Nearly $1 million.

That is what the Kwantlen Student Association paid in wages and benefits to elected representatives in 2025, according to financial statements reported by The Runner. The figure exceeded the budget by more than $230,000 and dwarfed compensation levels at comparable student associations across British Columbia.

At any institution funded by mandatory student fees, numbers like these demand scrutiny. What students have received instead, many say, is silence.

For years, concerns about governance and spending at the KSA have circulated quietly among staff, former participants, and engaged students. Some describe the experience as watching a car accident in slow motion warning signs appeared, concerns were raised privately, yet little changed.

Part of the frustration, according to multiple people familiar with the organization’s internal dynamics, is that complaints and questions have often been met not with transparency but with procedural delay, non-responses, or referral to legal counsel. The result, critics argue, is that an organization funded by students appears at times to be using those same funds to insulate itself from the scrutiny of its own membership.

This perception is reinforced when senior leadership declines to answer legitimate questions from student journalists. Neither previous KSA presidents Paramvir Singh nor Ishant Goyal, nor Executive Director, Timothii Ragavan, ever seem to respond to tough questions or requests for comment from students or The Runner (who themselves are students) regarding the dramatic increase in compensation or alleged potential misappropriations or conflicts of interest. Silence may be technically permissible, but in a student-funded organization it ought to carry consequences. Accountability that exists only on paper is not accountability at all.

Questions about management effectiveness have also surfaced in public reporting and private discussions. Former Student Services Manager Yakshit Shetty, who has been mentioned in connection with civil litigation reported by The Runner, was widely described by some staff, speaking privately, as completely ineffective in the role. Whether fair or not, such perceptions matter in any organization that depends on trust and credibility. The same criticisms are privately circulated between staff about Timothii Ragavan (who we’ve been told by multiple sources rarely shows up to the office or follows up on any significant mandates that don’t involve blind support for what the board’s unilateral mandate seems to be).

More broadly, critics argue that the KSA has increasingly come to resemble a closed network rather than a representative body. Over several election cycles, hiring and electoral outcomes have, in the view of some observers, drawn heavily from a narrow circle of candidates and friendly associates, raising concerns about whether the association still reflects the diversity of the student body it represents. When participation in elections is low, even small, organized groups can exert outsized influence year after year. We have heard that the Kwantlen Student Association has effectively become an Indian international student jobs program from numerous confidential sources.

Former insiders also describe a system that perpetuates itself. Chief Returning Officers perceived as sympathetic to incumbent leadership, hiring decisions that reinforce existing networks, and the use of overpaid consultants who served as presidents (Abdullah Randhawa, now possibly going by Abdullah Mehmood) drawn from past councils have all been cited as mechanisms that help preserve the status quo. In at least one case, critics have questioned whether hiring former officeholders as consultants at substantial cost creates the appearance of a conflict of interest, even if technically permitted.

Individually, any one of these issues might be explainable. Taken together, they paint a troubling picture: a student government that risks becoming structurally insulated from the students it is meant to serve.

The deeper problem is systemic. The Societies Act in British Columbia assumes that members of an organization can withdraw their support if they disagree with how it is run. That assumption does not hold for student unions, where membership fees are effectively mandatory and collected alongside tuition. Students cannot meaningfully opt out, yet oversight mechanisms remain designed for voluntary clubs.

Universities themselves have limited authority to intervene, and provincial oversight is distant. In practice, the only real check on a student association is an engaged electorate—but engagement is difficult when students are busy, transient, and often unaware of how much money is at stake.

None of this is an argument against compensating student leaders or hiring (competent) staff who truly care about providing the services KPU students deserve. Running a large association is real work. But when compensation rises far beyond comparable institutions, when questions go unanswered for half a decade, and when critics inside and outside the organization describe a culture of insulation rather than accountability, the burden of proof must shift to leadership and questioning the legal structures that are in place to explain why.

Students deserve more than procedural compliance. They deserve transparency, responsiveness, and leadership that always remembers whose money is being spent. Transparency of who gets paid and exactly why must always be at the forefront of any nonprofit organization who has a fiduciary duty to the members who allow it to function. As a CPA candidate, Executive Directory Timothii Ragavan should be the first individual who deeply understands this ethical duty and paradigm.

