Journal des étudia nt-e-s en droit de l’université M cGill

McGill Law’sWeekly Student Newspaper

Vo l u m e 3 4 , n o 4

2 3 o c t o b r e 2 0 1 2 | O c t o b e r 2 3 r d 2 0 1 2

ÉDITO 3EN RÉpONSE AU TExTE DE LEE MCMILLAN 4SOVEREIgNTY IS gOOD FOR QUEbEC, gOOD FOR EVERYONE 5DATUM ERRATUM : LSA TO LAW JOURNALS: gO ON, TAKE THE MONEY AND RUN 7 YOUR INTRO TO THE LSA COUNCIL’S $20,000 ADVENTURE 9AgM MOTIONS 10NO TIME TO COOK? 11FOOD FOR THOUgHT 12gREETINgS FROM THE CDO ADVISORY bOARD 14OxFORD’S gRADUATE RECRUITMENT 14ApLAM NEW: A WORD FROM 1L REpRESENTATIVES 15INSOMNIE 16CE N’EST QU’UN JEU II 16INgÉRÉE pAR LA FORêT 17OVERHEARD AT THE FAC 18

WHAT’S INSIDE? QUEL EST LE CONTENU?

WANT TO TALK?

TU VEUX T’EXPRIMER?

QUID NOVI

3661 Peel Street Montreal, Quebec H2A 1X1

http://quid.mcgill.ca/

EDITORS IN CHIEFJérémy Boulanger-BonnellyAaron Fergie

LAYOUT EDITORSKatherine Abarca Xiaocai FuKai Shan HeGabriel Rochette

ASSOCIATE REVIEWERSKatherine Abarca Eliza CohenKai Shan He Charlotte-Anne MalischewskiAudrey MayrandLana McCreaAngèle Périllat-AmédéeDan SnyderAnne-Sophie VilleneuveSusanne Wladysiuk

STAFF WRITERSLudovic BourdagesDavid GrovesMichael Shortt Warwick WaltonDerek Zeisman

Envoyez vos commentaires ou articles avantjeudi 17h a l’adresse : quid.law@mcgill.ca

Toute contribution doit indiquer le nom del’auteur, son année d’étude ainsi qu’un titrepour l’article. L’article ne sera publiee qu’a ladiscretion du comite de redaction, qui

basera sa decision sur la politique de redaction.

Contributions should preferably be submitted asa .doc attachment (and not, for instance, a“.docx.”).

The Quid Novi is published weekly by the students of the Faculty of Law at McGill University. Production is made possible through the direct support of students. All contents copyright 2012 Quid Novi.Les opinions exprimees sont propres aux auteurs et ne refletent pas necessairement celles de l’equipe du Quid Novi. The content of this publication does not necessarily reflect the views of the McGill LawStudents’ Association or of McGill University.

Vo l u m e 3 4 , n o 4

2 3 o c t o b r e 2 0 1 2 | O c t o b e r 2 3 r d 2 0 1 2

J o u r n a l d e s é t u d i a n t - e - s

e n d r o i t d e l ’u n i v e r s i t é M c G i l l

M c G i l l L a w ’s W e e k l y S t u d e n t N e w s p a p e r

É D I T O

QN • OCTOBER 23 2012 • 3

JÉRÉMY BOULANGER-

BONNELLY

C o - E d i t o r i n C h i e f

LA CRISE IDENTITAIRE DE L’AÉD

Notre association étudiante accomplit untravail essentiel et s’acquitte de ses tâchesde façon presque exemplaire lorsqu’ils’agit de nous changer les idées. Per-sonne, je crois, ne voudrait nier ce fait.

Cependant, la bête politique qu’est l’AÉDest nettement plus décevante et s’estmême avérée au cours des derniers moisêtre un échec total. Les épisodes de lagrève de MUNACA et du conflit étudiantont mené à des assemblées généraleshouleuses confrontant des étudiants ac-tivistes à un exécutif voulant rester neu-tre.

The result of last year’s events is evenclearer since the beginning of this aca-demic year. Our executive concedes nopolitical role to the LSA, as the referen-dum questions put to the student body inSeptember explicitly demonstrate. Theproposition to strip the General Assemblyof all its power was a clear attempt tomake sure that no other political positionwould be taken by the LSA. Luckily, thestudents decided to reject this proposal.

Mais ces cafouillages ne sont en fait quedes symptômes d’un problème beaucoupplus grand. Il me semble que l’AÉD vientde frapper le mur de sa quête identitaire.

Le référendum de début d’année aura aumoins permis de lancer le débat sur lerôle de l’AÉD au sein de la faculté. Certainsont défendu avec vigueur une vision pure-ment ludique de l’association, qui n’auraitqu’à se charger du pain et des jeux et nedevrait pas s’immiscer dans les débatspolitiques, qui seraient plutôt l’apanagede nos clubs. D’autres, au contraire, ontdéfendu le rôle politique de l’AÉD, sou-tenant que celui-ci pouvait accompagnerharmonieusement le rôle ludique surlequel tout le monde s’accorde, plus oumoins.

Different visions have emerged on therole of the LSA, but ironically the mostprecise conclusion that we can draw fromthis experience is that the goals and val-ues of the LSA are still uncertain.

This uncertainty was also clear at the lastAGM, held on October 17th, when a pro-posal to amend the budget to reconsiderthe allotment of funds to the journals wasput forward by a member. The executivefirst decided to refuse any amendment,before accepting, a few minutes later, to...submit their own amendment. During thisheated debate, our constitution was of nohelp, since it doesn’t describe the proce-dure to be followed during AGMs, anddoesn’t even provide a reference to abody of suppletive rules.

Or, comment peut-on agir, en tant qu’as-sociation étudiante, si notre constitution,notre document fondamental, restemuette sur autant de sujets d’importance? Vous remarquerez que les buts de l’asso-ciation y sont décrits en termes si vaguesqu’ils ne veulent finalement plus rien dire.

Il est donc impératif que notre associationrévise sa constitution, surtout dans le butd’en préciser les objectifs. Un comité pourla gouvernance a été créé dans ce but, cequi est un effort louable et qui, espérons-le, saura donner des résultats concrets,qui ne finiront pas sur une tablette.

Dans ce débat, l’histoire et la positionactuelle des associations étudiantes auQuébec pourrait nous éclairer; après tout,nous évoluons en collaboration avec elleset faisons face aux mêmes débats. Troispoints en particulier devraient à mon avisêtre réitérés dans une éventuelle réformede notre constitution.

Premièrement, il est essentiel que notreassemblée générale soit l’instance déci-

sionnelle suprême de l’association, excep-tion faite peut-être des référendums. Nonseulement est-ce le lieu le plus représen-tatif de notre association, mais c’est égale-ment un sain contrepoids au pouvoir del’exécutif. Dans notre démocratie étudi-ante, la séparation des pouvoirs s’ap-plique aussi, bien qu’à moindre échelle.

Secondly, the association has to have anexplicit role to represent the political in-terests of its members. Not only is thisconsistent with the current situation inQuebec, where accredited associationsare given this role by virtue of the law, butit’s also the primary way by which law stu-dents can play a role in society and con-tribute to the societal debates.

Thirdly, a suppletive body of rules has tobe specified in our constitution, be it leCode Morin, le Code Véronneau or theRobert’s Rules of Order. This would clarifythe procedure to be followed during as-semblies, and would prevent us from de-bating uselessly on technicalities such asthe way to put forward an amendmentand debate it.

