And so, it ends with a whimper, not a bang.
On Friday, college students at CEGEP du Vieux Montréal and at CEGEP Saint-Laurent voted to end the "strike"; in the days before, students at other CEGEPs across Quebec voted to return to class. Though many university student associations have yet to vote, the strike against proposed tuition hikes seems to have run its course. Some students are already back in the classroom.
The student protests shut down Quebec higher education, gained international attention and shook that province's politics. By all accounts, the democratic protests were highly successful at gaining attention.
There's only one catch: the protests were anything but democratic. Indeed, it would have been illegal for any labour union in the country to conduct itself the way the student union leadership did.
Quebec student leaders themselves have acknowledged the success of the Red Square movement with their tactics -- and, hey, they aren't talking about grassroots support. Rather, Francophone student associations opted to use direct democracy to make decisions (in contrast, Anglophone schools rely on representative councils and campus-wide referenda instead).
If you're thinking direct democracy sounds like the efficient Swiss tradition of annual citizen referenda, think again. In truth, we're talking about something closer to the operation of a dockworker's union of old. At most Quebec student unions, assemblies are empowered to make major decisions; these meetings typically have tiny quorum thresholds and ban proxy voting.
While most students opposed the tuition hikes, it's also true that most students didn't want to jeopardize their own educational future in protest. That's where the far-left's exploitation of direct democracy played such an important role. The myth is that assembly-based student government is healthy because it's democratically inclusive. In fact, radical student leaders found the meetings effective precisely because they were so exclusive.
Many -- like the author of a recent Viewpoints article -- see these assemblies as critical to a long-run campaign to promote their own political agenda, regardless of actual student demands or circumstances. "The current strike in Quebec has been a long time coming," Elise Thorburn writes. "We can realistically say that activists there have been organizing for this strike not only since 2010, but since 1968."
How exclusive were the strike votes? When Radio-Canada investigated, reporters found that activists in Quebec set the agenda, dates, times and meeting venues to exclude students with real lives, real classes and real jobs. Students replying online to the story complained that strike assemblies often conflicted with exams or classes. Others complained that assemblies took several hours to get to a vote, making it impossible for students with other obligations to stay.
Shutting down a school for months is obviously a significant decision. Yet turnouts at the original strike-vote assemblies generally ranged between 5% and 35%. At Concordia, fewer than 1,800 students were present to vote in a confused debate, making a potentially life-changing decision for more than 36,000 other classmates. And, by the way, the strike vote was done in a way that would be illegal for any Canadian labour union -- by a show of hands rather than a secret ballot.
That's not to fully dismiss the concerns of students. I was a student union president myself in the mid-1990s at the University of Manitoba. With that experience behind me, I thought Anglophone Canada's harsh editorial reaction to student protests was a little over the top. After all, it's routine -- and fair -- for people to complain about the government raising fees with little or no warning. Premier Jean Charest's proposed tuition hikes are modest and reasonable, but it's equally reasonable for students to protest mid-program fee hikes -- especially given the uncertainty of future employment.
But the student leadership seems to have gone three steps beyond a reasonable protest, essentially hijacking Quebec's post-secondary education system and tens of thousands of students with it. Now, with the strike winding down, the Parti Quebecois hopes to capitalize. Strike leader Leo Bureau-Blouin is both a PQ candidate and a regular presence at campaign events. Last week, PQ Leader Pauline Marois explained that Bureau-Blouin would probably keep up his studies part-time if he was elected. That's good for him -- but, thanks to his politics, students across Quebec didn't have the option in recent months of working and studying.
When announcing his candidacy, Bureau-Blouin made a point of saying that he hoped to represent all the voters in his riding. Nice. This would be nice, too: students having a greater influence in the actions of their student associations. The next Quebec government needs to democratize the student associations. After all, if Quebec student associations want the right to strike like regular labour unions, shouldn't they be held to the same basic democratic standards?
Second, the increases weren't "modest and reasonable". A 80% tuition hike is not reasonable nor modest, if it seems so because of the hikes seen in the US or some places in Canada, it's only because the hikes over there are unreasonable and excessive.
Third, no matter how much the student leadership plays it out, if the majority of students are dead set against the strike, they'll find a way to vote it down, don't worry. After one or two weeks of striking, if the majority is opposed, they WILL mobilize and find a way to end it.
