The Aftermath

While it seems a recount is still underway, Joe Paling has presumably won the title of SFSS president. In other news, the CFS defederation campaign was successful, claiming 66% support.

If I may offer some advice to the CFS: next time you're campaigning to keep a school in your clutches, perhaps you could allegedly sexually harass the "No" Campaign? Comment on the brightness of the "No" Campaign's pants? Make disgusting claims about "No" Campaign's back hair? Just saying -- it seems to be a winning strategy.

I'm happy to see the "No" side won out (although we have to see what the CFS's next move will be), so now I'm hoping the Development Fund referendum fails.

Let me explain.

It seems every candidate runs on promise of working to reduce tuition fees. A noble goal, perhaps, but one no SFSS candidate really has any control over. So long as they make the appearance of doing something that's enough to check the promise off on their list.

But student fees are something the SFSS has control over. And it seems only fair that if we are asking the government and the university to tighten its belt to make education more affordable for us that we do the same.

Now that the SFSS has a mandate from its members to defederate it certainly might require extra fees to fill in the gaps where the CFS used to be. However, a horrendously vague "Society Development Fund" is never going to get my vote. Show me the need you wish to fund and let me vote on it next year.

The "No" side and the SFSS campaigned on the idea that the CFS membership fees were not a good use of our student fees, after all. If that's true, then let's see some proof: show us we can get the same value for less and reduce our overall student fees.