Tout repose, en fait, sur la vision que nousnous donnons de notre rôle dans la so-ciété. Sommes-nous un organe démocra-tique vital, dont la participation à lasociété civile est essentielle et se réalise àla fois par les clubs et une voix forte del’assemblée ? Ou sommes-nous plutôt uncongrégat de clubs ayant certes un impactsocial, mais aucune voix politique co-hérente ? Il nous incombe de faire cechoix qui, bien que déplaisant pour cer-tains, sera tout de même plus fructueuxque le statu quo.

4 • 23 OCTOBRE 2012 • QN

EN RÉPONSE AU TEXTE DELEE MCMILLAN

Je me questionne encore à savoir s’il n’au-rait pas été plus judicieux d’écrire ce texteen anglais, afin d’éviter l’accroissement dufossé idéologique par la barrière linguis-tique. En fait, je constate que j’aimeraispeut-être uniquement avoir la certitudeque mon interlocuteur saisira bien monpropos…

Il m’est d’emblée apparu étrange de con-stater que le titre de ce texte n’avait rien àvoir avec son contenu, l’essence du travailétant de détruire une certaine vision de lapensée souverainiste et non de critiquerles politiques du Parti Québécois. Force estde constater que l’idéologie corrompt lejugement et qu’il devient alors impossiblede départager objectivement les bons etles mauvais coups d’un gouvernement. Jepeux donc, sur ce point, concéder la dis-tance qui sépare le propos exprimé et sontitre.

Cette simple constatation expose toutefoisen elle-même l’absurdité inhérente dudébat : nous nous campons de toutesparts dans une perception stéréotypée etdésinformée des enjeux politiques qu’im-plique la souveraineté. Nous ne faisons pasla différence entre le « Mouvement sou-verainiste » et l’élection d’un gouverne-ment minoritaire aux mains liées, ayantpourtant relégué la question nationale ausecond plan de son programme électoral.Nous tombons dans les perversions d’unendoctrinement conscient, d’une idéologiequi cache en soi une faiblesse : la peur del’autre. Mais qui a vraiment peur de quiici?

Et surtout, comment contrôle-t-on lapeur? Souvent par l’usage de la rationalité.Voilà peut-être pourquoi l’auteur du textesemble ressentir un besoin machinal d’ap-puyer son propos dans des précepteséconomiques qui donnent, je dois l’admet-tre, un semblant d’objectivité à son argu-mentaire, des bases rationnelles à sa peur.

Évidemment, lorsqu’on ne connaît pas l’en-jeu, il peut sembler légitime d’affirmer sur

une base rationnelle que le discours sou-verainiste s’enracine « principalementdans des aspects culturels et que tout ceque ce mouvement peut espérer gagnersur ce plan, il pourra certainement s’atten-dre à le perdre sur le plan économique ».Monsieur McMillan, qu’arriverait-il si cemouvement trouvait aujourd’hui unelégitimité dans une logique économiquecomme la vôtre, qui démystifierait vos pré-conceptions d’un discours souverainiste af-filié strictement à une idéologie de gauche,populiste, désillusionnée et irrationnelle?Rien ne vous permettrait alors d’inférerque la souveraineté du Québec impliqueune volonté d’introspection économique,un protectionnisme ou un refus d’accueillirdes capitaux étrangers. Rien ne vous per-met non plus d’inférer que le peuplequébécois à besoin de se fermer auxautres pour se définir.

Une logique économique souverainiste*existe bel et bien en ce moment et met enlumière le disfonctionnement systéma-tique des politiques fiscales fédérales. Cemouvement questionne la rentabilité pourle Québec de transférer «grosso modo» 50milliards de dollars par année au gou-vernement fédéral, lorsque celui-ci pos-sède le pouvoir de réinvestir et financer àcoups de dizaines de milliards de dollarsses projets stratégiques ailleurs au pays,comme les sables bitumineux d’Alberta oul’industrie automobile en Ontario. Ces dé-cisions n’ont effectivement guère de re-tombées directes dans l’économiequébécoises et ne reflètent décidémentpas les valeurs des Québécois, à en con-stater le rejet massif des politiques duParti Conservateur aux dernières électionsfédérales.

Face à ce constat, certains se réfugientdans un argumentaire essoufflé justifiantque le système possède des transfertsfédéraux afin d’équilibrer les inégalités.Pourquoi les Québécois devraient-ils alorss’insurger? Parce qu’une analyse compt-able poussée des dépenses grandissantesde la bureaucratie fédérale (32% lors des

quatre premières années Harper) permetde constater que le Québec perd main-tenant environ 2 à 3 milliards de dollarspar année, argent que pourrait possible-ment couvrir la souveraineté par la ratio-nalisation des doublons de ministèresfédéraux et la disposition du double rap-port d’impôt.

Cette logique économique existe. Elle estparfaitement défendable et évidemment,inconnue ou refusée des fédéralistes. Jepeux admettre qu’il puisse être choquantd’apprendre qu’objectivement, rationnelle-ment ou économiquement, le Québec au-rait peut-être les assises financières pourfaire l’indépendance. Mais il serait à montour futile de m’engager plus profondé-ment sur ce discours économique. D’unepart, parce qu’il est possible de manipulerles chiffres, leur faire dire ce que nousvoulons bien entendre. D’une autre parceque nous oublions trop souvent que l’é-conomie est d’abord et avant tout une sci-ence sociale inexacte frappée d’une limitequ’est l’incertitude et l’émotivité du fac-teur humain. En ce sens, les probabilités,les colonnes de chiffres, les déficits et lesprofits ne pourront jamais solutionner lecaractère émotif et la problématique so-ciale qu’engendre la question nationale.

Face à un constat aussi complexe, je n’au-rai pas la prétention d’apporter une solu-tion. Je ne peux que me désoler de lire,encore une fois, un texte teinté d’une rhé-torique décousue qui dévoile un discoursde sourd et mal informé. Je ne suis pascontre la liberté d’expression : ceux quiveulent faire la promotion d’un fédéral-isme américano-capitaliste ou louangerl’hégémonie économique de la langueanglaise peuvent le faire. Mais il est selon-moi essentiel d’adopter une optique quipermet le dialogue et le débat. Surtout surla question de la souveraineté. Sinon, celan’a pour effet que de polariser indéfini-ment la question.

*(Voir le livre «Un gouvernement de trop»de Stéphane Gobeil).

GabrieLSereNa

L a w I I

QN • OCTOBER 23 2012 • 5

SOVEREIGNTY IS GOOD FOR QUEBEC,GOOD FOR EVERYONE

aLexaNdreMichaud

L a w I I

This article is a response to Lee McMil-lan’s federalist paper. With all due re-spect to Lee, whom I appreciate andestimate, I believe his text was but acollection of misconceptions aboutQuebec’s sovereignty, which badlyneeded to be addressed – and crushedfor good.

Certainly, Quid Novi readers will havenoticed that my title is not a perfectcounterpart to Lee’s. Indeed, his articlewas fashioned as an attack against PQ,but it really dealt with sovereigntyalone. The recent switch in power fol-lowing September 4th did not‘‘reignite’’ an otherwise dead debate.Firstly because Quebec had neverstopped to be divided on the question,and secondly because the independ-ency option has clearly been put onhold by the actual government. Withher minority in the chamber, the newPrime Minister was not given a man-date to launch a referendum, andstated anyways she had no such inten-tion.