Until that standard is restored, the KSA risks drifting even further from its purpose—not a voice for students, but an institution increasingly protected from them.

Discuss...

— A Concerned KPU Student

Your words do carry weight. When used with intent, they can shift policies, spark dialogue, and protect what matters. 📩 Email KSA and KPU today.

Student unions are right to criticize the provincial government’s post-secondary review. That criticism is justified, and students should be demanding more from a process that could reshape the entire public education system.

According to The Ubyssey, student leaders across British Columbia were given a six-week consultation window, a single short meeting with the review chair, and little clarity on whether the process will protect core issues like tuition caps or long-term public funding. For something framed as a comprehensive review, that level of engagement feels thin.

The broader context makes the stakes even clearer. International enrolment is being capped, institutional budgets are under strain, and governments have a long history of using “reviews” to quietly normalize unpopular decisions. Students are right to treat this one with skepticism.

While student unions are pushing back on provincial transparency, something far more unsettling is happening inside their own organizations.

At the Kwantlen Student Association, students are being presented with steady reassurances while the internal reality looks increasingly bleak.

In January, The Runner reported that the Speaker of KSA council had not received a single executive or committee report since the start of her term, despite more than twenty being expected. Only one vice-president submitted anything resembling a substantive report. For an organization funded by mandatory student fees, this is a serious governance failure. Without regular reporting, neither council nor students have any reliable way to assess what their leadership is actually doing.

At the same time, the KSA is facing what its own financial documents describe as a seven-figure financial deficit, a deteriorating public reputation, and a relationship with KPU administration that has become visibly strained. The association’s credibility has taken a hit both on campus and beyond it. Even the university itself appears increasingly uncomfortable with the conduct of its own student leadership.

Despite all of this, students continue to hear confident messaging. Public statements from KSA executives emphasize hard work, progress behind the scenes, and ongoing advocacy. What is missing is evidence. There is little available documentation showing what a full year of executive leadership has delivered for students, beyond financial instability and internal disorder.

This gap between messaging and reality is what makes the situation particularly troubling.

Many of the people closest to the organization’s day-to-day operations are not in a position to speak openly. Staff are expected to keep things running while navigating shifting roles, unclear authority, and professional limits on what they can say publicly. They see the problems up close, but cannot realistically become the ones to raise alarms.

The result is a closed loop. Students hear reassuring narratives from leadership. Council meetings remain opaque and disseminate minimal information. Staff are constrained from speaking. Meanwhile, the organization continues to slide deeper into crisis without meaningful accountability.

This goes beyond poor management. It creates an environment where students are effectively asked to take everything on faith. No reports. No measurable outcomes. No transparent accounting of how an entire year of governance translated into tangible benefit for the people paying for it.

That is not just a public relations problem. It undermines the basic premise of student representation.

Student unions exist to act on behalf of students, not to manage impressions. They exist to justify the trust placed in them through clear records, open governance, and real results. When those foundations erode, so does the legitimacy of every external claim they make.

Which is why the current moment feels so deeply ironic. Student unions across B.C. are criticizing government for rushed processes, vague consultations, and decisions being made without proper oversight.

At Kwantlen, students are living inside a version of that same problem.

A student union that cannot clearly demonstrate what its leadership has accomplished over an entire year — beyond financial turmoil and reputational damage — is not simply underperforming. It is asking students to believe a story that the available evidence just does not support.

And that should concern anyone who cares about what student representation is supposed to mean.

Discuss...

— A Concerned KPU Student

Your words do carry weight. When used with intent, they can shift policies, spark dialogue, and protect what matters. 📩 Email KSA and KPU today.

Kwantlen students fund the Kwantlen Student Association with the expectation that when their money is spent, it produces something concrete: better services, stronger advocacy, or at the very least, clear outcomes we can evaluate.

That expectation matters when tens of thousands of dollars are spent on travel.

