: Assessing the Challenge of Youth Involvement in Public Policy, The Ontario Secondary Schools Student Association and The Institute on Governance, Ottawa, June 1999.

95

periods of time. Staff members tend to be young, inexperienced and usually stay with the organization for no more than one or two years. This especially affects corporate memory.96

This raises an obvious question; who is working for CASA? This section offers the opinion that CASA itself believes that its own employees are not qualified or even prepared to perform the tasks and responsibilities required by their employer. As a member school, this is a terrifying fact to learn. More importantly, there are self-admitted issues related to their level of compensation. As it has been identified as a systemic issue, another obvious question is how are these other not-for-profit organizations with the similar financial capacities attracting experienced and fully qualified people to their organizations?

8. Financial Capacities

CASAs self-SWOT Analysis suggests that CASA does not have the financial capacity to conduct extensive primary and secondary research.97 Moreover, as a result of this limited capacity their ability to provide the most researched and innovative policy solutions to problems in our post-secondary education system98 is compromised. This is especially concerning as BUSU has identified the heavy lifting involved in policy development as a strength of CASA, and a resource BUSU relies on. This becomes a very large concern to BUSU and a subsequent weakness if CASA is not producing quality work. More importantly, the VPUA interviews expressed some frustration with regard to CASA financial capacities. Disappointment with the inability to create consistent and stable financial circumstances were expressed, which reflect upon membership fee increases which used unforeseen costs as a reason. Moreover, there is a feeling that CASA just scrapes by every year, barely surviving the year on its budget. Lastly, it was suggested that, outside of human resources, CASA does not effectively use the financial resources available to it. Poor budget planning and a lack of quality return on expended resources are a weakness of CASA.

9. Obsessed with CFS

Throughout its history CASA has been compared to the Canadian Federation of Students (CFS). In some respects these comparisons are fair, as both organizations represent the voice of post-secondary
96

SWOT Analysis, Canadian Alliance of Student Associations., Supplementary Materials for CASA Transition Conference, May 2008. 97 SWOT Analysis, Canadian Alliance of Student Associations., Supplementary Materials for CASA Transition Conference, May 2008. 98 SWOT Analysis, Canadian Alliance of Student Associations., Supplementary Materials for CASA Transition Conference, May 2008.

education students to the federal government and work to develop sound policy solutions that address those concerns. However, as detailed in this report, there are many differences between CASA and CFS. The relationship between CFS and CASA is similar to that of an older and younger brother. The older brother was around first, set some standards and set out a path to follow. The younger brother comes along after the older brother, and fights for recognition by setting higher standards, leading him down a different path. The VPUA interviews suggested that CASA is constantly comparing itself to CFS and expands resources that could be used elsewhere. This obsession is unhealthy, and a distraction that creates a weakness for CASA.

10. Limited Focus of Federal Governments Role in Post-Secondary Education

A focused mandate can be a strength to an organization such as CASA, but it also presents a weakness. The role of the federal government in post-secondary education is limited to a very macro-level, as much of the micromanagement of the system is left to the provincial governments. The University Students Council, University of Western Ontario Report on External Political Representation stated that the role of the federal government in PSE is limited to the development of a Pan-Canadian vision (on PSE), a dedicated transfer (of funds form the federal government to their provincial counterparts for PSE), student financial aid (Canada Access Grants and Canadian Millennium Scholarship Foundation), and research and innovation.99 A focused mandate limits the issues that can be addressed, and the issues can become stale to those involved for longer periods of time. The argument can be made that this is reason why staff do not remain with CASA for any length of time. Moreover, these issues can also become stale to the government officials dealing with them and, more importantly, the students who CASA represents. A stale message has the potential to cause the membership to lose interest in the organization.

Opportunities

1. Develop a Brand

Like CASA did in their self-SWOT Analysis, BUSU also identified the lack of a brand or stable identity as a weakness of CASA as an organization. Nevertheless, this lack of brand or stable identity means an opportunity exists, as one can still be created. Undertaking such a task will allow CASA to look very hard within itself, and understand who they are as an organization and what they are about. A brand and

Paris Meilleur, External political representation review:CASA., University Students Council, University of Western Ontario, February 2007.

99

identity are very fundamental to an organization, and are something that can be used to promote and further the cause of CASA. This is an opportunity that needs to be taken advantage of.

2. Mobilization

Mobilization has become a very dirty word within the inner circles of CASA, as this is often the most drastic difference between CASA and CFS. As described by the interviewed VPUAs, CASA sees any effort to mobilize its membership as a step closer to becoming CFS. However, this is an area where CASA does sell itself short. CASAs annual Lobby Conference was far and away the single event for the interviewed VPUAs that demonstrated CASAs ability to be an effective external voice for the students of Brock University. At the heart of CASAs Lobby Conference is an incredible effort to mobilize post-secondary education students. Clearly, a mobilization effort exists within CASA that can create greater opportunities for CASA as an organization.

3. Member Driven

This report features a section on the nature of student government that details the advantages and disadvantage, as well as the uniqueness of it. As discussed, the annual turnover of the top level executives can be both beneficial and detrimental to these organizations. This is no different within CASA. The opportunity this characteristic presents to CASA lies in the ability of the organization to start fresh every year. New goals are set and initiatives are undertaken as CASA is renewed with the energy of new representatives. Every year, CASA is given the opportunity to separate itself from any past years that may not have been as successful as they should have been. Every year, the nature of student government creates this opportunity for CASA.

Threats

1. Inadequate entry points for engaged students

This issue was first identified in the University Students Council (USC), University of Western Ontario External Political Representation Review. Their concern was that CASA does not have adequate entry points for engaged students to participate in the work of CASA outside of campaigns.100 The USC report offers the opinion that beyond their President, Vice President Education, and External Affairs
Paris Meilleur, External political representation review:CASA., University Students Council, University of Western Ontario, February 2007.
100

Commissioner, there is little opportunity for an engaged student to connect with CASA. Moreover, since the USC report was published, CASA has moved away from conducting national campaigns which provided that limited entry point for these engaged students. The threat that exists here is that CASA is not capitalizing on the resources available within these engaged students. The phrase student apathy has become a clich, and sometimes a crutch to lean on when expectations are not met within student governments. Having inadequate entry points to create a student-to-student connection with CASA101 for students who are not apathetic is a serious threat to the organization. More often than not, student Presidents and Vice Presidents are students who were previously engaged in student government prior to their election, yet, as a result of these inadequate entry points, their first experience with CASA will likely be after their election. This lack of previous experience creates a baptism by fire situation in which expectations are difficult to achieve, much less exceed.