I am quite puzzled by Mr McMillan’sviews of Quebec’s struggles for its au-todetermination. Sure, it might shiftaway time and energy that could beused elsewhere. Sure, we could haveother debates instead, relatively tosome economic or international poli-cies. But if the debate is there – sover-eignty has actively been pushed sincethe 1960’s, let alone nationalism,which dates back to New-France –, andis given such importance by Quebeck-ers, how could one just wipe it away,saying it is but a petty matter, under-serving of our attention and efforts?

I’d really like the Quid Novi readers to

grasp the advantageous effects of sov-ereignty over federalism. What if Eu-rope’s struggles to keep its monetaryunion, as pointed out by Lee, was infact the best example of the issuesarising when different nations give outpart of their sovereignty to a confeder-ation? What if the euro zone is aboutto collapse because it was, from thevery beginning, as terribly bad idea?Countries such as France and Germanyshould share a single currency withless developed Eastern-Europeancountries? With Greece? Seriously?

I actually happen to believe that oneof the reasons why Europe became sopowerful in History is, precisely, it’sdisunion. Small to average-sized coun-tries were competing against one an-other, and that was very stimulatingfor innovations. Each nation had itsown model: compare France’s central-ism – there’s Paris, and the rest –, toGermany’s multi-polar landscape, inwhich many cities endeavoured to bethe first in importance. If a modelfailed, not all Western civilisationfailed, but only one country. If a modelworked better than the others, itwould spread. The opposite happenedin China. Did you know that China waswell set to discover America way be-fore Europe did? Indeed, China wasmore developped, and it started it’sgreat explorations nearly a century be-fore European countries did; the ex-plorer Zheng He had a fleet of 70ships, that were ten times as big asChristoph Colombus’. He exploredSouth-East Asia, India, Egypt, thecoasts of Africa, and some dare evensay Australia, Antarctica and theCaribbeans. Yet, being an enormous,united empire, it so happened that

China was alone with itself, unchal-lenged. The emperor feared that thesenew cultures and religions that werebeing discovered would prove danger-ous to the purity of the faith of hispeople, and just destroyed the ships.The entire civilization suffered fromthis.

I also resent Mr. McMillan’s views onthe seemingly ineluctable merger of allcountries into a planet-State, this‘‘global-village’’ or New World Orderagenda that is being pushed around inthe media. I believe this is one of themost dangerous ideas of our time, andone of the biggest challenges of theXXIst century will be for countries toresist this pressure and find alternativeways to come closer together withoutlosing their sovereignty. Think about itfor a second; who really has interest ina world without borders? Poets like itas a dream of fraternity in mankind,but the ones really benefitting from itwill be but the big corporations, forwhich borders are an annoyance, amere burden to deal with. A single-State world could not be a federationin my opinion, but solely an empire.The reconciliation of so many diverginginterests seems impossible to me with-out constant military interventions of aworld police. And then what shall hap-pen, if the Hitler, Staline, Franco orMussolini of the century to come takesover power? Who will fight him andhis policies?

On the opposite, I strongly believe inthe autodetermination of peoples, andin the concept of nation-State. That is,I think that any people conscious offorming a distinct nation should haveits own State. This is, in my view, the

6 • 23 OCTOBRE 2012 • QN

only way every people can deal withits specific problems and achieve itsunique goals. It’s the sole solution topreserving cultural diversity and long-term social peace. This is true for Scot-land, this is true for Tibet, this is truefor Transnistria, Catalonia, the BasqueCountry, and guess what? It is true forQuebec, too! Those are not ‘’olddemons’’, they are rather unresolvedissues! Just look at all the problemsfaced by Africa, simply because it wasdivided for the benefits of colonialistforeign nations, and not in the interestof the local populations, who were ei-ther split or forced to live in the samecountry as rival nations. Whenever anethnic group takes on power, the oth-ers inevitably suffer from it. If onlyAfrica had been divided into smallerstates, and the borders traced to fol-low the ethnic occupation of territory,there wouldn’t be so much tension.

The right to auto-determination is notprescriptive: there is no delay afterwhich a people can no longer demandfreedom. Quebec was conquered, andthus it is only legitimate that it wishesto access to independence, to governitself without the interference of an-other nation, that cannot fully under-stand and address its specificities.Seriously, how many Quebeckers feelthey are being well represented byHarper? Just like most Anglo-Canadi-ans are very proud of their Canadiandistinctive culture and would neverwant to be integrated into the UnitedStates (despite a common language),to what extend, then, should Quebecbe jealous of its independence, andzealous in trying to obtain it formally!

Yes, there are undeniably strong cul-tural, political, moral and philosophicalgrounds for independence, but theeconomic counter-part to sovereigntyis also a great argument in favor of anew Quebec State. It might feel like

some Quebeckers tend to get veryemotional when the question isbrought before them, but the sover-eignty project does not stop to merehistorical and cultural issues: it alsomakes a lot of sense, economically, tobecome a country! Sure, some in-vestors might be a little chilly in doingbusiness with us during the transitionperiod, but this is true of any new na-tion. We need not fear this. No nationhas ever regretted to access sover-eignty. Ever. It just doesn’t happen.

Lee McMillan seems under the falseimpression that Quebec nationalism inanti-English, while it is in fact simplypro-French. Of course, we want to beable to be served in French in retailshops, but that does not mean thatQuebec will be disarmed in exteriorbusiness. Can anyone seriously believethat Quebec businessmen will stoplearning English in a sovereign Que-bec? That our investing prospectuseswill only be available in French? Whatare we, dumb? Quebeckers are, on thecontrary, very aware of the state ofNorth America and the world, and it isone of the most bilingual people in theworld. Quebeckers speak Englishmuch better than French people do.We have a vast and rich territory, greatindustries, and formidable institutions.We have everything we need to beamongst the wealthiest nations of theworld. What a shame it is, in my opin-ion, that a poor region like South-Sudan could make its sovereigntyhappen before we could!

Mr. McMillan, as many federalists, re-sorts to the commonly heard, yet mis-leading, argument of equalizationpayments. Sure, Quebec might re-ceive, for the time being, more moneythan it gives. But let us consider theuse of the money paid to the federalgovernment. The truth is, Quebecloses a lot in paying for the federal

policies, because they go against itsvalues, and thus enter in contradictionwith our own provincial endeavors.Quebeckers want to invest in preven-tion of criminality; Canada spends itsmoney on mega-prisons. Quebeckerswant more respect for the environ-ment; Canada destroyed Kyoto. Que-beckers are in favor of peace andneutrality; Canada has become a mili-tary country, keen to declare war andtake the lead in Afghanistan. And soon, and so forth. Quebeckers are pay-ing twice, for policies than end-up can-celling one another’s benefits!

Quebec is also relatively less indebtedthan other developed countries: if itwas to become a State, Quebec wouldbe less indebted than the average ofthe OECD. How come those countriesfeel that it’s ok for them to be in suchdebt and be independent, and Quebecshouldn’t? Federalists too often try toscare the population with economicarguments, and, unfortunately, toooften succeed. The size, the weight ofa national economy is, in fact, irrele-vant in our now globalised world. Sov-ereignty is far from being synonymwith autarchy! In the XXIst century, alla country has to do to be prosperousis find a niche in which is it perform-ing, and sell that to the rest of theworld. In fact, ten of the wealthiestcountries per capita in the world havea smaller or comparable economythan Quebec.