In late 2025, the KSA approved up to $35,000 in student funds for travel tied to external meetings in Toronto and Montreal. The respective delegations were:

Toronto (Canadian Federation of Students National General Meeting):

• Gurdit Singh (Faculty of Business Representative)
• Rohit Uppal (Faculty of Science and Horticulture Representative)
• Jagjivan Sran (Faculty of Arts Representative)
• Shawinderdeep Singh (Associate President)

Montreal (and Toronto external meetings following the conference):

• Paramvir Singh (President & Vice-President University Affairs)
• Harpal Singh (Vice-President External Affairs)
• Amanpreet Singh (Arts Representative)

That money covered flights, hotels, meals, and conference costs. Travel isn’t free, and no one is pretending advocating for student rights on a federal level and building relationships with other student organizations isn’t important… but once you cross into five-figure spending, the burden of proof shifts. Students are entitled to ask a simple question:

1. What was the ROI (return on investment)?

So far, the public answer has been underwhelming.

When council later discussed the Montreal visit, including meetings at Université de Montréal, the description boiled down to visiting offices, asking about services, and “having a chat.” When asked who exactly was met with, the response was vague enough to raise eyebrows. No clear organization. No named contacts. No documented takeaways that students can point to and say, this was meaningful.

That’s not a report. That’s a lazy travel recap.

If KSA representatives are travelling across the country on student money, meaningful post-trip reporting should be automatic, not optional. At minimum, students should see:

• who was met with (names, roles, organizations),
• what specific practices or policies were learned,
• what concrete actions will be implemented at KPU as a result.

Without that, “external advocacy” becomes impossible to distinguish from networking tourism.

The scale of the spending makes the lack of detail worse. $35,000 is not pocket change. That money could fund multiple clubs, campus events, emergency bursaries, or mental-health programming. When it’s instead used to “visit offices and chat,” students deserve to know why that was the best use of their fees, and what came out of it.

To clarify the claims made during council discussions, we have reached out to relevant organizations, including student bodies at Université de Montréal and its student association FAECUM (FAÉCUM) and the Canadian Federation of Students, to corroborate what meetings took place and what they involved. That kind of verification shouldn’t be necessary. The KSA itself should be providing that clarity proactively.

We must demand better standards from our representatives and executives at the Kwantlen Student Association.

Student representation isn’t measured by how far you travel or how many conferences you attend. It’s measured by what you bring back: in writing, in outcomes, and in changes students can actually feel.

Right now, the disconnect between the money spent and the substance reported is too wide to ignore. And until that gap is closed, KPU students are left asking a fair question:

Are our student fees funding advocacy, or just vacations?

Discuss...

— A Concerned KPU Student

Your words do carry weight. When used with intent, they can shift policies, spark dialogue, and protect what matters. 📩 Email KSA and KPU today.

As a student at Kwantlen Polytechnic University, you expect the student association to safeguard your interests: fees collected should be spent transparently, equitably and in ways that enhance student life. Instead, in the past three months rumours and emerging evidence suggest the KSA board, lead by Ishant (Goel) Goyal, President and VP University Affairs Paramvir Singh, VP Finance and Operations Manmeet Kaur under the oversight of Executive Director Timothii Ragavan, may have veered far from that standard. This is not about minor budgeting mishaps; this is about institutional accountability, governance and whether student funds are being used in ways that reflect their stated purpose.

What we’ve heard

Silver coins for a “44th anniversary”

The board authorized the purchase of ten silver coins, each weighing under 10 grams, celebrating the KSA’s “44th anniversary”. These coins feature Sikh and other religious symbols and, by reports, were purchased at approximately CAD $70 per coin. By comparison, the spot price of silver in Canada today is approximately CAD $2.33 per gram.

If the coins truly weigh 10g each, then the raw metal cost would be around CAD $23.30 per coin (10 g × $2.33/gram). If under 10 g, the cost would be lower. That means paying CAD $70 is about three times the metal‐value alone.

On its face: if the rationale was a simple commemorative coin for the KSA’s 44th anniversary, the symbolism fails for two reasons: the coins don’t clearly tie to the “44th anniversary” motif (they instead appear more aligned with Diwali and religious representation), and the cost premium appears excessive given the metal value.

Hanging Basket Chairs

You may have seen these hanging basket chairs on campuses. We have heard allegations that the cost of these were approximately CAD $1,950 each (total ~CAD $20,000). But current wholesale listings on major procurement platforms for the same model are in the $300-600 range.

What justified the association spending $2,000 per unit on these chairs?

