Lily PolenchukIn the 2025 University of Alberta Students’ Union (SU) elections, students will get the chance to vote on two plebiscites:
- Single Source Cold Beverage Agreement
- Halt the Hike
Single Source Cold Beverage Agreement (SSCBA)
On the ballot this year will be the a plebiscite question on whether or not students want the SU to pursue a new SSCBA. The SSCBA gives exclusive rights to a company, currently Coca-Cola, to sell cold beverages on campus. This includes on-campus businesses, the SU itself, any registered student groups, and the university. In exchange for the exclusive rights, the vendor funds scholarships and bursaries, and the SU also receives direct funding for student priorities.
This year, Bassam Dakhel has represented the no-side campaign. And he’s been making a great case for students to vote against this plebiscite. Dakhel has been at every single forum — which is rare for any plebiscite or referendum campaign. But beyond simply just being present, he’s been mounting a really great argument against the SSCBA hinging on choice and ethical agreements.
Under SSCBA, no one can sell cold beverages that are not Coca-Cola products. On a very basic level, this limits the choices of students who may simply prefer other companies’ beverages. But, as Dakhel has been pointing out, it also limits the beverages to an American-owned company’s beverages. For those hoping to buy Canadian, that’s not possible with beverages under SSCBA. For international students who may want to drink a beverage from home, they can’t buy it on campus. And as Dakhel has pointed out, some businesses or student groups are already defying the agreement.
On the ethical side of things, Coca-Cola has a factory in occupied Palestinian land. And that’s just one ethical concern about the company. There’s also concerns around its environmental impact. But to be clear, the plebiscite does not specify Coca-Cola as a vendor. The likely alternative would be Pepsi — which there’s also been ethical concerns around.
Will it pass?
I think there’s a good chance that students will take the no-side and vote against the SSCBA. The student body has consistently mobilized around issues regarding Palestine in the last year and this will likely be an extension of that. Additionally, students may simply just want greater choice in the beverages they can purchase on campus.
Should it pass?
I think that it shouldn’t. Dakhel has raised some important considerations during the campaign, both in terms of choice and ethical concerns. The SU needs to heed these concerns, regardless of if the SSCBA agreement passes or not. It seems to me that the benefits of this agreement are outweighed by the concerns.
Halt the Hike
Halt the Hike, a group that advocates against tuition increases among other issues, is proposing that the SU add advocating for free tuition to its tuition advocacy policy. While the sentiment is nice — trust me, I’d love free tuition — Halt the Hike’s question is neither realistic or very logical.
For starters, the SU has been struggling to get different levels of government to meet their requests as is. Whether that’s an increase in operating grants from the Government of Alberta or making the temporary grants for students permanent at the federal level. Jumping right over those things to asking for free tuition likely won’t get students anywhere. Not to mention, it’s still likely the Conservative Party will win the next federal election. The Conservatives are probably the least likely party to meet a demand for free tuition. It’s not about bowing to political pressure, it’s about putting effort towards things that are reasonably achievable.
But looking deeper at what exactly this plebiscite asks for causes larger concerns. The proposal outlines that free tuition for students could be paid for in two ways: cutting Canada’s defence spending by 75 per cent or cutting Labour Market Development Agreements (LMDA). Seeing as there are multiple conflicts happening globally and Canada is under pressure to meet the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) spending targets, I can’t reasonably see that budget being cut. Nonetheless by 75 per cent.
When it comes to LMDAs, these are vitally important government investments. Employment Insurance (EI) falls under LMDA, which provides people with support when they are unable to work. To undercut EI would mean undercutting support for people between employment. A free university degree isn’t going to mean a whole lot if you can’t afford your rent because there’s no EI anymore.
Will it pass?
It’s unlikely that the plebiscite will get enough votes to pass. Halt the Hike has done almost no campaigning around its plebiscite question so it’s hard to believe many students will even know what it is.
Should it pass?
No, this plebiscite question should not pass. It would steer the SU towards unrealistic asks in their advocacy when it’s already struggling to get results on smaller asks. Additionally, how the plebiscite suggests free tuition will be paid for is even more unrealistic and frankly, not very smart. Canada’s security spending and EI are vitally important to this country right now.