I could go on and on, but I doubt youare very numerous to have read to thispoint anyways. I’ll simply conclude bystating that, in my opinion, all the is-sues Quebec is currently facing wouldbe better and more easily resolved if ithad all the powers to govern itself.Sovereignty is absolutely good forQuebec, it is good for all nations!

C O N T I N U E D F R O M P R E V I O U S PA G E

QN • OCTOBER 23 2012 • 7

derekZeiSMaN

L a w I I

LSA TO LAW JOURNALS: GO ON,TAKE THE MONEY AND RUN

DATUM ERRATUM

Democracy can be such a messy thing.

If you weren’t at the LSA’s 2012 AnnualGeneral Assembly, held Oct. 17 in theMoot Court, you missed a very interestingdiscussion of the LSA’s proposed alloca-tion of $20,000 in “surplus funds” (i.e. ourmoney) to the four law journals that affili-ate themselves with the Faculty of Law.

It was a discussion I suspect the LSA Exec-utive was not expecting. (I was there, andI wasn’t expecting it either.)

But law students, by their very nature, arean argumentative and contrarian bunch,and more than a few of them seemed dis-mayed (to put it lightly) that the LSA’s2012-13 budget had allocated $20,000 tothe journals. This money, by the way, is inaddition to the substantial $$$ already al-located to the journals through our stu-dent fees.

The dissent over this proposal reached afever pitch, even as LSA President GrahamSplawski attempted to douse the flameswith various explanations of why the extramoney for the law journals was a soundspending decision by the LSA.

For several minutes, it looked like thebudget would be soundly defeated by theassembled students – a move Mr.Splawski said would result in the immedi-ate shutdown of the LSA and all its activi-ties. The audience seemed unimpressed.

Eventually, the President proposed abudgetary amendment that was reluc-tantly accepted by the membership. Theproposed allocation was removed fromthe budget and placed in a kind of fiscalpurgatory. It will be up for debate by stu-dents until next semester.

At that point, LSA Council (which, I note,unanimously supported the budget in itsentirety before it was presented at theAGA) will again vote on the issue and de-cide where to allocate the homeless$20,000. Will it simply be rubber-stampedback to the law journals? Potentially. Butthe delay gives students an opportunity toparticipate in the discussion, and lobbytheir elected representatives (LSA exec,class presidents, and Faculty Council reps)one way or the other.

***

Rabble-rouser that I am, I must say thediscussion over this proposed $20,000 al-location to our venerable law journalsraised a host of serious questions in mymind.

The biggest argument made by the Execu-tive in favour of this major spending pro-posal is that the LSA is flush with cash.Apparently too flush with cash.

The LSA’s accumulated worth is now inthe range of $167,000. This is apparentlytoo high – though not high enough to jus-tify reducing our student fees, which arenot only expensive for starving students,but are also roughly indexed to inflation,and thus are guaranteed to rise everhigher, year after year.

Don’t get me wrong. I’d be more thanhappy to pay my student fees at their cur-rent rate, if the LSA had some grand vi-sion, some great plan that justified amajor capital expenditure. For example,Chris Durrant, who narrowly lost the racefor LSA President to Mr. Splawski lastMarch, had proposed the LSA work withthe Faculty and University Administrationto purchase and install solar panels on theroof of the Law Faculty, as a nod toward

environmental sustainability and energyefficiency.

But I am neither advocating nor opposingsolar panels per se. All I am saying is thatif the LSA is flush with cash, it could doseveral positive things to rectify this situa-tion. It could lower our student fees. Itcould undertake a good-sized capital proj-ect that would benefit students as awhole (following suitable consultations, ofcourse).

The LSA has chosen neither course. In-stead, the proposed alternate course of“action” is to hand out large sums of stu-dent dollars to the law journals.

As the AGA, the LSA made various argu-ments to justify this gift. I was, and re-main, skeptical.

The first argument is that the law journalsbenefit all students, not just those whoparticipate in their editing and produc-tion. These benefits come in the form ofthe periodic conferences and talks thejournals sponsor, as well as the added ac-ademic “prestige” their publication bringsthe Faculty and, by “trickle-down,” lawstudents themselves.

I myself cannot say how many confer-ences, talks and colloquia are sponsoredby the various law journals. We are inun-dated with such things on a weekly basishere in the Faculty. This is a good thing,but I am not sure the few added drips thelaw journals add to my overfloweth cupjustifies a major, multi-year cash gift tothem.

The LSA also said the law journals havebeen experiencing “financial difficulty” inrecent years. Of course, no numbers couldbe provided to the assembled students to

8 • 23 OCTOBRE 2012 • QN

back up this claim, as the journals areindependently incorporated entitiesthat are neither accountable, nor re-port to, the LSA.

Instead, we were simply asked by theLSA to “trust” the law journals, and to“trust” the Executive’s judgment in thisregard. I’m sorry, but that just doesn’tsound like a very “lawyerly” responseto a valid question.

Because really, where student fundsare concerned, trust has nothing to dowith it. The facts should speak forthemselves. And yet the facts cannotspeak for themselves, because the lawjournals – as separate legal entitiesfrom the LSA – are under no obligationto open their books to us.

I respect this independence. Indeed, Ivociferously defend it. But this doesnot mean the law journals should beentitled to additional student money,without having made any financialcase in their favour. Indeed, for want ofany hard empirical evidence of fiscalhardship, the law journals should beentitled to no extra money, period.

(As an aside on this topic, I might posean additional question: if the journalsare hard-up for funds, then why havewe taken the collective decision tostart a fourth new journal: the Arbitra-tion Journal? This seems tantamountto taking on new obligations, beforeexisting obligations have been properlyattended to.)

Overall, I am not even certain this “fi-nancial need” argument is a valid one.My understanding is that the McGillLaw Journal, by far the granddaddy ofthe group, was in the black last year. Italso holds a substantial endowmentfrom various benefactors, though this

cannot be dipped into without specialpermission.

At the AGA, the LSA seemed eager tohand over student funds to the lawjournals because “we know all themoney will get spent.” This point wasmade in contrast to clubs and soci-eties, who only spent 56% of theirbudgetary allocation last year. (The un-spent monies were simply added tothe LSA surplus.)

I just cannot understand the logic be-hind this comparison. If there is aproblem with insufficient spending (!)by clubs and societies, the LSA shouldwork with them to remedy this issue.But this fact has nothing to do withwhether we should be giving extrafunding to the law journals. If they arenot entitled to more LSA money, whoreally cares whether they would spendit all?

The LSA commitment to the law jour-nals is also supposed to carry forwardover three years, for a total of $60,000.Personally, I do not like the idea of theLSA tying the hands of future councilslike this. Let next year’s budget bemade by next year’s council. If the lawjournals don’t like it, they are welcometo refrain from the gift-giving processaltogether.

***

I really do not see why the LSA feelssuch a terrible itch to draw down itsaccumulated net worth. It is always agood thing to retain money – lots ofmoney – for rainy day needs and fu-ture projects of an urgent nature. Ofcourse, if the LSA is dead set on flush-ing away its money, then why not un-dertake a major project with long-termvalue to students and Faculty alike? Or

perhaps they could consider giving meback a few of my own scarce dollars, inthe form of a student fee rebate?

On the other hand, if the LSA is deadset on throwing money at the law jour-nals, then fine. Let’s consider them forfunding.

