Questions that need asking

(Originally posted on http://www.kj360.ca)
U-Pass

So apparently that SAC report, that looked like a ruling, that looked like a decision . . . wasn’t. And if it wasn’t, then what the heck was it? It seems a tad fishy to me. I mean, the e-mail with the document originated from the Chief Arbiter, and is undersigned by the SAC. And the original subject line is: “SAC Response/ Réponse du CAÉ: Submission on U-Pass Referendum Irregularities/ soumission sur les irrégularités concernant le référendum sur le U-Pass.” Where the problem arises is with the statement coming from Chief Arbiter David Davis: “so I would like to clarify that no official decision has been submitted to date on the U-Pass constitutionality.”

If nothing is explained or clarified, then there is nothing to stop rumours and allegations from beginning and spreading. The SFUO/SAC needs to do is be honest and explain themselves in a clear and concise way, otherwise there is no reason to think something illegitimate is going on.

Elections

La Rotonde is reporting that Julien De Bellefuille (former CEO of the 2010 Elections Bureau) resigned due to “a serious lack of transparency and good governance within your organization.” If I am not mistaken, the resignation came during the Roxanne/Amalia collusion allegations and potential cover-up.

BOA Social Science and Engineering

When will all the details be released? Will we have to re-do all the elections and put the willing candidates through a campaign again? Will they re-open the nomination period? Will the by-elections conflict with final papers and exams? While we have had by-elections before (to elect Dean Haldenby) that was do to a lack of any candidates, not because of poor elections. It is not the fault of the candidates the election method was not secure. But alas, there is nothing we can do about it they throw out the results (Which in my opinion should be immediately challenged to the SAC).