 |
|
| Dear Editor, Thank you for your coverage of the election and arbitration proceedings over the past months. I applaud The Reflector in its ability to cover issues going on at Mount Royal. I also look forward to working with you in the future to keep students informed of the events happening within their student government. I wanted to clarify the miscommunication provided by candidates Kourtney Smith and Dylan Clarkson (after the election) regarding the arbitration. There have been a couple of quotes now where both individuals have alluded to Elizabeth McKeown and my arbitration with the SA over the election in March 2008 contextually as “suing” the Students’ Association. Smith said she was “very disappointed that the students would vote in individuals who essentially sued them for $65,000.” Clarkson also reiterated his thoughts on the process leading up to the byelection: “Again I would say that suing the SA and then running for president is ridiculous regardless of who the person is, because Travis is a nice guy.” It would be beneficial to help each of the former candidates to understand the difference between financial gain through legal means and through arbitration — the latter being the route taken by the SA and the disqualified candidates. The term “to sue” should be followed by a “(sic)” in order to clarify to the reader that the candidates interviewed do not understand the immense difference between tort law and quasi-judicial processes. In order to sue someone, you are in turn seeking to gain financially from the outcome in the form of reparation payments. Neither Elizabeth nor myself received any financial gain from the arbitration process. We did not “sue” the SA for damages. The arbitration costs totalling $65,000 were for three things: the Students’ Association’s legal fees, our legal fees and the $10,000 cost of the arbitrator who oversaw the proceedings and released the final report. None of these costs were returned to either Elizabeth or I. The costs of $65,000 outline the incredible economic weight of legal representation. I am for the freedom of the press and the right for individuals to voice their concerns within the media, but it is also the role of the media to ensure that information is conveyed appropriately. I do not mean to downplay both Smith’s and Clarkson’s respective concerns for the costs of the SA, but readers must be allowed to see the full frame of reference. I do not know why Smith and Clarkson have come to believe that we sued the SA, as nowhere in any other aspects of your publication have you referred to it in that context. Keep up the great work as a paper. |
| — Travis McIntosh President of the Students' Association of Mount Royal College |
|
 |
Professor under fire |
| Cigarette ban hits MRC | |
| Aboriginal cultural gap a reality | |
| Authors use ‘flimsy knowledge’ | |
| Letter to the editor |
 |
Sex survey results |
| Supplying the high | |
| Reflect this! | |
| 'Fire of spirit' |
 |
Fox Sparrow flies to Calgary |
| 1111 pushes art to the next level | |
| CD reviews |
 |
Cougars Connection |
| The legacy that is Sutter |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|