But let them make the case for it,rather than our simply accepting themat their word. This means each journalshould be required to submit an appli-cation for funding, complete with con-crete financial projections, explicitfunding plans, and maybe even per-formance benchmarks. And all fundingallocations should be made on an an-nual basis only – no multi-year fundingcommitments, under any circum-stances.

Additionally, I think the law journalsshould be required to provide the LSAwith an outline of their additionalfunding sources, whether from adver-tising, sponsorships or whatever else.And if these “other” funding sourcesare minor or nil (for example, ads in afew of the law journals are very fewand far between), then I tend to won-der why LSA money should be replac-ing fundraising activities that thejournals should really be undertakingthemselves.

I would encourage all students to pro-vide your opinions, ideas and feedbackregarding this law journals fundingproposal to your elected LSA represen-tatives. Remember: It’s YOUR moneythey’re spending, so have your say!

C O N T I N U E D F R O M P R E V I O U S PA G E

QN • OCTOBER 23 2012 • 9

chriS

durraNt

L a w I V

YOUR INTRO TO THE LSA COUNCIL’S $20,000 ADVENTURE

In terms of LSA politics, last year wasabout referendums. We voted aboutlabour disputes, tuition hikes, and the om-nibus crime bill. And while we’ve alreadya controversial referendum, this year isgoing to be different. The LSA Council willbe making the decisions. They’ll be decid-ing how to spend twenty-thousand dol-lars, and maybe reinvigorating therepresentative democracy part of our gov-ernance that has generally been ignoredin the past.

The LSA’s great experiment in representa-tive democracy started at this semester’sGeneral Assembly a few days ago. For any-one who missed it, this paragraph is mytake on how GA’s budget discussion un-rolled. After a pleasantly meme-illustratedexplanation of the executive’s budgetsand the budget as a whole, questionsbegan. The questions came to focus onone point of contention. The budget wasset to give an extra twenty thousand dol-lars to the four law journals. Audiencemembers suggested that the moneyshould be made available to all clubs, withthe journals applying for the money likeany club. Perhaps loath to be makingbudgetary changes on the fly, the LSAexec said that they wouldn’t acceptamendments from the floor. This naturallybegged the question of what would hap-pen if the budget was voted down, towhich the LSA answered that they wouldhave to immediately cease all financialdisbursements, meaning a halt to all LSAactivities. In possibly the only momentthe LSA exec was able to successfullygauge what the room was thinking, theyquickly added that this would mean noCoffee House. The discussion got pre-dictably heated, and after some constitu-tional and procedural wrangling, acompromise was struck. The budget was

passed (grab your mug Sally, Coffee Housecontinues) except that the twenty thou-sand dollars earmarked for the journalshas been left out of the budget. The LSACouncil will decide what to do with themoney in early January, possibly at theirfirst meeting.

Now this is an interesting issue and shouldstimulate some good discussion about therole of the journals at our school, ourhopes for our clubs, and what the LSAspends money on. One detail I found in-teresting at the GA is that the journalshad not shown their budgets to the LSA.The executive said they would give thejournals money by reimbursing receipts,just like they do with clubs. This makes lit-tle difference however, if the journalsdon’t have to show how the money thatthey receive from the levies we all pay isused. They could send some of their legiti-mate expenses to the LSA, and spendsome of their levy money on a cham-pagne bubble bath. Do I think that’s whatwould likely happen? No. I assume ourjournals are well-managed, because theonly kind of person who is more anal re-tentive and detail-based than someonewho follows student politics is someonewho would want to check citations intheir spare time. Get enough of thosepeople in a room and they’ll probablywatch each other pretty well. At the sametime however, we can’t base our decisionson glib stereotypes. The journals get ourmoney, but they don’t appear to be veryaccountable. It might be worth having adiscussion about that.

Another point I hope doesn’t get lost inthis discussion is that we don’t have tohand the money over to either the jour-nals or the clubs. Unless they say other-wise, the journals are getting by on their

levies, and compared to last year, theclubs are already getting more money as itis. Council could vote to spend it on some-thing else or even decide not to spend itright away. The money represents theLSA’s structural surplus; the 20 thousandthe LSA usually has left over at the end ofeach year, these last couple of years. Now,the LSA could provide an additional serv-ice, take on a new initiative, give a regulardonation to charity or provide a scholar-ship. There are lots of things we could do,if not starting this year, then next. Januarywill come fast, but I hope there is a gooddiscussion on how this money should bespent this year and in the years to come.(I personally will be suggesting that aswonderful as Actus Reus always is, itwould really benefit from a pyrotechnicsbudget).

Finally, just as interesting as the decisionto be made is who will make the decision.The LSA Council makes decisions all thetime, but what’s different in this case isthat the whole student body has the timeand opportunity to consider the issue andgive their input. Now this is pretty neatactually, democratically. People who wereelected, not based on a political party, butbased on who they are, will have to makea decision, with hopefully a large portionof the law school watching. Will they votebased on what they personally think isright or will they vote based on what theythink the majority of students want? Havewe elected Edmund Burkes or people whosee themselves as delegates? We’ll findout when they vote. But before that, theirresponsibility is clear. They must listen,even Burke was quite adamant aboutthat. The flip-side of the coin however, isthat we the students must be vocal.

10 • 23 OCTOBRE 2012 • QN

WHEREAS the curriculum forms a fundamental part of a stu-dent’s legal education;

WHEREAS students are the people most affected by decisionsabout course offerings and course content;

WHEREAS students are in a good position to know what types ofcourses will be necessary or useful for their future careers andpersonal development;

WHEREAS the Faculty is currently undergoing a review of thecurriculum;

WHEREAS many students are disappointed with the Facultycourse offerings, including topic and language of instruction;

WHEREAS many students are sometimes disappointed with thecontent of their courses, especially required courses;

WHEREAS other Quebec universities allow for student input intothe content of each course;

WHEREAS some law faculties in Canada have mandatory coursesin Access to Justice (Windsor), Social Rights (UQAM) and Aborigi-nal Law (UBC) that are either not even offered at McGill or noton a regular basis;

WHEREAS students were inadequately consulted during the cur-riculum changes that took place last year;

WHEREAS measures to address gaps in the course offerings, suchas student-led seminars, are welcome but their constraints aretoo limiting;

WHEREAS students have no representation in decisions aboutannual course offerings and each course’s content;

BE IT RESOLVED that the Faculty Council Curriculum Committeestudent representatives canvas student ideas through town hallsand/or written submissions to determine the best ways studentscan play a substantial role in decisions about course offeringsand course material; BE IT RESOLVED that following this consul-tation, the Faculty Council Curriculum Committee student repre-sentatives organize a special General Assembly by the end ofJanuary 2013 to vote on the preferred method(s) of studentinput into course offerings and course content;

BE IT RESOLVED that the LSA advocate that students play a sub-stantial role in decisions about course offerings and course con-tent based on the results of this special GA;

BE IT RESOLVED that the LSA advocate that students be allowedto take more than one student-led seminar for credit;

BE IT RESOLVED that the LSA advocate that the Faculty committo offering any student-led seminar as a regular course after ithas been held three times.