2. Growing Strength of Provincial Organizations

This is another issue identified in the USCs Report on External Representation, with discussion centered around CASAs policy process not effectively combining the work that is already being done in our partner provincial groups.102 The USC makes the point that quality work is being done within these provincial organizations, and by not considering their work, CASA is essentially reinventing the wheel and duplicating their work on the national stage. The work produced by these provincial organizations is of a high quality, and thus is seen as a positive use of resources by student organizations. As these provincial organizations grow stronger, a threat is posed where individual student unions and associations could focus their limited resources on these provincial organizations, and become inattentive to their CASA responsibilities.

3. Stale Rhetoric

As discussed, CASAs focused mandate is both a strength and weakness of the organization. The weakness it presents also translates into a threat, as the limited number of issues can only be presented in so many ways before it becomes stale rhetoric. The VPUAs interviewed offered the opinion that there has been little change in issues CASA is proposing policy solutions on. Essentially, CASA is still selling the same product it was in years past, and it is debatable as to whether or not it has improved over the years. While the nature of student government can breathe new life into tired or stale issues, the students of those respective post-secondary institutions hear the same message every year for the
101

Paris Meilleur, External political representation review:CASA., University Students Council, University of Western Ontario, February 2007. 102 Paris Meilleur, External political representation review:CASA., University Students Council, University of Western Ontario, February 2007.

duration of their studies. A stale message can be demonstrative of a lack of progress, or a lack of innovation. Regardless, stale rhetoric creates disinterest in the product and the government, as well as individual students, may look elsewhere.

4. Financial Capacity and Resources

The financial capacity of CASA and the resources it supplies have been discussed within this section of the report as a weakness of the organization. CASA does not believe it has the financial capacity to hire experienced and fully qualified staff. As discussed in the VPUA interviews, CASAs inability create a stable and predictable financial situation for itself is frustrating. Moreover, the prevailing feeling that CASA financially struggles every year to mange itself is not overly welcomed. This constant state of turmoil and uncertainty can act as a deterrent to future members, which translates into a threat to the organization in terms of loss of future revenues.

5. Ability to recruit and retain experienced and fully qualified staff/Over reliance and dominance of staff.

In this situation, the relationship between two weaknesses has compounded to create a sizeable threat. CASAs self-SWOT Analysis offers the opinion that the organization believes it does not have the financial capacities to attract experienced and fully qualified staff. The VPUAs interviewed suggested that either themselves or other members of CASA felt the staff members were dominating discussion, and thus non-members were directing the member driven organization. Moreover, an over-reliance on staff results from an under-engaged membership. Compounding all these factors into one threat creates a situation where inexperienced and underpaid staff are either dominating discussion, or are overly relied upon to achieve the objectives of the organization. This is a paradox for CASA that threats CASAs ability to achieve on a higher level.

3.6.2 TOWS Matrix

A TOWS Matrix aids in the development of strategies that take into account the SWOT Analysis.103 These strategies work to develop a competitive advantage by identifying a fit between the firms strengths and upcoming opportunities.104 More specifically, a TOWS Matrix explores the relationship between the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats as it considers the system in which the
103 104

Available at www.netmba.com/strategy/swot/. Accessed September 2008. Available at www.netmba.com/strategy/swot/. Accessed September 2008.

organization is operating in. This TOWS Matrix should by no mean be considered to be an exhaustive list of systemic issues facing CASA or the steps that need to be taken to rectify those situations. Nevertheless, this TOWS Matrix will be taken into consideration, serving as a foundation for the Conclusion and Next Steps section of this report.

1) Strength: Recent Growth and New Members/Heavy Lifting of Policy Development Weakness: Ability to recruit and retain experienced and fully qualified staff/ Financial Capacities Opportunity: Develop a Brand Theat: Stale Rhetoric

CASAs mission is to advocate for students through policy development and research, awareness campaigns, government relations, and partnerships with other stakeholders.105 This Mission Statement suggests research and policy development to be a foundational aspect of CASA as an organization. If CASA believes that its policy development is limited by its financial capacities, then its ability to achieve the objectives of its mission is equally as limited. Furthermore, if CASA believes its policy development is limited in any way, the effects of these limits have been identified and are being felt with the organization. When policy development is at its limit, everything that can be discussed or considered within that limit has been considered, and no new issues or messages can be developed. CASA now stands at a point where its rhetoric can become stale. More importantly, the heavy lifting of policy development is seen as strength of CASA from BUSUs point of view, and brings value to BUSUs membership in CASA.

To put is bluntly, new members mean new membership fees which will increase CASAs revenue. As the TOWS Matrix suggests, it is not necessarily in the best interests of an organization to pursue the most lucrative opportunity, but instead work to develop a competitive advantage by capitalizing on strengths and creating opportunities that work to reconcile weakness and threats of an organization. Essentially, a competitive advantage can be gained by addressing weaknesses and threats before creating another strength. CASA might be best served by using these new revenues to learn how other not-for-profit organizations with similar financial capacities can afford offer their staff higher levels of compensation, and expand their policy development capabilities to include primary research. In doing so, CASA could push beyond their previous limits, use its experienced and qualified staff to conduct primary research,

105

Guiding Statements, Supplementary Materials of the Annual General Meeting, March 2008.

and therefore identify new issues and messages which CASA can develop into a brand and identity that it needs.

