Student unions show systems can be changed from within
Legacy of student activism shows funding and dissent are not mutually exclusive
Funded by the system they’re meant to confront, student unions like Concordia University’s are caught in a paradox.
It’s natural to wonder: how can students hold universities accountable when their operations depend on them? Isn’t that a conflict of interest? Yet, history shows that student unions can—and often do—navigate this tension effectively.
Funding does not automatically equate to submission. In fact, institutional support can provide student unions with the resources, legitimacy and platform necessary to offer vital services and drive systemic change.
For example, Concordia’s institutional funding has enabled the Concordia Student Union (CSU) to establish programs such as the Legal Information Clinic, the Student Advocacy Centre, on-campus childcare and other essential initiatives.
Though the CSU receives a portion of student fees administered through the university, it retains autonomy in how it organizes, advocates and agitates. This model—common across Canadian universities—has often strengthened rather than silenced student activism.
Consider the Quebec student strikes of 2012. Students across the province, including those from Concordia, played a central role in one of the largest acts of civil disobedience in Canadian history, protesting tuition hikes proposed by then-premier Jean Charest’s government.
While funding structures remained intact, the political climate shifted. Student unions like the CSU and the Fédération étudiante universitaire du Québec used their resources to coordinate mass mobilizations, strikes and negotiations—ultimately forcing the provincial government to shelve its tuition increase plans.
The CSU has also taken on broader social justice issues beyond tuition.
In 2024, they accused the university of police brutality, called for the removal of all police officers on campus and increased support for mental health services. These were controversial demands that directly challenged Concordia’s operational priorities. The CSU has also backed divestment campaigns and supported marginalized student communities, even when these stances conflicted with university policy or public image.
And yet, funding didn’t stop; if anything, the union’s high-profile actions often strengthened student support and legitimacy.
What makes this tension between funding and freedom navigable is the structure. Most Canadian student unions are democratically governed by elected student leaders who are accountable to their peers, not university administrators.
In Quebec, student union funding is often legally protected, meaning universities cannot easily defund them without triggering major political or legal consequences.
Of course, risks still exist. Universities can attempt to control or suppress dissent through bureaucratic hurdles or public-relations pressure, and student leaders must always guard against co-optation.
Still, a funded union is not a powerless one. It often has a stronger platform to organize, advocate and apply pressure than an unfunded or underground alternative would.
This was demonstrated in February 2025 when student unions across Alberta leveraged their collective resources and legitimacy to demand expanded government funding in an effort to make postsecondary education more affordable. This action shows how student unions can band together to push for systemic change.
With structural safeguards and democratic governance, institutional funding can empower more than it restricts. Concordia’s student body has proven time and again that it can and will bite the hand that feeds it; not out of disloyalty, but out of a commitment to equity, justice and a stronger community.
Money doesn’t dictate the fight—students do.
This article originally appeared in Volume 46, Issue 1, published September 2, 2025.
_600_832_s.png)
_600_375_90_s_c1.jpg)