This motion was adopted at the law students association annual general meeting, held on october 17, 2012

WHEREAS the faculty should foster an atmosphere of communityand collaboration rather than one of competition;

WHEREAS a number of courses in the faculty already operate ona pass/fail basis;

WHEREAS other distinguished law schools such as Yale and the Uof T have moved to a non-grade evaluation; and

WHEREAS studies appear to show that pass/fail programs corre-spond with less stress and greater group cohesion;

RESOLVED that the LSA convene a committee on alternative ap-proaches to grading;

RESOLVED that this committee be given a mandate to research,to canvas student opinion, and to issue a report by February2013;

RESOLVED that the committee pay special attention to potentialeffects on marginalized groups historically excluded from thelegal profession;

RESOLVED that the report be issued with a view to proposing anLSA referendum question on the matter in March, if the commit-tee identifies what appears to be a better approach; and

RESOLVED that such a referendum question would strongly advo-cate on behalf of students that the faculty adopt the preferredapproach.

A MOTION FOR A SUBSTANTIAL STUDENT ROLE IN DECISIONSABOUT COURSE OFFERINGS AND COURSE CONTENT

MOTION ON GRADESThis motion was adopted at the law students association annual general meeting, held on october 17, 2012

Je vais être honnête en disant que je n’avais pas d’inspirationpour mon article de cette semaine. Alors je me contente de vouspartager un paquet de recettes faciles, rapides et pas chères,vous permettant d’avoir un menu équilibré toute la semaine!

De plus, j’ai découvert que Joannie Jacob, une étudiante sur leStudent Well-Being Committee en 2009-2010, avait fait un livrede recettes complet avec des recettes d’étudiants. Si vous envoulez une copie, écrivez-moi un email! michele.lamarre-leroux@mail.mcgill.caEnjoy!

Salade tiède de pois chichesPréparation : 15 min.Cuisson : 10 min.Portions : 4

Ingrédients- 1 petit oignon rouge émincé finement- 1 gousse d’ail hachée finement- 2 c. à soupe d’huile d’olive- ¼ t. de vinaigre de vin rouge- 1 boîte de 540 mL de pois chiches rincés et égouttés- 2 tomates coupées en fins quartiers- 1 tasse de bébés épinards- 1 c. à soupe de menthe fraîche ciselée- Sel et poivre

Préparation- Dans une poêle, attendrir l’oignon et l’ail dans l’huile.- Déglacer avec le vinaigre et laisser réduire à sec.- Ajouter les pois chiches et bien mélanger.- Saler et poivrer- Dans un bol, mélanger la préparation de pois chiches avec lereste des ingrédients.- Rectifier l’aissaisonnement.

CommentairesJ’ajoute toujours plus de bébés épinards! Ajuster les quantités augoût.

pangasius au lait de coco 5 minutesPréparation : 5 min.Cuisson : 10 min.Portions : 4

Ingrédients- 800 grammes (11/2 lb) de filets de pangasius, coupés en cubes- 398 mL (14 oz) de lait de coco- 30 mL (2 c. à soupe) de gingembre frais haché finement- 1 mL (¼ c. à thé) de coriandre moulue - Le zeste et le jusd’une lime- Sel et poivre

Préparation- Dans une casserole, mélanger tous les ingrédients à l’exceptiondu jus de lime.- Saler et poivrer- Porter à ébullition- Couvrir et laisser mijoter doucement environ 5 minutes- Ajouter le jus de lime au goût

CommentairesIdéal à manger sur un lit de riz!

galettes de saumon facilesPréparation : 5 min.Cuisson : 5 min.Portions : 4Ingrédients- 10 biscuits soda- 1 conserve de saumon (106 gr)- 1 œuf- ½ t. d’épinards ou cresson, hachés- Sel et poivre

Préparation- Écraser les biscuits soda.- Y ajouter le saumon, l’œuf, les épinards et les assaisonnements.- Bien mélanger.- Façonner des galettes.- Cuire dans un poêlon légèrement graissé pendant 5 min.

CommentairesCela aide d’écraser les galettes avec une spatule.Idéal pour un repas rapide, en transit, entre deux cours!

Salade polyvalenteTous les ingrédients sont au choix!Préparation : 10 min.Cuisson : 0 min.Portions : 4

QN • OCTOBER 23 2012 • 11

MichÈLeLaMarre-LerOux

NO TIME TO COOK?FROM THE STUDENT WELL-BEING COMMITTEE

L a w I I I

12 • 23 OCTOBRE 2012 • QN

FOOD FOR THOUGHTMOLLy

kriShtaLka

L a w I I I

IngrédientsBase (au choix)- 2 boîtes de légumineuses mélangées en conserve- 2 tasses de couscousMélange (au choix)- Poivrons de la couleur préférée! (Les verts sont moins chers, lesrouges plus sucrés!)- Céleri- Olives noires- Bébés épinards- Tomates- Concombres- Feta- Menthe/Basilic- N’importe quel autre légume du marché de saison!

Extras pour faire changement :- Graines de tournesol- Amandes- Thon en canne

Vinaigrettes (quantités au goût):- 2 parts d’huile d’olive pour 1 part de vinaigre balsamique- Moutarde dijon- MielOu- 2 parts d’huile d’olive pour 1 part de vinaigre de framboise- OriganOu- 2 parts d’huile d'olive pour 1 part de vinaigre de vin blanc- moutarde de dijon- jus de citron frais- origan séché- 1 gousse d'ail, hachée- sucre- sel et poivre

Préparation- Tout mélanger

CommentairesAdaptable à tous les goûts!

Vous sentez qu'il n’y a pas assez d’heures dans la journée pourcompléter toutes vos lectures et manger sainement? Ne vous in-quiétez plus, je vous jure que cette recette végétarienne neprend pas plus de 30 minutes! Spice-lovers may prefer to pre-pare their own seasoning mix (see below), but for those in a realrush, store-bought barbeque seasoning will do just as well. Feelfree to add other vegetables—corn, diced eggplant, or evenmushrooms would be equally delicious in this dish. Dependingon hunger levels, this recipe makes 2-4 servings.

Black Bean Fajitas

2 tablespoons vegetable oil1 medium onion, diced1 bell pepper, diced1 can black beans, drained and rinsed1 tablespoon barbeque seasoning (store-bought, or homemaderecipe follows)½ teaspoon ground cumin2 tablespoons tomato paste¾ cup water1 green onion, dicedSalt and pepper, to taste

Soft tortillas, warmedToppings: grated cheese, diced avocado, diced tomato, sourcream—the options are endless!

Heat the oil in a large saucepan over medium heat. Add theonion, and cook until soft, roughly 3 minutes. Add the bell pep-per, and cook for an additional 4 minutes, until softened. Stir inthe black beans, BBQ seasoning, and cumin, and cook until fra-grant, roughly 30 seconds. Add the tomato paste and water. Stirthe mixture occasionally until the water has cooked off, roughly5 minutes. Add the green onion, salt, and pepper, and spoon thefajita mix into the tortillas. Top with cheese, avocado, and/ordiced tomatoes. Enjoy!

Homemade seasoning (makes 1 tablespoon)1/8 teaspoon ground cayenne1/8 teaspoon ground mustard¼ teaspoon garlic powder¼ teaspoon onion powder¼ teaspoon red pepper flakes½ teaspoon cumin½ teaspoon sweet paprika1 teaspoon brown sugar

14 • 23 OCTOBRE 2012 • QN

1. Who are we? The CDO Advisory Board is an LSA committeethat was put together last year to work in conjunction with theCareer Development Office to discuss and meet the needs of thestudent body concerning career-related issues. This committeeconsists of the Assistant Dean (Student Life and Learning), theCDO Director, the CDO Coordinator, one LSA executive, and twostudent representatives.