2) Strength: Positive Image/Local Presence in Ottawa Weakness: Lack of Mobilization Efforts Opportunity: Mobilization Threat: Inadequate Entry Points for Engaged Students

The interviewed VPUAs consistently praised the efforts of CASA in organizing and executing CASAs annual Lobby Conference. CASAs Lobby Conference brings representatives to Ottawa for a week to meet with numerous Members of Parliament, Senators, and other government officials. For as long as CASA has been organizing this Conference, it has been received positively by those who took the time to meet with the CASA membership. This week is a demonstration of CASAs ability to organize and mobilize its membership, and further develop the positive image that many already have of CASA. Moreover, the access CASA achieves for its members at this conference is due in large part to the work of Home Office staff, and their year-round contacts. Unfortunately, most member student unions and associations can only afford to send approximately two representatives to this conference each year. Furthermore, CASAs efforts to organize and mobilize its membership outside the Lobby Conference have been ineffective in the past, and are now seemingly non-existent. As it stands right now, CASA tends to shy away from mobilization efforts beyond the Lobby Conference, thus limiting membership involvement to only those two representatives. The development of a mobilization strategy beyond the Lobby Conference using the successful model of Lobby Conference could develop the ability to incorporate engaged students at member school, and produce greater results for the organization.

4.1

BUSUs Approach to Federal Lobbying

In spite of the annual turnover of its top level executives, BUSU has developed a brand with regard to its federal lobbying efforts. This brand is macro-level and is more indicative of the effort put into it than the style or the issues it adopts each year. It became apparent during the interviews with past and present BUSU VPUAs that BUSUs efforts can be divided into three specific areas: 1) Local Lobby Efforts, 2) Ability to organize and mobilize and 3) What we expect from CASA as a partner and external representative. When all three factors are considered, BUSU takes a subtle and passiveaggressive approach to its federal lobbying efforts. In the past, BUSUs local lobby efforts had set the standard around the CASA table, so much so that at Lobby Conference in 2006, CASAs Home Office Staff pointed to the example set by BUSU in its effort to develop relationships with local Members of Parliament. BUSU has not organized rallies at MPs offices, or publically condemned their action or inaction. Instead, BUSU actively pursues its local MPs for meetings in a one-on-one fashion and works to maintain a profile in the community at large. Typically, BUSU will meet with each the four Niagara-area MPs at least once annually in a formal lobby meeting, in addition to many casual encounters at community or BUSU events. A year with about ten interactions with MPs (outside of Lobby Conference) is typical of BUSU efforts. These efforts result in consistent access to our local members. It is through this face time that BUSU pushes its issues hard, and works aggressively to forward them through the power and authority of our local representatives. With respect to lobby topics, BUSU prefers well-researched, articulate and achievable targets. In talking to our local Members of Parliament, we want to be seen as an educated organization which can engage in high-level policy discussion about the needs of our students. Our council and committees typically do not mandate BUSU to advocate specifically for or against federal proposals or topics, and thus our lobby meetings and discussions are based on the CASA priorities that we have helped develop. With a limited capacity to gather and condense our own statistics in-house, CASAs policy development process provides the fundamental numbers and messaging we need to talk about complex topics. To provide one example, it is easy to discuss the ramifications of high tuition, but it is much harder to convince the government to spend their money on targeted assistance for highest-need students instead of universal grants. The politicians are not necessarily experts in the field of education, so we need to impart on them the statistics and principles that are most relevant to their knowledge level. And in all cases, these need to be realistic and achievable demands, not end-goals that will take decades to finally implement. BUSUs needs federally are an organization that will engage in the research and policy development, take direction, priorities and input from BUSU representatives, and coordinate the resulting messaging coast-to-coast in order to achieve results. BUSUs brand federally, and how it is perceived as an advocate for the voices of its members, is closely tied to the relationship it has with CASA. As discussed in the SWOT Analysis, BUSU willingly compromises a certain level of its autonomy with regard to certain issues in favor of a collective voice developed through CASA. This compromise is made in comfort, as BUSU quite often looks to CASA for

that type of leadership. BUSU has found its value for its membership in CASA in the heavy lifting of policy development, the access to various government officials, and the networking opportunities CASA offers BUSU as a member. Any success achieved by CASA is reflective of BUSU, and vice-versa, but the same goes with regard to failures.

4.2 The Cost of CASA to BUSU

This section, more than any, is a quantitative examination of BUSU efforts as advocate and voice for the students of Brock University to the federal government. Simply put, this section will explore the impact BUSU membership in CASA has on its Division 001 budget, draw a comparison between the cost of a CASA membership and other initiatives with similar impacts and explore the impact the other options available to BUSU in their efforts to be that advocate. Most importantly, this section is designed to be informative, as it is attempting to establish standards with regard to costs, and is not trying to be evaluative of these expenditures. The impact a CASA membership has on BUSUs Division 001 Budget is not limited to the actual membership fee as many other costs need to be considered. These costs include those of human resources, travel expenses and delegate fees, which are not mandatory but are equally as important as they provide BUSU with the opportunity to be an active and productive member of CASA. The following chart takes into consideration all costs that need to be considered and displays those costs.

2007-2008 Budget* Revenue $ $ $ Actual**

2008-2009 Budget***

Expense Travel and Promotion CASA Membership CASA Delegate Fees CASA Travel CASA Accommodations CASA Per Diem Total Travel and Promotion Wages and Benefits $ $ $ $ $ $ 44,000 2,100 3,500 2,200 800 52,600 $ $ $ $ $ $ 41,753 2,419 2,509 2,661 1,150 50,492 $ $ $ $ $ 46,265 1,950 2,500 2,500 800

$54,015

Executive Salary Research and Policy Advocacy Coordinator Total Wages and Benefits

$ $ $ $

11,020 2,340 450 13,810

$ $ $ $

11,020 2,340 450 13,810

$ $ $

11,397 2,359 -

13,756

Total Revenue Total Expense

$ $

66,410

$ $

64,302

$ $

67,771

Net Position

(66,410)

(64,302)

(67,771)

