Originally Posted by summer

And maybe you are right that they shouldn't take a stance at all.

If you want to question the SRA's ability to take a stance, fine. But let's not forget those students who use the referendum procedure for genuine reasons, rather than to line their own pockets.

I never spoke against the SRA taking a stance. Actually, many MSU types asked my advice on the matter and I told them they should take a stand against the DVD service.

My primary point today is that the process worked. Some may consider this referendum to have been undesirable, but that decision should always be made by the student body. In terms of cost, this referendum could have occurred in March and had little added costs beyond ballots..

Yes, the MSU wishes to prevent future "abuses", but the cure may be worse than the disease. The MSU should have no ability to reject a petition, no matter how frivilous it may seem to them.

IF the MSU had a structure similar to the UAlberta Students' (with the apostrophe) Union, then a J-Board could consider such an action, but even that is a dangerous line to walk down.

Originally Posted by fullsmash26

My primary point today is that the process worked.

Good! We agree then

The MSU should have no power to decide if a petition signed by the student body is valid or not. If students sign it, the MSU must respect.

To give politicians power that used to belong to the electorate is inviting abuse of power.

We had never even thought about not accepting those student signatures or whether or not we should admit the referendum.

It is good to know that students are able to bring issues to the attention of the MSU if enough signatures are gathered, and that a referendum will be held to hear what the student body wants to do on the matter at hand. I feel that there should be a distinction though between a referendum brought up by students that has to do with bettering undergraduates by allocating existing MSU funds or changing policy vs. students wanting to bring in an external company and increasing tuition for everyone for a particular service (and being an external company I would assume would have monetary goals as their primary objective to further their business and not putting the interest of the students first).