DESPITE BEING rejected twice by the Sanggunian Central Board (CB) , the proponents of the Ateneo College Fair refused to give up on their project right away; instead, the House of Representatives (HoR) was convened on November 15, Monday, to help determine whether the Sanggunian would support the proposed college fair.

The Ateneo College Fair is a proposed two-day event that will feature booths, talent showcases, fashion shows and games, among others. According to the project’s press release, the fair was in response to the Sanggunian’s “thrusts of engaged citizenship and the scholarship endowment fund.”

At the end of yesterday’s meeting, 63.7% voted in favor of the college fair (see breakdown of votes here). However, Sanggunian Secretary-General Maan de los Santos clarified that the HoR votes are not legally-binding and that it would still be up to the CB to decide on the fate of the project.

If the CB decides to vote in favor of the College Fair, it will be recognized as an official project of the Sanggunian and will thus receive financial aid and the authority to use the Sanggunian’s name in promoting the said event. The CB is set to meet later today to vote on the College Fair, among other things.

The fair is tentatively scheduled on February 11 and 12 at the Bellarmine field.

Ideology, opinion clash

The fair, which has been a point of debate within and outside the Sanggunian, elicited mixed reactions even amongst the HoR members and students from different Loyola Schools organizations.

After a 15-minute presentation by the members of the College Fair Task Force, the floor was opened to questions and comments by all in attendance; members of The Assembly and the Ateneo Debate Society [ADS] in particular, voiced out their opinions against the proposed fair.

Fundraising and social involvement

College Fair Task Force Publicity Head Toni Potenciano said that the fair was a good project as one of its goals is to raise P1 million for the scholarship funds. She added that the fair was a means for members of the community to showcase their skills.

Apart from this, some representatives favor having the fair as it could become an avenue for the community to come together.

Course Representative Chris Reyes said, “I think the College Fair is hitting two birds with one stone. We are uniting the Ateneo community, and at the same time, living up to being a man for others. We are being a community for others.”

Meanwhile, Moses Albiento, one of the proponents of the project, said that they wanted the fair to push through because majority of the students who were part of the focus group discussions they conducted said that they wanted a college fair.

Worth the gamble?

Some representatives meanwhile, questioned the advocacy of the fair and said that there were more important issues Sanggunian should focus on.

Several points were raised against attaching an advocacy to the event, claiming that the fair would not be the best avenue to promote social responsibility in the community. In particular, some students questioned the plan to include three Non-Government Organization booths “for Father [Ben Nebres, SJ’s] advocacy.”

“[The fair] is Ateneo social responsibility ending… [it is] is Ateneo social responsibility dying,” said AB/MA Political Science major Leiron Martija.

Junior Job de Leon from the ADS likewise pointed out that the proposed fair was, at the end of the day, a capitalist venture. “The Sanggunian should therefore ask itself – is this really what they want to take part of?” commented de Leon.

Senior TJ Sevilla, meanwhile, said that the project could further divide the student council. “This is already a big gamble for the Sanggunian since it is already crunch time… the Sanggunian may be divided because of this, so is it really worth the gamble?”

Other students continued to defend the attacks on the reasons for throwing a college fair. “Fundraising is [reason] enough,” said an Interdisciplinary Studies senior.

Representation through HoR

According to a Facebook note (see full version here) posted by Sanggunian President Rob Roque the morning before the session, the HoR is composed of all elected and appointed block and course representatives. The HoR is designed to “be a deliberative and recommendatory body convened primarily by the CB to discuss issues the Central Board will deem pertinent to be discussed by such a group composed of over 200 representatives.”

Political Science major and The Assembly VP for Finance and Logistics Bian Villanueva said that he found the HoR assembly unfair for both students and their representatives. “It is unfair to hold an assembly a day before the Central Board (CB) Meeting, wherein [task force members are only given] 15 minutes for the presentation and the rest of the time for discussion and voting,” he said.

Third year CB Representative Claudia Vega, however, countered this by saying that the assembly was planned early on during the semester break. “We specifically [allotted] this day to be the schedule of the assembly because CB meeting is held every Tuesday and any concerns we get from here can be raised during the meeting.”

Villanueva also pointed out that it was also unfair because regardless of the HoR’s decision, it would still be the CB’s vote that mattered. Roque explained in the same Facebook note that “any vote of the HoR on this issue will be taken as one of the considerations (and will not be the primary consideration) for the approval of the College Fair.”

De los Santos added that the HoR voting “could affect the way the CB votes [today].”

Senior Alex Ang also raised concern over the voting process of the assembly. According to him, appointed representatives should not have been allowed to vote. “The key difference between elected and appointed representative is the power to vote. If you will allow the latter to vote, why then don’t we simply appoint all representatives?”

Ang also questioned why some representatives were given more votes than others. “Some representatives have as much as nine votes available while others only have one; the idea of this being a consensus of the community is then questionable.”

Roque clarified that the point of the voting was to “get the pulse of the community.” “The voting is not to grant them legal power but really to know what their constituents really want,” he said.

With reports from Luther Aquino, Bea Cupin and Pao Monteiro