* Taken from 2007-2008 BUSU Division 001 Budget presented to BUSAC August 22, 2007. ** Taken from 2008-2009 BUSU Division 001 Budget available on-line at www.BUSU.net *** Taken from 2008-2009 BUSU Division 001 Budget presented to BUSAC July 20, 2008. Several things need to be considered when examining this chart. Firstly, the Executive Salary line item is based on a percentage of the VPUA and Presidents total salary. It was established as part of the VPUA interviews that approximately 30% of the time spent in office by a VPUA is spent on CASA and federal affairs annually. Furthermore, the president often has a role in managing BUSUs membership in CASA, and 10% of their annual salary is included in that figure. It was also estimated that the Research and Policy Coordinator spends approximately 30% of their time on federal work. There were two Advocacy Coordinators in 2007-2008, and one was assigned specifically to the CASA file. The travel and promotion expenses are taken verbatim from their respective budgets. Lastly, even though it shows zero, a revenue line item is included as it will be needed to draw comparisons to other budget initiatives. There is a comparable initiative in BUSUs budget, and this is our membership in the Ontario Undergraduate Student Alliance (OUSA). Both represent BUSU externally, and both are primarily managed by the VPUA. Much like CASA, OUSAs membership fees are the only mandatory fees associated with membership. Further to that, as with CASA, there are line items in BUSU Budget that allocate resources which allow BUSU to be an active member of OUSA. The following chart takes into consideration all costs that need to be considered and displays those costs as there were in the 2007-08 Budget as budgeted and actual and in 2008-09 as budgeted.

2007-2008

2008-2009

Budget* Revenue $ 28,700 $

Actual**

Budget***

29,484

29,400

Expense Travel and Promotion OUSA Membership OUSA Delegate Fees OUSA Travel OUSA Accommodations OUSA Per Diem Total Travel and Promotion Wages and Benefits Executive Salary Research and Policy Advocacy Coordinator Total Wages and Benefits $ $ $ $ 11,020 2,340 450 13,810 $ $ $ $ 11,020 2,340 450 13,810 $ $ $ 11,397 2,359 $ $ $ $ $ $ 28,700 2,900 1,000 1,500 200 34,300 $ $ $ $ $ $ 29,287 1,440 1,028 1,315 5 33,075 $ $ $ $ $ 29,400 1,950 2,500 2,500 800

37,150

13,756

Total Revenue Total Expense

$ $

28,700 48,110

$ $

29,484 46,885

$ $

29,400 50,906

Net Position

(19,410)

(17,401)

(21,506)

* Taken from 2007-2008 BUSU Division 001 Budget presented to BUSAC August 22, 2007. ** Taken from 2008-2009 BUSU Division 001 Budget available on-line at www.BUSU.net *** Taken from 2008-2009 BUSU Division 001 Budget presented to BUSAC July 20, 2008.

Several things need to be considered when examining this chart. Similar to CASA, it is estimated that 30% of the time spent in office by a VPUA is spent managing BUSUs OUSA membership annually. The same percentage was also used to determine the figure for the Research and Policy Assistant. Additionally, the same 10% figure was used for the Presidential salary. The other Advocacy coordinator from 2007-2008 was dedicated completely to the OUSA portfolio. The travel and promotion line items are taken directly from the annual budgets. Lastly and unlike CASA, there is a figure in the revenue line item. The OUSA membership fee is a direct per student fee that is charged due to a student referendum, and is effectively an in and out cost. When placed side-by-side, it appears that CASA costs BUSU approximately $66,000 per year, while OUSA costs BUSU approximately $20,000. This is a very significant difference, considering that OUSA meets at least once per month in person, and that provincial governments bear most responsibility for the micro-management of the education system in Canada. However, we cannot ignore the in-and-out aspect of the OUSA financing model. Whether that money comes from the BUSU Division 001 Budget, or directly from an ancillary fee, it still comes from the pockets of our students and members. Removing the OUSA revenues from consideration, OUSA costs the students of Brock approximately $50,000 per year, while CASA costs our students approximately $66,000. When these numbers are compared to other BUSU budget initiatives, it is clear that political representation is in the upper echelon of spending priorities. Beyond salaries and wages (which are broken down and included in other respective sections), the only expenditures which are in this range are our insurance premiums (in order to cover the events that we run), our I.T. needs, utilities, our Student Ombudsperson, and Orientation Week. For BUSU, Orientation Week is the premier event of the year. Over the four summer months, we have no fewer than seven staff members (one Vice-President, and six part-time coordinators) spending all their working hours devoted to this week. In addition, the other three executives, and three full-time staff members also devote a substantial amount of time to the planning and execution of the week. After selling substantial sponsorship packages to recoup some of the costs, BUSU is left with an operating cost typically ranging from $0 to $3000. However, once staff salaries and wages are factored into the budget, O-Week usually will usually cost the students approximately $50,000. With this money, we achieve a substantial bang for our buck, contacting and interacting with an estimated 12,000 students during the week (out of a student population of over 15,700 full and part time). While it is unrealistic to expect the same eyeball exposure with the money we spend on CASA, we want to ensure that we receive a similar value for our money spent. It would be a disservice to the students of Brock if we did not.

4.3

The Cost of Federal Alternatives to BUSU

As detailed in the History and Development of CFS section, it is difficult to establish a set cost of membership in the CFS without taking a range obtained by surveying the fees charged to students of member schools. Taking only the federal component of the fee and multiplying it by the number of students BUSU represents, the membership fee alone would cost somewhere between $107,619.56 and $122,826.60 to Brock students. When the cost of the mandatory provincial component is included, the overall cost of a CFS membership to Brock students is somewhere between $152,553.50 and $248,015.25. If the membership fee standards that are applied to the Brock Graduate Students would be applied to the undergraduate students, the total cost would be $204,775.98. It must also be kept in mind that none of these numbers include percentages of staff wages, or any conferences and travel requirements needed to maintain an active membership. Even in the cheapest-case-scenario, where BUSU joined CFS (CFS-Services and CFSO) and then withdrew from OUSA, the cost to students would be more than double the amount currently spent on CASA and OUSA. The third option for BUSU is to become non-aligned at the federal level. No legislation or mandate requires BUSU to join a national lobby group, and there are many other student unions that choose this option. The cost can vary greatly, as BUSU would have to decide whether or not it would participate in discussions and represent students on a national level. Should BUSU decide to continue such advocacy, there would obviously be costs associated with it. The associated impact on the BUSU budget therefore could range from $0, with no effort or time required, to hundreds of thousands of dollars necessary to maintain a separate office and staff members in Ottawa, and the related travel between this and the Brock campus.

