It befuddles me why this hasn’t hit the debates more loudly. It’s something that should have been a big issue in the AMS elections from day one, but I’ve heard very little talk about it at all – including those who claim to be concerned about it. VP Academic hopeful Nate Crompton relegates the issue to the “Other” category in his platform.
I was at the meeting when a motion called on AMS council to recognize the Musqueam claim to UBC territory and to support ongoing negotiations taking place between the band and other groups over the title to the UBC Golf Course. No baggage attached, no action required of councillors apart from raising their hands to say “we agree.”
But council rejected it, and now they’re hearing from me.
Every member of the AMS executive supported the motion except for Matthew Naylor, now your candidate for the society’s presidency. He told me after the meeting that it’s the role of council to take stances on issues that specifically affect students and that that was one of the reasons he didn’t support it.
To be fair, he wasn’t the only one who said no. But there’s something to be said when you’re a student leader who can’t set an example and support a simple motion that says, “This is Musqueam territory, and we’re living on it.” Apparently that’s too hard for some people to digest.
The elections come down to the wire this week, with results announced Thursday night at the Gallery. I’ll think it a travesty if this doesn’t become an issue before then.