Overpriced nut baskets and dresses distributed to students

For Diwali celebrations, large expenditures on “nut baskets” and dresses which were given to students was alleged. Details (quantities, vendor quotes) remain vague; however, the pattern of gifting combined with high unit cost raises valid questions about procurement, tendering and justification. Who were the vendors who were contracted for this? Why is this not being disclosed to students and campus reporters?

$250 plants that look like Ikea palms in Rona pots

A further allegation: that the association spent CAD $250 each on plants that appear to be repotted Ikea palms placed into CAD $28 pots sourced from Rona. If true, this suggests markup and perhaps a lack of competitive sourcing.

Nearly $10,000 on Diwali decorations across campuses

The board allegedly spent nearly $10,000 on Diwali decorations just for the installation across campuses. The decorations themselves were purchased separately by the association, adding even more cost on top of the installation fee. Students effectively paid twice: first for the decor, then for the labour to put it up. This is yet another opaque expense pushed through by a board and Finance VP who appear to exercise little scrutiny over vendor pricing, procurement practices or whether spending aligns with the association’s mandate.

Why this Matters

Our student fees are not a slush fund for luxury items, overpriced decor, or vendor contracts that nobody outside the board has ever seen. They are paid with the expectation of responsible stewardship and transparency.

The examples above point to a pattern:

• High-cost purchases without clear student benefit
• No competitive procurement process
• No public vendor information
• No accountability from the Finance VP Manmeet Kaur or Executive Director Timothii Ragavan
• A culture of secrecy rather than service

But questionable spending is only half the picture. The governance failures behind it are just as serious.

A Board That Barely Shows Up

The Runner’s recent reporting highlights an equally alarming issue: the board’s growing inability to even run its own meetings.

At the Nov. 21 council meeting, the KSA failed to vote on three key election-regulation changes, not because of disagreement, but because councillors simply didn’t show up.

Zero councillors attended in person, despite the room being booked specifically to avoid connectivity issues.

Attendance dropped from ten online participants to seven, below the quorum of eight.

This marks the third meeting where critical governance items were delayed due to lack of quorum.

Councilors receive an honorarium of $125 per meeting, yet many appear to:

• log in silently
• sit muted,
• write a line or two in chat (mainly to vote yae or nae)
• and disappear before the meeting concludes.

These honoraria are meant to defray any commuting costs so that these meetings are held in person. They are not just an extra source of income for clicking on a meeting invite and sitting quietly in chat.

Meanwhile, these same elected officials oversee procurement, student-club funding, election rules, and the millions in student fees flowing through the association each year.

If the people responsible for oversight aren’t present, oversight doesn’t happen. And when oversight doesn’t happen, waste, mismanagement, and unchecked spending become predictable outcomes.

KPU Students Deserve Better

Good governance is not complicated. It requires councillors who:

• attend meetings in person,
• participate meaningfully,
• stay for the full agenda,
• and uphold their responsibility to the students who elected them.

Good procurement is also not complicated. It requires competitive pricing, transparent reporting, proper documentation, and accountability to the student body.

Right now, the KSA appears to be falling short on both fronts.

SIGN THE PETITION FOR A FORENSIC AUDIT

For years, students have paid millions in mandatory fees with little transparency, accountability, or oversight. Yet these funds continue to be misspent while students across Kwantlen campuses receive uneven and inconsistent services.

It’s time to demand better.

We the KPU students need to organize, speak out, and call for a FULL, INDEPENDENT, FORENSIC AUDIT of the KSA.

Please share the following link with every body you know: sign and share the petition for accountability and reform: https://c.org/FzsKZB7gMZ

We also call on the Province of British Columbia to amend and strengthen the B.C. Societies Act to ensure student-funded organizations can never again operate without transparent, democratic governance.

Enough is enough.

Discuss...

— A Concerned KPU Student

Your words do carry weight. When used with intent, they can shift policies, spark dialogue, and protect what matters. 📩 Email KSA and KPU today.

On October 9, 2025, MLA for Abbotsford West Korky Neufeld (X, IG, FB) referenced the Kwantlen Student Association (KSA) in the B.C. Legislature for the second time this year, again, raising concerns about fiduciary mismanagement of student fees from the Kwantlen Polytechnic University (KPU).