5.1

Conclusions

From the outset, the intention of this report was never to lead BUSU to a withdrawal from CASA. While such a conclusion was never out of the realm of possibilities, this report was developed to provide BUSU and CASA with a written analysis of the membership, and some targets aim for. BUSU has been a member of CASA since 2002 and has laboured, with varying degrees of effort and success, to be an active member of CASA working to achieve its mission and goals. The intention of this report was to explore and examine BUSUs ability to represent and advocate for the interests of their members to Federal Government. In doing so, a detailed and extensive review of CASAs ability to help BUSU achieve that goal was necessary. With that, this report examined the workings of CASA as an organization by exploring the infrastructure that exists within CASA, which is intended facilitate the advocacy efforts of this group. Essentially, does CASA provide BUSU adequate opportunity to have the voices of its members heard by the federal government? In short, CASA does offer those opportunities to BUSU and BUSU does find value in its membership in CASA. It is the opinion of this report that BUSU remain a member of CASA and continue to work as it has in pursuit of our collective mission and goals. However, this is not a statement of blind faith as there is much that can be done by both CASA and BUSU to improve the relationships and further our collective goals. BUSU finds value within CASA in a number of areas that complement each other. As stated in the BUSUs Approach to Federal Lobbying section of this report, BUSU has consistently worked to gain access to local MPs for one-on-one meetings to discuss the needs of Brock students. Moreover, BUSU strives to present itself as educated, organized and professional in such meetings, as this often leads to high level policy discussions and subsequent action. CASA strengths contribute and compliment BUSUs efforts in achieving those goals. CASAs presence in Ottawa consistently provides BUSU with the access we want and need to be effective. CASAs member driven structure allows the voice of Brock students to be not only represented but heard and acted upon. The positive image associated with CASA provides both CASA and BUSU with the warm reception needed to consistently gain the attention of decisionmakers. CASA policy development is currently beyond the capabilities of BUSU, as an individual student union, and is the foundation of the educated image BUSU works to maintain. Nevertheless, both BUSU and CASA are not without their share of shortcomings in their collective relationship. BUSU believes CASAs lack of entry points create a missed opportunity as CASAs issues are not widely known among student membership, and stronger policy development suffer as a result. CASAs unstable identity and lack of a brand bring compromise the strength of CASA as an organization. And BUSU is concerned that CASA does not feel it has the financial capabilities to recruit and retain experienced and qualified staff or conduct extensive primary or secondary research. However, BUSU shares a responsibility with CASA regarding all these short-comings because we, as members of a member-driven organization, have allowed them to happen. With this in mind, BUSU must ask itself some very tough question: Is BUSU a good member of CASA? Does BUSU take ownership of our membership and consistently work to the best of our capabilities to see CASA achieve their

desired goals? Are our efforts driving CASA to be a better organization? It is important that this discussion is not a comparison between our efforts and the efforts of other member schools. The quality of BUSU efforts as a member of CASA should be measured against our own capabilities, and not those of other members. BUSU should stand apart, be a leader within CASA, and set the pace instead of being part of the race. Our needs from a federal lobby organization will be identified and outlined in the following sections, and will for the first time in our history be delivered to CASA for comment and action. BUSU is a committed member of CASA and gladly continues to work within it. We believe that CASAs organizational infrastructure does offer BUSU the opportunities that we need, and it is our hope that we can jointly work to lead and develop many more.

5.2

BUSUs Expectations of a Federal Lobby Group

As members of CASA, we have the opportunity to set direction for the organization. We can change things we are unhappy with, and we can expand on the successes that we already enjoy. But our expectations of a federal lobby group have never been put on paper before. Many of the following expectations are things which CASA already achieves, while some are not. The central theme boils down to results for students. BUSU needs an effective national presence, one that is listened to and understood. One that is gaining influence, and relays positive associations. Currently, we believe CASA is the best choice for the students of Brock University. If another group or option became available that better satisfied these criteria, we must look seriously at better servicing our needs in other ways. The students of Brock need an organization which: Achieves more than BUSU could achieve individually Is member-driven and member-controlled Strives for excellence Engages and motivates its members to contribute their time and talents Allows its members to participate in any and all aspects of its organizational functions Is respectful of member autonomy Treats all members fairly Has a national presence Allows BUSU representatives the chance to engage in meaningful dialogue and discussion Limits its focus to post-secondary education, and related public policy Provides adequate entry points for our interested students Engages in high-level policy research Conducts primary research Gains BUSU access to decision-makers Is increasing in federal importance and influence (the % response rate to meeting requests increases every year) Is increasing in public importance and influence (the number of media hits increases every year) Is increasing in academic importance and influence (the number of times our research is referenced or used increases each year) Is able to influence political party platforms Is able to influence public policy between elections Has a strong focus on lobbying Achieves more policy wins than losses when compared to alternative organizations Has an effective policy development and adoption cycle Continuously updates, expands, renews and evaluates its active policies Has policies which contain principles, backgrounds, cited sources and rationales, as compared to short statements which provide no backup or information Has fully qualified, experienced and knowledgeable staff Retains significant corporate memory and history Provides quality contact with other students unions to allow BUSU opportunities to informally discuss other students union needs and share information

Provides BUSU representatives with the opportunities to take leadership roles within the organization, if desired Is experiencing organizational growth, while maintaining fair exit options for members who wish to move in a different direction Works towards engaging all partners, including competing associations, in dialogue about postsecondary issues Works closely with provincial associations to strategize and harmonize messaging and policy Has the ability to mobilize its students Works with members and their students to strengthen the post-secondary sector Provides support to BUSU on local satellite lobbying and other initiatives Is responsive and timely with communications and queries Shares knowledge and wisdom about announcements, policies, the political climate, and other information about the federal government with its members Provides training and guidance to new representatives from member associations Is affordable

5.3

What Does the Future Hold?

