Democratic Reform Committee

In October 2021, the CUSA Council was presented with the Democratic Reform Committee's Final Report.^[2] Since 11 August 2021, the Democratic Reform Committee (DRC) had been meeting twice a week, every week to reestablish trust of students in CUSA that has recently been lost. Following the 2021 CUSA General Election, the 2021/2022 Executive committed to the project of democratic reform and struck this Committee. The Committee is composed of three students at large, five councilors, three non-voting CUSA Staff, one volunteer notetaker, and one member of the CUSA Executive.

The Committee began by consulting with John McNair, CUSA’s lawyer, who answered questions from Committee members about the state of CUSA’s Governance. Mr. McNair’s testimony only reinforced the harsh reality: CUSA’s bylaws and governing structures were seriously flawed and could provide opportunities for malicious lawsuits to the detriment of CUSA and the student body. Mr. McNair’s testimony imprinted the urgent need for full and total reform of CUSA governing structures – not only because reform would improve CUSA’s democracy, but because such modifications were vital to the maintenance of CUSA as an organization.

Following Mr. McNair’s interview, the Committee began inviting witnesses and guests with personal experience working in select fields pertinent to the Committee’s mandate, or who were known to have knowledge that could be especially worthy of the Committee’s time. Current and former CUSA full-time staff, including a former CUSA executive, were invited; current and the most recent former executives were invited; current and former student leaders from recently reformed students’ associations in Ontario were invited; and consultants from the student union movement in the United Kingdom were invited. All witnesses were agreed upon by Committee members in earlier Committee meetings.^[2]

The Committee also organized four public forums for students-at-large to raise any questions, comments, or concerns regarding reforms to CUSA’s governance and elections systems. Students had a wide variety of concerns, comments, and suggestions for Committee members to consider; however, the Committee noticed there were a few issues with wide-spread support. Notably, students were generally opposed to the slate system and were concerned about the hiring process of CUSAs Electoral Officers. Additionally, students also found that CUSA struggles to provide clear communication to students about opportunities and operations. A series of former Electoral Officers also gave their testimony, but asked to remain anonymous for the sake of their mental health and well-being. These Officers vividly described the hate and vitriol received during their time in office and recommended that Electoral Officers not be selected from the student body.^[2]

CUSA Board

The CUSA Board holds responsibility for the long-term financial, legal, and reputational position of the corporation. As a Not-For-Profit Corporation, the CUSA Board is subject to all  relevant principles and  policies of the  Ontario government, provincial  law, and the Articles of  Incorporation. The Board is to ensure ethical fiscal management of CUSA by investing a fiduciary responsibility in members of the Board.^[3]

Composition of the CUSA Board

1. 8 student-at-large directors
2. The CUSA President (ex-officio)
3. The CUSA Vice President Finance/Secretary-Treasurer (ex-officio, non-voting)

Eligibility to be a Director

1. Be a current Carleton Undergraduate student at the time of application, intending on remaining a Carleton Undergraduate student for the duration of the term of appointment
2. Directors may not be employees of CUSA, unless occupying ex-officio positions (President/CEO, VP Finance/Secretary-Treasurer)
3. Directors may not be sitting CUSA councillors, or CUSA councillors within the most recent academic year
4. Directors may not be former CUSA executives
5. Board Members may not maintain or hold fiduciary responsibility to another entity that could conceivably regularly conflict with their fiduciary responsibility to CUSA while a member of the Board.
6. Directors shall not serve more than four calendar years on the CUSA Board.

Ascension to the Board

1. Candidates for the board shall be reviewed and selected by the CUSA Board Nominating and Appointing Committee for ratification by CUSA Council
2. CUSA Council will then vote to ratify or deny the selection
3. All applicants so ratified will immediately ascend to the CUSA Board

Primary Responsibilities

1. Inform strategic direction and organizational growth
2. Provide oversight and accountability for the organization
3. Monitor policies, procedures, and processes of decision making and resource allocation
4. Approve the budget every year
5. Comply with the Not-For-Profit Corporations Act (2010)

CUSA Council

The Vice Presidents are no longer be voting members of the CUSA council. Their seats was converted to student representative seats based on academic faculty enrolment. CUSA Council is responsible for hiring Vice Presidents and appointing the Board of Directors. The Council operates as a deciding body for the association's day-to-day business, holding power on advocacy & accountability actions of the Executive team, with a stronger emphasis on Presidential accountability as the President is the only elected body. The Vice Presidents work as "hired officers" of the association, accountable to the council & the board.