The first time Korky raised this issue was six months ago on Tuesday, April 8 2025.

What I also wanted to bring forward was Kwantlen Polytechnic University and Langara College student societies. I know that the minister and I, when I was in her office about a month ago, touched on this topic about student unions.

I was told that it doesn’t fall under her purview. It does, though, under the Minister of Finance. But I think it directly impacts the affordability of students to be able to afford post-secondary education when they’re forced to pay their student fees, and then the student fees aren’t being used appropriately in our institutions.

I know that the minister knows about this, because letters have been sent from students from Kwantlen Polytechnic University and Langara College with deep, deep concerns about their student unions. I think there need to be some changes made to this, and I think if we care about our students, the minister will take these up with the proper authorities.

I know you received information like this that talks about some of the remedies, and I’m going to go through some of the remedies until my time is up. Some of the remedies for the student unions are very simple, because….

What is very interesting, actually, is that the Premier, who was then, back in 2015 — November 18, when he was speaking to Langara College… He was the Post-Secondary critic at the time. When he heard their concerns, this was his response: “I am very concerned about the information you presented about what is happening at Langara, as an advocate for open government and transparency at all levels.” Ten years ago and no action. That is the concern — when somebody says something and doesn’t follow through with it.

These students were hanging on every word, hoping that somebody would follow through and deal with these student unions. Some of these staff members in these student unions get paid as much as an MLA, and that’s on the backs of our students and student loans. It is absolutely reckless, and something needs to be done.

Here are some of the remedies for this.

The Premier needs to ask the B.C. Auditor General to perform a full audit of student societies for the past five years.

Two, amend the B.C. Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act to cover student societies.

The Premier needs to launch a comprehensive, all-party public inquiry into the structured powers of B.C. student societies and their continued necessity, if any, or at least a public consultative process. This inquiry would produce a report with recommendations.

Four, create a new, stand-alone B.C. student societies act.

Five, Victoria urgently needs to legislate a hard cap on student society staffers’ salaries, expenses, bonuses and overtime.

What is happening at these student unions is that staff members who have control of their finances, and nobody’s checking on it, are loaning money to their friends without any payment back. That’s on the backs of our students, because our students have to pay the fee. They have no choice to pay the fee, but they’re not getting their bang for their buck.

These two groups especially are reckless. We’ve known about it for ten years. I’m hoping the ministry will take this to the Minister of Finance and, once and for all, deal with it, because our students are counting on us.

Sign the Petition

For years, students have paid millions in mandatory fees with little transparency, accountability, or oversight. Yet these funds continue to be misspent while students across Kwantlen campuses receive uneven and inconsistent services.

It’s time to demand better.

We the KPU students need to organize, speak out, and call for a FULL, INDEPENDENT, FORENSIC AUDIT of the KSA.

Please share the following link with every body you know: sign and share the petition for accountability and reform: https://c.org/FzsKZB7gMZ

We also call on the Province of British Columbia to amend and strengthen the B.C. Societies Act to ensure student-funded organizations can never again operate without transparent, democratic governance.

Enough is enough.

Discuss...

— A Concerned KPU Student

Your words do carry weight. When used with intent, they can shift policies, spark dialogue, and protect what matters. 📩 Email KSA and KPU today.

In August 2025, KPU students were stunned to learn—via a Runner Letter to the Editor—that their Queer Students Representative, Yuvraj Bains (who campaigned under the name “James”), has been banned from all KPU campuses by the Student Rights and Responsibilities Office (SRRO). The restriction isn’t minor; it prevents him from accessing classrooms, services, or student spaces.

But here’s what no one has explained: why?

Why has he been banned?

The SRRO doesn’t release reasons for bans. But Bains’ own Instagram account (screenshots below) has featured images of firearms, ammunition, and weapon accessories, sometimes geotagged in B.C. Students are asking: if a KSA representative is publicly posting with weapons, is that connected to his ban—or is it unrelated?

According to a video posted on KPU’s Student Rights & Responsibilities Office homepage, the “[department] works with the KPU community to handle non-academic misconduct issues, behaviours of concern, and sexual misconduct.”

This is highly concerning that a Kwantlen Student Association representative has been restricted by the the SSRO on any of these grounds.

