Opinion, Point vs. Counterpoint

E7 Referendum: Vote NO

Note: This article is hosted here for archival purposes only. It does not necessarily represent the values of the Iron Warrior or Waterloo Engineering Society in the present day.

In Fall 2014, Waterloo Engineering and the University of Waterloo announced plans for a new building, Engineering 7 (E7). The building is expected to begin construction in Fall 2015 and will cost an estimated $88 million. Last summer, the Waterloo Engineering Society jointly approved a referendum asking students to contribute $1 million towards the construction of the building through a $25 dollar opt-out fee per student. This would be on top of the $7000+ of tuition/term that Waterloo engineers already pay for their education. The facilities to be included in E7 will provide benefits to students in certain departments, but these benefits should be inherently part of the student experience and should be encompassed in the $7000 per term that we pay. Tuition is continuing to rise and student debt in Ontario is at an all-time high. Given these factors, every additional cost to students must be weighed heavily. $1 million towards a building that has many other sources of donations is not a good financial decision for students. I’d like to convince you to vote against this contribution. Here is an overview of the main points for E7.

Student support will garner donors.

While showing that students support the construction of the building might aid in gathering external donors, it is by no means essential. Since almost $30 million dollars for the construction of the building are expected to be gathered by private sector donations, it is ridiculous to believe that the University doesn’t have a fundraising plan that doesn’t rely on proving student support. In addition, if the goal is to prove student support, there are a lot of ways to show this, which doesn’t necessitate a financial burden on students.

The fee is opt-out.

The fact that the fee is opt-out is used as an argument in favour of it by maintaining that anyone strongly against the fee can always get a refund. However, we only need to take a look at the many other opt-out fees we pay to know this isn’t always the case. The most similar fee to E7 is the endowment fund, WEEF, which is $75 a term. Approximately 13% of students opt-out of the WEEF fee per term, which is actually higher than the percentage of students in A-Soc who voted in favour of the E7 fee. It’s clear that opt-out fees often take advantage of the fact that students do not have enough time or information available to opt-out. In fact, if the goal of the fee is to show that students support the construction of E7, the fee should be opt-in rather than opt-out.

Students should do their part.

Undergraduate students are already amongst the largest financial contributors to the university. And while yes, the building will contain many benefits for students, to claim that students aren’t “doing their part” in any capacity is not merely misleading, it’s simply dishonest. While tuition funds may not go directly towards the construction of new buildings, they will go towards every aspect of maintenance of said building as well as contributing to the facilities provided within it. In addition, there is no reason tuition funds cannot go towards construction of the building if funds are needed (the Hagey Hall expansion is expected to be partially funded by “operating funds”), so the same could be done for E7 without requesting additional funds from students.

E7 will contain student space.

Yes, E7 is expected to hold new student space. And student space is important. Extremely so. Our university experience is determined by many factors, quality of education is just one amongst many. The rest is determined by a combination of student life experiences, and having student-friendly spaces which provide opportunities for students to build communities are integral to this. Amongst Ontario universities, UW is the second worst for providing student space on campus. Which is why the idea that students must pay up in order to be guaranteed new spaces is extremely problematic. Waterloo engineering students pay the highest tuition amongst engineering students across the country. According to UW this already guarantees us the best undergraduate student experience in the country. If this is true, why then are we being asked to pay more money in order to subsidize our student experience?

UW is expanding, so additional costs are expected.

Yes, UW is expanding (at unprecedented rates) but maintaining that students should be expected to cover the additional costs that come with expansion is illogical. In fact, expansion for the university means higher enrollment numbers, which means greater revenue. In addition to E7, the Engineering vision includes plans for an E8 and E9. Are students expected to provide funding towards each of these new buildings? Voting in favour of this contribution sets a bad precedent for future students. Across Ontario there has been a rise in students being asked to pay for new buildings and expansions that will in the end draw revenue for the university. Even at Waterloo, given there are so many new buildings in the plan, we shouldn’t set the precedent that students are expected to make a financial contribution to these expansions.

Out of over 4000 students registered in Waterloo Engineering in A-Society, only 430 of them voted in favour of the fee. In fact, even without a committee providing information about why students should vote against it, 256 students still voted against the contribution. The choice to hold this referendum was called by the Engineering Society Joint Council meeting which barely met quorum. A tiny majority of students shouldn’t be allowed to make a decision of this magnitude for the student body. There has been no meaningful student input into this process. The referendum has been run with the understanding that it will pass without any provision of alternatives if students choose otherwise.

Given that most of us will have graduated by the time the contribution comes into effect, we have a responsibility to future students to make a decision that does not negatively impact them. Those students will already have to pay higher tuition and will have greater debt. Should we vote to add the additional cost of a building (which is an essential component to their education) onto them? We should be pushing towards reducing the burdens on future students, not choosing to add more. On March 11-14th, vote ‘NO’ in the E7 referendum.

Leave a Reply