2. What do we do? Well, our first meeting of the year was veryproductive. We discussed a number of relevant issues including:

a) Activités du CDP – Cet été, le CDP a été très occupé par lamise en place des processus de recrutement organisé auprès dedifférents cabinets et organisations. Il a également planifié lesactivités qui ont eu lieu durant l’orientation, de même que lesévénements sociaux et les ateliers pour les étudiants qui se tien-dront au courant de l’année scolaire. Le CDP a aussi travaillé avecle SAO à développer d’autres activités comme un programme dementorat entre les Anciens diplômés et les étudiants (génial!).

b) Student Concerns: We discussed some of the issues you raisedto us such as: the need for more public interest events, the CDO

doing more to provide information on Eastern Canada recruit-ments, getting some statistics on the OCI and Course aux Stagesrecruitment rates, and increasing the meeting times availablewith the CDO office. To address some of these issues, the CDO islooking to hire more help very soon (subject to available re-sources), and they are offering more group clinics and workshops(so take advantage of these). Regarding Eastern Canada recruit-ment – and organized recruitment processes in general - theCDO currently partners with a number of CDO offices across thecountry, and uploads the information on its website(http://www.mcgill.ca/cdo/) as soon as it becomes availablefrom them. A reminder to all students was also sent in the MmeJobs newsletter.

3. Comment pouvez-vous vous impliquer? C’est très facile devous exprimer par le biais des membres étudiantes du comitéconsultatif! Tout commentaire, question, inquiétude et compli-ment sont les bienvenus! N’hésitez pas à communiquer avecnous! Also, don’t forget to visit the brand new “Get involved”section of the recently revamped CDO website to find out more!It’s YOUR Career Office!

This November, the University of Oxford will be in Canada visit-ing various universities across the country to promote graduatestudy at the University.

We have been able to arrange presentations at the University ofWaterloo, Wilfrid Laurier, York, Queen’s, McGill, Concordia’s LACand the University of Ottawa.

If you know anyone who may be interested in attending one ofthese events, please ask them to register online on the Univer-sity’s Canada website: http://www.ox.ac.uk/admissions/post-graduate_courses/about_the_university/countryspecific_information/canada_2012.html.

If you know anyone from Canada who may be interested in ap-

plying for graduate study at Oxford, please ask them to visit ourCourse Guide:http://www.ox.ac.uk/admissions/postgraduate_courses/course_guide/index.html for details on our courses, the applicationprocess, and more.

Prospective graduate students can get in touch with our Gradu-ate Admission team via www.graduate.ox.ac.uk/ask, and alsosign up for useful updates through www.graduate.ox.ac.uk/up-dates

If you have any questions or comments regarding our upcominginitiative, please do get in touch with Luke Seamone, GraduateRecruitment Manager (luke.seamone@admin.ox.ac.uk).

OXFORD’S GRADUATE RECRUITMENT

cdO adviSOrybOard

GREETINGS!

OxFOrd’S Graduate

recruitMeNtteaM iN caNada

QN • OCTOBER 23 2012 • 15

APLAM NEWSJaMeS

Mccarthy& LiNdaeL-haLabi

L a w I

A Word from 1L Representatives

James: On September 26th, the Asia Pacific Law Association of McGill(APLAM) kicked off the year with its Welcome Event, the first ofwhat promises to be a year of interesting and fun events forAPLAM. Over a snack of egg rolls, samosas, and various otherfinger foods, students had the chance to mingle and discuss vari-ous topics related to the Asia Pacific region. The 2012-2013APLAM executives were on hand to welcome newcomers, chat-ting with them about the organization itself and the various op-portunities to get involved and learn more about the region.After students had the opportunity to talk and enjoy the food,the APLAM team formally introduced themselves, as well astheir plans for various events throughout the year aimed at pro-viding opportunities for McGill Law students to learn more aboutthe Asia Pacific region. As a first year student coming from out-side of McGill, this event was my first exposure to APLAM. Hav-ing experienced the region first hand as an exchange student inHong Kong during my undergrad, I was extremely interested inthe various opportunities which APLAM provides to McGill Lawstudents to increase our knowledge of the Asia Pacific region,and I very much look forward to the events which are plannedfor the coming academic year.

Linda: A few weeks ago, I attended APLAM's welcome event to new stu-dents. Because of my interest in the Asia Pacific region and mylove of East Asian cultures and languages, I had been involved inAsia-oriented student clubs during my undergrad at McGill.Therefore, when I had heard about APLAM while still an under-grad, I immediately thought I would want to join the group as alaw student. I attended their welcome event to learn more aboutthe club, and by talking to the execs and previous and currentmembers, I knew APLAM was the right student group for me toget involved in. I liked that they were focused both on profes-sional development events and cultural events, and I thought itwas a great idea that they wanted to work on integrating moreAsia-related courses in our law curriculum. Basically, after gettingto know the execs and the members at the welcome event, I wasimpressed by their ideas, their achievements (for which theyhave won club of the year), and their welcoming and friendly at-titude. I'm definitely glad to be on the team this year and can'twait to see what we will accomplish.

16 • 23 OCTOBRE 2012 • QN

J’ai le cœur étourdidans tes brasil a tournéles yeux bandéssur lui-même

je te l’ai offert

avec le sourire d’un enfantqui met la queue de l’âneen pleine face

avec le délire d'un ivrognequi joue au funambule en pleine rue

et tu as ri.

INSOMNIEJONathaNbrOSSeau

L a w I I

et les lumières ensanglantéesmon regard à la guerre dans mon cœur au lent rythme des vagues demes souvenirs hier nouveaux poèmesapprendre à parler retranscrire quelqueschansons tes rêves cessent de se direparfois même l’été fait du sens pour les convaincus la crème glacée sirapidement évaporée goudron tes vêtements flottant sur l’eau l’étang

LudOvicbOurdaGeS

L a w I I

CE N'EST QU'UN JEUII

QN • OCTOBER 23 2012 • 17

INGÉRÉE PAR LA FORêThéLia taheri

L a w I I I

Ingérée par la forêt, elle court, elle court sans tourner la tête; ig-norant les branches qui la fouettent, elle court. Ingérée par sapeur, elle court, elle court sans tourner le regard, ignorant lescailloux qui mordent ses pieds nus, elle court. Ingérée par l’e-spoir, elle court, elle court sans se retourner. Peu à peu, elles’estompe dans la noirceur.

Mercredi

Ses doigts tremblants défont l’enveloppe tout doucement. Lenom du destinateur n’est pas indiqué, seulement une adresse in-connue; cela la terrifie. Tracassée, elle retire la lettre d’un coupsec.

« Je t’aime, je t’aimais, je t’aimerai. Il faut que tu le saches. Je net’ai jamais raconté de mensonges et je ne commencerai pasmaintenant, aujourd’hui, après tant d’années. Quand je te disaisque tu étais belle, je le pensais réellement. Je ne veux pas direque je ne regrette pas le passé anéanti. Je me suis laissé traînerpar la charrette de mes appétences les plus immorales. C’es durde résister, surtout lorsque le fruit paraît si délicieux. Je regrette,je regrette de l’avoir souillé, le fruit de ton âme.