It also wouldn’t be the first time as many current executives and members of this board were associated with, consulted and trained by Abdullah Randhawa who was accused of sexual misconduct and permanently banned from the Canadian Alliance of Student Associations (CASA).

Yuvraj Bains, Kwantlen Student Association’s Queer Students Representative at KPU.

Why the double identity?

He campaigned under the name “James”, never disclosing his real identity or photo. Students only learned afterward who he was. Why did KSA’s election system (overseen by recently-appointed Chief Returning Officer (CRO) Gurrinder Gaddu) allow this? How could queer students know who was stepping forward to represent them?

Does he even identify as queer?

Community members have raised the question directly: does Bains even identify as gay or queer? If not, then his candidacy represents more than a paperwork loophole—it undermines the principle of authentic advocacy. As the saying goes: “Nothing for us without us.”

Where is KSA’s accountability?

Despite being banned, Bains hasn’t stepped down. He continues to hold the title of Queer Students Representative and, unless clarified, appears eligible to receive stipends funded by student fees. The KSA council has not addressed this publicly. Students are left in the dark.

Close Ties to Executives?

Beyond social photos with council members, Bains’ own posts suggest he is in a relationship with Manmeet Kaur, the KSA’s current VP Finance and Women’s Representative**.** If true, that deepens the accountability question: how can students trust impartial oversight or disciplinary action when the person responsible for financial oversight of the council is also personally connected to him?

This is not a personal critique—it’s a conflict of interest issue. Relationships between officeholders in any representative body demand transparency, especially when one of those officeholders is banned from campus yet still holds their seat

Does he authentically represent the community?

Beyond his campus ban and use of an alias, one open question remains unanswered: does Yuvraj Bains (“James”) even identify as queer? If he is cisgender and straight, as his social media posts seem to imply, then his role as Queer Students Representative isn’t just questionable—it’s illegitimate.

The position was created to give queer students at KPU a direct voice, not to be treated as a resume builder or a placeholder by someone outside the community. There’s a phrase often used in activist circles that applies here: “Nothing for us without us.” Representation only works when it comes from within the community being represented. Otherwise, it becomes tokenism at best and silencing at worst.

Why this matters

This position exists to amplify queer voices at KPU**.** Right now, the role is filled by someone banned from campus, who campaigned under an alias, who may not even identify with the community he represents, and whose online persona raises serious concerns.

Students don’t need gossip; they need clarity:

• What happened?
• Why is he banned?
• Why is he still in office?

Until the KSA provides answers, queer students at KPU are being represented without representation.

Discuss...

— A Concerned KPU Student

Your words do carry weight. When used with intent, they can shift policies, spark dialogue, and protect what matters. 📩 Email KSA and KPU today.

Kwantlen Polytechnic University spans five campuses—Richmond, Surrey, Langley, Cloverdale (KPU Tech), and Civic Plaza in Surrey City Centre. That multi-campus reality isn’t a footnote; it’s the daily life of students who study and work where they are, not where student politicians wish they were. Even so, the Kwantlen Student Association (KSA) keeps centralizing perks, events, and access in Surrey, creating inequities that are now impossible to ignore.

Perks clustered in Surrey

Repeated KSA promotions restrict discounts to Surrey Member Services. Example: multiple Instagram posts and reels advertise $6 Cineplex tickets “from April 16–30 at the KSA Surrey office” or “from KSA Surrey member service,” often with limits per student. That’s a direct geographic advantage for Surrey-based students and a de facto barrier for students centered in Richmond, Langley, Cloverdale, or Civic Plaza.

This isn’t a one-off; it’s a pattern. When the KSA controls where benefits can actually be redeemed, students without easy access to Surrey are functionally excluded.

Events promoted to the public—then gone in a flash

Take the “Summer Splash” Cultus Lake Waterpark trip. The poster (shared to KSA’s social channels) announces the registration window and meetup at Grassroots Café (Surrey). Within minutes of the announced time, students on the post report broken forms, “sold out” notices, and no confirmations—despite hitting the link right away. The screenshots provided show complaints like “tried registering… it says the Jotform is closed,” “response received right away but no confirmation,” and “I tried at 7:30 pm and it says sold out.”