CUSA Executives

Firstly, of the executive positions, now only the Presidency is elected by students-at-large. The Vice Presidential roles have been redefined, with much of their power dispersed to other check-and-balance bodies within CUSA. Because of this, the positions were deemed to no longer rise to the level of student-at-large elections and will be selected, elected, and appointed by CUSA Council after the CUSA Presidential and Council election.^[4] The CUSA Presidency role is a full-time role that requires a 35 hours/week commitment. The CUSA President will be responsible to the CUSA Board of Directors, CUSA Council, and the Not For Profit Corporations Act (2010). The CUSA President supervises the Executive Director on behalf of the CUSA Board and the Vice Presidents.^[4]

Reactions and Criticism

The CUSA was criticized for this decision since the motion did not reveal the source of the claim that cystic fibrosis affects only Caucasians. In fact, the CCFF's website states that: "The disease is most common in caucasians, but it can affect all races." Nick Bergamini, a CUSA council member who represents Journalism students, stated that "They're playing racial politics with something that is supposed to bring people together – a charity."^[16] Bergamini commented that "they see this, in their own twisted way, as a win for diversity. I see it as a loss for people with cystic fibrosis."^[17]

Cathleen Morrison, who is the CEO of the CCFF, stated in an interview with CTV News that although cystic fibrosis "does affect Caucasian populations primarily," the term Caucasian includes people from South Asia, North Africa, the Persian Gulf and Israel. Morrison explained that "These are Caucasian populations. These people do not have white skin. They have CF, it now seems, in the same ratios as other Caucasian people who do have white skin." Morrison also stated that cystic fibrosis affects just as many young girls as boys.^[19]

Jonathan Kay, a columnist for the National Post, blasted CUSA for this decision. Kay stated that "Even by the loopy standards of students governments, this has got to be a new low." Kay argued that cystic fibrosis, although it has a much higher rate of occurrence in caucasian males, affects all races and both genders. Kay also pointed out that many charity events raise money for breast cancer, even though it is primarily a female disease, and for Tay–Sachs disease, whose sufferers are almost exclusively Jewish.^[20] Editorial and opinion articles from the Ottawa Citizen have also condemned CUSA's actions with the editorial declaring that "when [a student association] does something as ignorant and thoughtless as Carleton University's did this week, the country pays attention."^[21][22]

Subsequent response by CUSA

CUSA president Brittany Smyth later stated that the council has been considering rotating the beneficiary of Shinerama instead of always giving the money to one charity, arguing that "It's about people wanting to do something different."^[16] Smyth said the colour of someone's skin wasn't at issue; rather, the decision was made to spread the university's fundraising efforts to other charities. In an interview with CTV news, Smyth stated that "There was some discussion about that issue but very small. Most of it was around just switching it up and doing something different for a change."^[19]

CUSA released a statement on November 26 indicating that the association's council would revisit their decision. Smyth stated, "It has become clear that there is not an appetite at Carleton to change from [Shinerama]... The responsible thing to do is to reverse the decision," adding that "the motion was never meant to imply that raising funds for Cystic Fibrosis research was not a worthwhile cause."^[23] Smyth announced an emergency meeting of CUSA's council to vote on a new motion to reinstate the charity.^[24] A unanimous vote at that meeting revoked the earlier decision, approved the restoration of next year's Shinerama campaign and also approved the publication of an apology over the matter. Donnie Northrup, the council representative responsible for moving the original motion to cancel Shinerama, resigned his position at CUSA as did another councillor, Sean Maguire. However, over the summer of 2009 Northrup was acclaimed back into CUSA. The meeting also received petitions demanding the resignation of Smyth and certain other councillors, although no actions on these were immediately taken.^[25][26]