Now that BUSU has laid out its criteria for success, we must take the time to evaluate and allow for organizational growth and change. It would be hasty and irresponsible to take any action in any direction without allowing time for a proper response, and any possible shift in organizational culture. Many of the criteria which CASA does not currently do will take some time to plan and implement, and likewise some of the activities CASA currently does do may need tweaking and revision. BUSU must wait to see how CASA and the other member associations react and respond to these identified priorities and criteria. In the meantime, BUSU must develop an internal policy and criteria for our level of membership responsibilities. In order to be active and effective partners in CASA, we must be prepared to work with the organization and help it achieve its goals. BUSU cannot afford to sit back and hope that work gets done; we must dive in and assist. To what levels, and what expectations, is what must be determined. We need to ensure that moving forward, there is a clear expectation for future student leaders at Brock with respect to their federal responsibilities. Since joining CASA in 2002 by a council vote, students at Brock have not been directly asked about our membership. After twice failing to reach quorum, BUSAC made a decision that they believed was in the best interests of Brock students. Our students deserve the chance to affirm or reject this continued membership and partnership in the future. Once the identified criteria have had a few years to resonate within CASA, it will provide clarity for a future executive to run a referendum with respect to our federal association. If CASA has demonstrated successful responses to our needs, we should hold a referendum affirming our membership status. If there is an alternative that better suits the needs of Brock students, there should be a referendum to terminate our membership.

6.1

Summary of VPUA Interviews

Q: What was you impression of CASA at the start of your term? A: - I was very pro-CASA. I felt Brock was a very pro-CASA school. I had campaigned on a platform of very firm support of CASA and the work it does and was looking to further BUSUs relationship and presence in CASA. - CASA was a professionally organized lobby group that was prepared to meet the needs of its members and advocate for their interests. - CASA was a policy resource to BUSU and we looked to them when working to prepare our own local lobby agenda with our local members. - CASA was a well respected federal lobby organization in the eyes of various members of federal government. - It seemed that BUSU/Brock had a lot of momentum within CASA and that energy was translating into very positive results for CASA. I wanted to see this continue and was going to work towards that. CASA will only be as influential as its members allow it to be. I wanted it to be successful.

Q: And after you term began and you began to work within CASA and for CASA, did you impression change. A: - I was very overwhelmed at first but I brought this on myself I as ran for a leadership position within the organization and won. This, of course, meant more responsibility. - I know CASA would still be a resource to BUSU but I was confused as to what kind. There was policy work and campaign initiatives that were being suggested and I was struggling of figure out how all this would fit into my agenda as VPUA. - CASA seemed to lack a sound sense of identity. Was it a think tank who advocated for those initiatives? Was it an advocate that was trying to mobilize the student voice? Was it a government relations firm that worked to develop that network?

Q: Describe you experience at the Policy and Strategy Conference. A: - There was a lot of energy at this conference. It was obviously at the start of everybodys term in office and ideas were everywhere. - Looking back, I was definitely not prepared for this conference. The direction for the year was going to be decided and I was busy making travel arrangements. The conference material was

largely presented to me when I arrived and I essentially had a day to review and analyze it and prepare BUSUs approach. - There was an undercurrent at this conference, kind of an unspoken confusion. Are we campaigners or lobbyist? There were strong arguments on both sides. - I left the conference felling pretty good about the direction decided upon but as the year progressed and as CASA started working I found myself constantly asking was this what we had originally decided to do.

Q: Was their a campaign? How did it turn out? A: - General there was mixed feelings about whether or not we should be doing a campaign or not and then what is should be. - The Campaign materials were inadequate. I was committed to doing what CASA was asking of me but when the materials arrived they were not what I had expected and would not have allowed to be as successful as I was. - We decided not to do a coordinated national campaign.

Q: Lobby Conference, what was this like? A: - At the end of my year, when I looked back on my term, this week in Ottawa really sticks in my head. That week was easily the most fun, hard-working and exhausting week I had in office. - CASA was at its best this week. We were lobbyist and the positive and receptive response we received was a testament to the policy work that had been done. No other initiative of CASA was as impactful or effect in achieving our ends. - The general assemblies at this event turned into an airing of the grievances as skeletons came flying out of the closet. I did not make for a very positive experience. Our message was not lost as a result but this internal squabbling can not be helping the cause. - This was a real wake up call. I had put a fair bit of work into preparing for this, learning the issues and what not. I arrived to fined I was alone in making such an effort. Moreover, I had done a very successful campaign launch and found there were few who had put in the same effort. That was very disappointing as there was an event at lobby con that was designed to be the climax of the campaign.

Q: Home office staff, and how home office works, your opinion? A: - While it is hard to criticize their efforts because a lot is asked of them but they definitely had their ups and down. They had their flashes of brilliance such as lobby conference but to work with them outside of the conferences was a struggling. - I felt like they had their own agendas and that they had it in their minds how CASA should run and would work to that end. To a point I felt I was being managed. - Office politics are always a struggle and this was no different in CASA. Tensions between staff and what not kept people walking on eggshells. - Its hard to say if the composition of the staff, with regard to the roles of the staff members is best for CASA as they try to be everything to everybody while parts of their jobs are neglected.

Q: Member schools, how they worked for CASA, opinion? A: - Some schools dont take it as seriously as others and that is reflective in their participation. Some representatives just show up at the conferences and a scarcely heard from in between while some dont even bother to send representatives. - I always tried to carry myself as educated and knowledgeable and this took a lot of work. I thought this presented me, as well and those who I represented, with a very professional and organized look. Some others did much the same but not all did. The most frustrating part of all of that was that those who didnt present themselves well were reflective of CASA and by extension BUSU and Brock students. - I got the impression that not everybody had put in the work to do this. I wasnt too happy with this as I had put in a lot of work to do this and the common excuse for not knowing this stuff was that they were too busy. I heard this so often it was easy to make the case that everybody was busy. Nobody wasnt busy. I got it done and I was prepared. - Compared to other members, I felt BUSU put more into CASA and worked harder for it. Satellite Lobby, Campaigns, policy work and what not. This of course, by extension, helps CASA as whole and makes CASA look good. In not exerting those efforts, others schools werent creating a positive image of CASA in the regions. This looks bad on BUSU by the same extension our efforts look good on them.

