After 45 minutes of deliberation, AMS Assembly approved a question surrounding divestment to be placed on the Winter Referendum ballot.
During the AMS Special General Assembly on Dec. 2, Assembly approved a motion to include a plebiscite question on the Winter Referendum ballot following discussion among multiple student leaders. The discussion opened with a presentation by Aishnikha Sayinthan and Jessica Shaughnessy, both ArtSci ’27, who explained that the rationale behind the motion stemmed from both environmental and human rights concerns.
The approved question asks students whether they agree that “Queen’s University’s investment portfolio should comply with recognized international standards of ethical and sustainable investment, including the UN Principles for Responsible Investment (UNPRI), and no longer invest in financial sectors or institutions identified as presenting environment, social, governance, or humanitarian risks?”
“Continued investments within industry sectors directly in opposition to environmental specific sustainability and protection of human rights directives, such as within the […] aerospace [and] defence [industries] highlights this issue,” Sayinthan said to Assembly.
Shaughnessy spoke to Assembly about how herself and Sayinthan view the student opinion on this topic.
“Several concerns have been raised by various student groups and faculty, particularly the past few years on campus. Some groups advocate for complete divestment and academic boycott of institutions complicit in genocide and war crimes,” Shaughnessy said. “Broadly, this is the student opinion.”
Sayinthan later added that the question would allow students to voice their opinions “regardless of their stance” on Queen’s investments.
After their roughly seven-minute presentation, Assembly moved into the question and discussion period. Nursing Science Society President Mika Heler started by asking what data they used to conclude that this was a main concern amongst students, because she claimed that this hasn’t been her experience when speaking with students.
In response, Shaughnessy explained their conclusion hasn’t necessarily come from a source or is quantified but comes from generally speaking with students. She added that they see a gap between undergraduates and Queen’s administration on investments and hope this will allow the AMS an opportunity for students to express their opinions through a democratic channel.
Commerce Society President Prem Mehta-Spooner then asked if they would be willing to remove the end of the originally proposed question, which specifically referenced the aerospace and defence industries, as the question speaks to broader investments.
Shaughnessy responded that they specified investments in aerospace and defence because they’ve drawn the most concern from the people they’ve been speaking with, but are open to amendments.
After further brief discussion, AMS President Jana Amer called for an amendment to the motion to take out the example. A vote was then quickly called, where the amendment passed with roughly eight abstentions.
Some Assembly still had points to make on the topic, despite the vote being called directly after the proposed amendment, with Arts and Science Undergraduate Society (ASUS) President Ivana Drinziu arguing that if their motion has a focus on aerospace and defence, then it should be included. In response, Amer explained she feels taking out the examples helps focus the question more.
Shortly afterwards, Amer called for a vote on the motion, asking for it to be blind, meaning voting would be held anonymously online.
ASUS representative Allan Savini then asked why there was a call for a blind vote. In response, Amer said, “Any member can ask for a blind vote.” Savini then asked again the reason for it, to which Amer simply replied that “any member can.”
The first form to use the blind vote wasn’t working, but while a second form was being made, Drinziu felt as if there was more discussion to be had, including whether there may be an option to adjust the ballot so students could rank priorities in terms of divestment.
Amer responded by saying it felt like the discussion became cyclical, but that it’s up to the speaker to determine whether there’s further debate.
Speaker of Assembly Julie Choi followed up and asked whether there was further debate that hadn’t been discussed. A discussion then ensued on how the question could be framed, with Drinziu again requesting a ranked order of importance ballot.
Amer responded that while they can offer ranked importance ballots, “we would already have executive elections on there, as well as the referendum questions on there, [and] that would make the simply voting link kind of weird and crash,” as there are limits to the number of questions and how they’re set up.
There was then further clarification to explain that the motion will include hyperlinks as well as full abbreviations for clarity on the question.
Assembly members and student attendees then voted on the motion through an online form, with Choi announcing the motion passed, leading to applause from the room and the end of Assembly.
Tags
AMS Assembly, AMS General Assembly, AMS president, Divestment, winter referendum
All final editorial decisions are made by the Editor(s) in Chief and/or the Managing Editor. Authors should not be contacted, targeted, or harassed under any circumstances. If you have any grievances with this article, please direct your comments to journal_editors@ams.queensu.ca.