Finally, I am willing to compromise. Let's recognize the right of students to strike and then we can set rules for how the strike votes occur, demanding referenda organized by the students that all students can participate in. As long as the right to strike isn't officially recognized, there is no legitimacy for imposing such rules on the vote.
You are lobbying so that the super-rich pay as little tax as possible.
Please say, who you really are. A lobbyist!
fifth, the reason CLASSE-affiliated associations did away with the representative councils you glorify was because that model encourages student apathy and student politician careerism. Leo Bureau-Blouin, whom you criticize, was the president of FECQ and is the product of that model. furthermore, have you checked the actual participation rates at the campus-wide referenda you speak of? no, you just mention it because it sounds more inclusive than the GAs. during my time at university, our referenda usually pulled in about 12 to 18 %, depending on the question.
sixth, the CBC 'investigation' you site is an online forum discussion and, while relevant for highlighting some of the problems that surface at GAs, is about as representative as the sample of people commenting on HuffPost.
so, in conclusion, if you want to write like a journalist, i suggest you investigate things like a journalist is supposed to do instead of regurgitating what you've been told by biased sources.
so, first, associations that did go on strike had regular assemblies to vote whether or not to go back to school or keep striking. sometimes they went back, sometimes they kept going, sometimes they went back on strike after going back to school. the ebb and flow corresponded to major shifts in the strike (the liberal party congress, plan nord, the two sequences of negotiations, bill 78, etc.). the way the votes went seems to have reflected changing moods.
second, in most schools, assemblies go by departmental association - i.e. a couple of hundred students at most. the Concordia example is an anomaly and not representative of how the majority of CLASSE-affiliated associations function. as the strike went on, strike votes were legitimised by the number of students who stopped going to classes and attended the massive protests that took place.
third, anti-strike students, instead of going to assemblies preferred to seek court injunctions, a state-police intervention to enforce their minority view. very democratic.
fourth, by the rules of most assemblies, if five members or more request a secret ballot vote, it must be granted, without debate.
Yesssssss. In a Democratic country, the policw stay out of peaceful protests.
And for a modest increase, 75% over 5 years after 3 consecutive 100$ raises in tuition does not seem all that modest. I realize a lot of students did not want to strike but the most undemocratic event to come out of the strike was the special law limiting demonstrations and the article does not even mention that. Add to that the fact that by May over half the students in Quebec were no longer striking.
But keep on calling Quebec a xenophobic province that is undemocratic, all the insults only make us feel more distinct :) If what is being said in anglo media was true, I and most of the people I know would have left long ago.
Anything that American apologists like David Gratzer or David Frum write about Canada should never appear here.
I don't fully agree with this article, but it's not "unCanadian" (what ever that means) and I'm glad it appears here on HuffPost.
This vacuum makes universities particularly vulnerable to radical student politicians whose agendas have little support from typical students.
Next time try checking your facts before you write things you know nothing about.
ALSO: these student activists -- the liflong politicians of tomorrow -- had much aid from the radical old sovereignist UQAM boomer professors (who were invested to undermine the Liberal party), and the massive labour unions (who were invested to undermine the Liberal Party).
These students' "grassroots" movement was largely separatist astroturf, as the almost-hilarious amoung of over-50 protesters at the "student" protests showed.
as for the UQAM professors, what's wrong with them offering support? in fact, if the labour unions had supported the students more, what would be wrong with that? the government was supported by the banks, the conseil du patronat, the university rectors, and the police. it's called politics. allies. balance of power between political forces. it's how society works.
Plus to add to STREPSI's justified comments on the voting periods: when some of the red squares were prohibited from coming into either of the 2 UQO building (because they broke things in the school), our dear association HAD to move the vote to another school to ensure as many red squares would come... WOW, like any good parent would send their 100 lbs girl there knowing she WOULD get beaten up.. Yes, we even have a girl that was punched in the face because she wanted to protect herself by having her camera on her, just in case someone harrased her... This way she would be able to identify the person who did it, but it when ever farther, the GUY puched her in an attemt to knock her phone out of her hand!!! Yes, a GUY puched a GIRLin the face!!!
Again, what a great democratic battle, hey GeorgesK?