Q: Committee work/structure? Effective/Ineffective?

A: - I think its a good system and structure for delegation of those responsibilities but is not managed very well at all. With that, it doesnt produce the results its supposed and does not work as it should. - The Committee system ends up putting a over reliance of staff and the committee chairs as those who ends up doing most of the work. This makes the impact of committee at marginal at best. - It felt like we were in a hard place as we didnt act without direction or approval from the Board of Directors or an incredible effort from the National Director to find us information. We spun our wheels a lot trying to find what we could do.

Q: Moving on to the last event of your year with CASA, the AGM, talk about that experience. A: - Very mixed experience as some are already checked out as their term in office is almost over and their successors have already been elected while some are still working as hard as they ever did. Also, some of those new incoming executives are at the AGM and that renews the energy levels a bit. - We went with a lot of energy but left with an empty feeling. We went prepared with items we wanted to see addressed and issues we wanted to see resolved and they were put no action was taken. Looking back, our efforts there definitely landed of deaf ears. - It was an odd experience as it was as if people were trying desperately to make their mark on CASA. Some had realized they had done little to impact CASA and were trying do it all at once at this conference. Its that their effort was appreciated but at this point it was too little to late.

Q: When your term was done, what kind of taste did CASA leave in your mouth? A: - As with most of my experiences with CASA, my feelings are mixed. In my opinion, BUSU had gone above and beyond what CASA had asked of it. We had done a lot of satellite lobbying and the material CASA supplied us with was the foundation of that success but our ability to influence CASA was marginal. I felt CASA got what it needed from BUSU but BUSU did not get what it needed out of CASA. - Campaign was useless as it was poorly conceived, planed and executed. Nothing about it turned out to be any good. Completely spoiled my year.

Q: Given your experience with CASA, what are its strengths and weakness?

A: - Staff is motivated and driven and contribute a lot to the organization but this can create a tunnel vision that excludes everything that isnt within that field of vision. This can of course alienate members. - Policy development and the heavy lifting done by CASA is the greatest contribution it can make and where BUSU finds the most value. - Far and away, I believe CASA strength to be its research and policy development. However, this research and those polices are useless if nobody outside of CASA knows about them. If members dont take initiative and spread the good world of CASA, all of its work at the Policy and Strategy Conference, the AGM and everything in between is all for not. Within in CASA there is no organization or standard structure that asks member to be pro-active and spread the word. - There is no formal mobilizing force in CASA. CASA seems to naturally shy away from mobilization. Now, I am not talking about rallies with pickets and what not but circulating material, having meetings and establishing relationships with other stakeholders in post-secondary education is mobilization. This is of course the paradox that will plague CASA. - A weakness is it does not seem to growing as much within the policy area. CASA prides itself on this aspect of itself yet I find issues to be stale. This makes CASA stale. - CASA believing it can run a national campaign is becoming more and more outdated. Regionalism has and will continue to work to undermine any effect such a campaign will have. - CASA is member driven organization that will only go as far as its members take it for better or worse. Any elected individual has the right do prioritize their efforts in office however they please and are thus perfectly within their means to put CASA at the bottom or top of their list. For those who put it at the top their list, CASA will make progress as result of their efforts. If CASA is low on the list of priorities of its members list, CASA will not go far.

Q: Is CASA the right choice for BUSU? A: - In my term, absolutely. Obviously, I cant speak for BUSU right now but when I was in office it was not even a question of choice. We were a CASA school and was going to work as hard as I can to make CASA successful. CASA worked for me and I worked for CASA. CASA was the right choice for the BUSU I was apart of. - BUSU association with CASA is a win-win situation. I believe BUSU benefits from its membership is CASA because of the respect CASA has earned in certain circles and CASA benefits from the work BUSU does for it. The work and initiative BUSU takes to further CASA is a symptom of the structure of CASA as an organization. This balance is unique to BUSU and CASA.

- For the most part yes, but I was left with a lingering feeling that BUSU, and other Ontario school as well, might be out growing CASA. OUSA is a similarly empowering organizations and is functioning at a very high level and helps to elevate the Ontario schools. OUSA is of course unique to Ontario and is not necessarily in-line with CASA on various issues. So I was left asking myself, is BUSU drifting away from CASA.

Q: How much of you time as VPUA do you spend on CASA in year? A: - If I had to put it into a percentage it would easily be 25% of my time. - I had taken a leadership role within CASA and with that in mind Id put it at 40%. - Probably a third of my time is spent on CASA. - CASA and OUSA combined was 50% of my term so CASA would have been half of that. So 25% of my time.

Q: Switching gears a little bit, talk about you experiences/impressions with the CFS? A: - I met my counterparts from other schools that were CFS schools but never really had any business with them. In discussion groups with them they tend to be a little more aggressive and demanding and would get frustrated when things didnt happen immediately. - My experiences left me with impression that CFS compromises a student unions/associations autonomy. If you are CFS members, you are required to use CFS services, regardless of quality and what not. BUSU already supplies most of those services and would not be willing to cancel them for what CFS is offering. - CFS demonstrated to me just how out of touch they are with students and the issues of the day. During my term, Brock was faced with the prospect of a shortfall in its operating budget for the upcoming year. When this issue exploded onto front pages of newspapers it made a fair bit of noise. Right in the middle of this exercise, when everything about this issue was red hot, a group of students organized a demonstration before a meeting of the Brock University Senate. Of course all the senior administration attend senate and would have to confront/pass by this mob. CFS showed up to this demonstration with a giant Reduce Tuition Fees Banner. At this time in Ontario, tuition fees were regulated by the provincial government and only a certain percent increase was allowed per year. Brock had already announced its planed increase for that year and it was no different that before. Beyond that, a reduction in tuition fees would have resulted in reduction on the revenue the university collects and an even greater discrepancy between revenue and expenses than there already was. The demonstration was completely misguided and uninformed and was used a platform by the CFS to spread its agenda.