Quand mes doigts parcouraient le chemin si soigneusement as-soupli de ta peau, je sentais le plaisir cru monter en moi. Quandles larmes barbouillaient ton regard, c’était le remords qui com-mençait à ronger mon être, mais il était trop tard. Il était tou-jours trop tard, mes mains ne m’obéissaient plus, mes mainsbestiales. Elles ne m’appartenaient plus, elles étaient un tout,une entité sauvage, un être guidé par le désir et affronté par laculpabilité. Elles étaient puissantes et toi, tu étais si facile à ma-nipuler, plus souple qu’une ficelle de pêche. Il fallait affronter latempête à chaque soir. Moi, assis dans la chaloupe de mon désir,je gardais ta tête sous l’eau, je t’étranglais dans une mer depéché. La tempête te faisait mal, elle me faisait plaisir. Quandc’était fini, tu courrais te cacher. Et moi, je te regardais partir, im-mobile, je songeais à me charcuter les mains, à brûler mon sexe,afin de ne plus te faire du mal. Mais, le lendemain soir, mêmetempête, même histoire. J’étais trop lâche, trop lâche pour mecouper, me brûler, me détruire, et j’ai fini par me démolir. »

Sourire forcé, pour se convaincre que tout va bien, que sonmonde ne vient pas de s’écrouler dans l’espace de quelques min-utes. Regard cloué sur le mur, le sourire s’efface aussitôt. Échap-pant la lettre, elle s’écroule sur la chaise. Les convulsions partent,

le calme revient; les halètements laissent place à des souffles encadence; le regard accroché au mur s’est traîné jusqu’au plafondmaintenant où il trace des arabesques. Réfléchis.

Jeudi

Assez! Elle en a assez d’être embrouillée comme si elle était sousl’effet de sédatifs. Elle a eu cette impression pendant silongtemps dans sa vie, elle ne recommencera pas. Évasion,écrire, répondre. Une feuille nue qui attend d’être vêtue. Ellecommence à l’habiller par des mots.

Je te hais, je t’ai haï, je te haïrai. Il faut que tu le saches. Toi et tesremords, je n’en ai rien à faire. Qu’est ce que tu espérais enécrivant cette lettre? Que je me sens mal pour toi parce que tun’es qu’un gâchis total? Essayes-tu vraiment de me faire croireque tu ne m’as jamais menti? Tu ne cesseras donc jamais. Je veuxtant que tu te suffoques avec tes mensonges. Non, tu ne re-grettes rien. Les souvenirs du passé, ces cauchemars qui hantentnon seulement mes nuits, mais aussi mes jours; ils te redonnentle plaisir recherché. Tu passes tes journées à rêver dans ton fau-teuil, oui, le même fauteuil, ce lieu de péché, là où ton couteau apercé ma carcasse je ne sais plus combien de fois. Non, quand tume disais que j’étais belle, tu ne le pensais pas réellement. Tu au-rais craché la même tirade à n’importe quelle fille de douze ans àta disposition. Il y en avait quelques unes dans le village. Le des-tin avait fait en sorte que ce soit moi, ta poupée. Il m’avait prismaman, elle était morte. Il m’avait pris papa et Patrick, ils travail-laient tout le temps, trop occupés à regarder ailleurs, trop con-centrés à ne pas voir. Il m’a laissé seule, seule entre tes salesgriffes. Et dire que vous étiez connus comme mes gardiensjaloux. Jaloux, oui, gardien, non. Tu as démoli mon passé, mais tune m’as pas démolie, tu n’es ni assez important, ni assez puis-sant, pour me démolir. Je me suis enfuie, comme l’avait faitcousin Stevens. Mais lui, il était revenu rendre visite. Je ne re-viendrai jamais rendre visite. Je suis à l’abri, la tempête ne metouchera plus. Lettre par lettre, elle recopie l’adresse du desti-nataire, un moment d’hésitation, elle inscrit ensuite le nom. Soncrayon a du mal à l’obéir, à moins que ce ne soit sa main quihésite, les lettres roulent sur la surface de l’enveloppe.

Vendredi

Confusion, congé de maladie de travail, regard au plafond, vided’esprit.

18 •23 OCTOBRE 2012 • QN

Samedi

Dans le lit jusqu’en après-midi, long bain.

Dimanche…

Lundi

Il faut se décider. Dans quelques heures le train arrivera. Et queferas-tu? Courir encore? Vers où? Destination ou affrontement?Il faut se décider. Le revolver, ne l’oublie pas, peu importe tonchoix. Le premier salaire en échange d’un revolver; ventre af-famé, corps fatigué, priorité au revolver. Il faut savoir se

défendre. Ne plus subir le mal, ne plus jamais laisser personne tefaire du mal. Aujourd’hui, prends le revolver. 11h00. Le train ar-rive bientôt. Partir? La gare? L’embarcadère? Curiosité, qu’est-ildevenu, ça te ronge les os, tu veux savoir, tu as toujours voulu lesavoir. Courage, pourrais-tu le revoir, le regarder dans les yeuxaprès quinze ans passés? Courbé, dos courbé, tu ressens le poidsdu fardeau que tu croyais avoir réussi à t’en débarrasser. Le pou-voir du déni t’avait aidé à oublier, à ignorer et maintenant, quevas-tu faire? Ferme tes yeux et cours…ou ouvre grand et avance.Peu importe ton choix, le revolver dans la main.

Elle jette le revolver dans le sac, ferme la porte, avance de pasprécipités, direction, la gare.

OVERHEARD AT THE FACProf: You look at this book and you think,‘Wow, Egypt built the pyramids, andCanada has the Income Tax Act’.L4: Would you rather live in Canada orEgypt?Prof: I’m not sure.

Prof: Have I upset you? If you want we canhave a drink about this on Thursday.

Prof, in tax class: Beware of simple rules.

Prof: So, what article is that?[silence]1L, after a little while: 3088.Prof: 30901L: I think I just made that up.Prof: Well, I’m not saying I didn’t appreci-ate it! After what felt like 2 hours of si-lence, it was the best answer we had. SoBravo!

Prof: I will only accept answers in classicalsanskrit.

Prof: Ça va? J'entends chouchoter... est-qu'il y a des questions? Ça va? ok.

Prof: Diva life is very expensive… Justthink of how much I spend on M&M's!

Prof: No doubt your knowledge of the first100 articles of the Criminal Code is im-pressive and I'm sure pretty daunting toyour fellow students.

Prof: Well, the Supreme Court isn't boundby the dictionary.

Prof: Constitutional law was taught differ-ently in my day. I think that we spent 4and a half weeks on the Charter. The restwas all marketing boards... egg marketingboards, pork marketing boards, mar-garine... Don't test me on my knowledgeof egg marketing boards. You'd be sur-prised.

Prof: Do you agree that … well, it’s purelyrhetorical, so of course you agree...

Prof: So, maybe contextualism is usefulhere … sorry to use the Supreme Court’sfavorite weasel word.Prof, calling a student: Margarita? You’re adrink, not a lady.

Prof: That was a trick question. But an-swer it.

Prof: Are interest payments deductiblefrom income?L4: Possibly so.Prof: That is a wonderfully caveated an-swer.

L4: Question.Prof: If you’re really interested, I justwrote a fourty-page paper on that sub-ject.

2L: McGill Law is a very particular faculty.Prof: Yes, we are pretty weird.

C O N T I N U E D F R O M P R E V I O U S PA G E

SUBMIT OVERHEARDS!quid.overheard@gmail.com