Appendix G: External Affairs Meeting Minutes from an October 18 meeting with CASA ND Zach Dayler

th

Fee structure and voting structure and the proposals for voting structure member driven so the membership takes it in the direction they wish examples of taxes : one member one vote is simple and makes sense and thrusts the membership into what they think to do which is not think about their individual school but PSE in general we have the fee structure which is if we dont reach two thirds consensus we go into a FTE calculator based off of fees Why? because some school pay 40 000 and some schools that pay 30 000 dollars we pay this much more than this smaller schools we should have or more than say form a business perspective thats where that would make sense but we have to walk the fine of line of are we a business or are we student driven if we are to keep the voting and fee structure the way it is the two are interrelated we cant talk about the fee funding model and not the fte voting structure casa will loose the smaller schools if the bigger school get more votes because of how much money they pay thats simply a reality its not about the individual institutions but improving PSE in all of canada Associate member the idea of being part of the discussions pushing the agenda forward means you can take credit ftfor the scess of pse in Canada costs of joing the organization travel to three conferences or 4 if you consider regional transit hotels for that more than 1500 for travels the average cost per student is 2.50 per student CFS is 16$ per student

proposal getting ris of FTE calculation per student bracket model there is no change in the budget or what students wold be paying CASA CASA ambassador program council had a volunteer in and ex official sit s on the board this individual responsible of the campaigns we used to do during lobby con there would be campaigns on the hill the ambassadors would get input form Canada branding is important student engagement is important its important to implement and compile in a document the effort to make it clear the effort to put into how does CASA try to engage its member school to start these grass routes organizations they are dong members calls form home office the e bulletin which is a document that will be put out three times a year again thats answer is different fro every school calgary justifies paying for the membership fees for knowing that federal lobbying is taking place on a day to day basis what do the member schools want to see on their campus is something that CASA wants to investigate they are doing a tour of the schools and meeting them they are available to consult if campus wants to make events about CASA they will be there to help CASA policies OUSA has to be updated but CASA tends not to How are policies chosen they call for proposals

they have debates and discussions on those issues they ask for what areas need drastic improvement and what policies are secondary on their major ones for the call for policy statements you will known november that june 2011 they will ask for policies schools will receive a pamphlet and talk and discuss about it without identifying which policy was written by which school updating policy papers has to happen more often there is a struggle ti maintain embers engagement and then complaints about .policy and research the canada student survey they produced three sererat document there were issues on the report documents that were produced that we can refer to and use for research in terms of policies our website is not overly functions there were issues in terms f last yea as o how he organization was managed there was a contract that says they cant change the website for a few years but there are things that will not change for some time organization fo the policies needs to happen as well discussion paper on open access again, there is a challenge in that there is a draft form appear but the policy committee and membership has to approve it members always want a change to discus and debate things its not idea for home office staff and membership CAA can put out amore structures policy approach and issue based things out there the other thing to note is that OUSA as a provicial organization has acces to their members within thtee hours of dricign they have access to school more regularly to do provicial research is one provinces to do a national research paper you are talking about 10 provinces , produce it in both official languages and incredibly well researched a critics from every province or different MPs view points three research dynamic is very different

looking at national research project and potentially the association of university colleges and canada because the social transfer needs to be investigated that will cost money and time the minute that they do anything on a campus they have to go through an ethics board that takes six months these are unique challenges to the national level major thing in change is education and training for the membership because its improves debate and the way they talk to students so for the lobby conference there is a whole day about how to talk about this also putting out the past lobby documents video blogs that have reach issue in the lobby document video of one of staff talking about the issue a links and policy there that way debates are well informed experiential education CASA has mandate to focus on post secondary education at the federal level perhaps we need to be focusing on just education period issues that has come before CASA is bottled water but CASA members do not want to deal with it getting to talk about other issues has to do with the members members are part of something big you are part of something exciting encourage campus to campus communication with student governments CASA is there to provide information organizational culture that they are trying to foster trying to do more in brader student issues multiple entry visas students when they go home back to china they may not be able to come back FEDERAL election what would be what McMaster loses by not being a part of CASA in terms of an election strategies they are targeting getting students to the polls we are seeing 40 % student effort in the poles as a goal just on campuses themselves

they want to get youth young canada aware of the importance of giong out and voting FYC question short term goals? internal fatigue needs to be fixed they are tired about talking about voting structure etc encourage the membership to be driven members this is not about us or the directors or event he individual members schools: the short terms goals is hard to articulate with a federal lobby ing organization like CASA this activity is about the future about future generations of students its about a constant effort and a constant pressure

Memo
TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: Student Representative Assembly Joe Finkle, Vice President (Education) CASA Options January 12th, 2011 Dear Members of the Assembly, As per the request of SRA Science member Heather Fisher, this memo will outline the options we have regarding membership in CASA. In order to avoid confusion, the motion that I will be submitting for approval will be asking for full membership in CASA effective February 1st, 2011 (pending approval by the CASA Board). This will leave the motion open to amendments should the assembly wish to choose otherwise. 1. Full membership in CASA effective as soon as possible. a. If approved by the SRA and the CASA Board, we will become full members of the organization, with the ability to vote at the March AGM. b. This would require the MSU to pay CASA an additional $1,800 this year. 2. Leaving CASA. a. Should the assembly vote this way, the MSU would no longer be members of CASA. This would result in us forfeiting our remaining membership dues, as they will not be refunded. This is in line with the membership contract the MSU signed when we became members in 2009. 3. Continued Associate Membership. a. The MSU could request special permission to remain associate members for another year. This would require the approval of the CASA Board and cost the MSU approximately $23,000 next year. b. Our rights would remain the same as this year, which include speaking rights, but not voting rights or the ability to chair committees. 4. Full membership, but the SRA chooses to leave the organization half way through the year. a. The CASA membership agreements state should a member wish to do away with full membership, they must first drop down to associate members, followed by 90 days notice to leave the organization. b. According to CASA by-laws Article 4.7: A withdrawing Member shall not be entitled to a refund of its Membership Fees for the then-current Fiscal Year, and shall be responsible for Membership Fees for the ensuing Fiscal Year if the withdrawal takes place on or after April 15.

c. At the time of the start of the new fiscal year, regardless as to what status a member is associated with in the organization, they are responsible for paying the full amount of the dues for that fiscal year.