On paper, the event is open to everyone; in practice, the process feels closed. The gap between a publicly announced registration time and near-instant sell-outs (paired with inconsistent confirmation flow) reasonably fuels the perception that friends or insiders can access registrations before the wider student body. (KSA’s website promotes the event; the clustering around Surrey remains.)

Accessibility isn’t optional—centralizing meetups makes it harder

When events and perks are physically anchored to Surrey, students who rely on closer campuses—or who have mobility, chronic health, or scheduling constraints—encounter invisible barriers. They must either travel farther (often inter-city), forgo the perk, or attempt late, glitch-prone online registrations that vanish immediately. That’s an equity issue and an accessibility issue.

It’s fair to ask: where is the Students with Disabilities Representative in this conversation? According to KPU’s June 2025 Convocation Program, current Disabilities Rep Bhoomika Seera (Jiya) (Instagram) appears on the graduation roll—i.e., she graduated. Does that mean she can serve for months while not taking classes, even as accessibility concerns mount for current disabled students?

Who’s representing which campus—and from where?

The KSA Council poster posted around campus lists the 2025–26 campus reps, including Akashdeep Singh (Richmond), Jobanpreet Singh (Cloverdale), Shawinderdeep Singh (Civic Plaza), and Prabhnoor Singh (Langley). Yet many marquee events and most of the headline perks still funnel through Surrey. In a multi-campus union, representation without distributed access looks like theatre. What do these representatives have to say about such inequitable distributions of benefits?

Source: https://kusa.ca/council/

Serving while graduated: the legitimacy problem

Leadership continuity matters—but student representation also requires, well, being a student. The KSA’s own rules (as summarized by The Runner) require elected councillors to submit proof of registration each semester. Meanwhile, the June 2025 Convocation Program lists Ishant Goyal—the KSA’s current president—as a graduate (BBA in Entrepreneurial Leadership). Unless he’s also actively registered for new coursework, this raises a basic governance question: who is being paid with student fees to represent students, and will they remain students for the foreseeable future?

This same tension applies more broadly: when representatives (including constituency reps) graduate but remain in office, their incentive alignment with currently enrolled students weakens, especially across issues like commuting, course registration pain points, and campus-specific access.

Spending choices that amplify the perception of insiderism

In July, the KSA’s executive approved over $30,000 in concert tickets for distribution to students (Nirvair Pannu, Babbu Maan, Atif Aslam). The Rough math may fit within a budget line, but the method of distribution matters for equity: The Runner reports that 30 tickets for one show were given away on the Surrey campus by “asking random questions,” and that a promotional post was taken down “due to high demand.” The optics are exactly what you’d expect: scarce perks distributed in ways that privilege who is physically present in Surrey—and who is in the right place at the right time.

Why are all of these concerts geared for Indian audiences?

The Queer Students Representative who can’t set foot on campus

Multiple queer KPU students published an open Letter to the Editor stating that the KSA’s Queer Students Representative, Yuvraj Bains, has been temporarily restricted from accessing any KPU campuses by the Student Rights and Responsibilities Office (SRRO). In the same piece, they note he ran under the name “James,” was absent from the AGM oath of office, and has not engaged the campus queer community meaningfully. Whatever the underlying conduct matter, the practical effect is stark: a constituency rep barred from KPU spaces cannot perform core duties that depend on in-person presence.

One open question is does Yuvraj Bains (“James”) even identify as gay or queer? Representing the queer community while not being a member seems problematic in the very least. If not, the problem sharpens: representing the queer community while not being a member is, at the very least, a conflict of principle. Communities facing marginalization have long insisted: “Nothing for us without us.” If representation is to mean anything, it must be rooted in identity and accountability, not just a ballot slot filled under a pseudonym.

A similar question stands for Disabilities Representative Bhoomika Seera. Does she relate to her constituency by having a visible or invisible disability?

A representation gap KSA won’t measure

The current council appears visually homogeneous on official materials, and the election slate/candidates list shows a narrow band of names and networks repeating across roles. They all seem to be international students from India. How can they legitimately represent the needs of the entire student body at KPU? KSA does not publish demographic breakdowns of candidates or of the council, making it impossible to evaluate how well the board reflects KPU’s very diverse student body. The absence of demographic transparency deepens mistrust—especially when combined with Surrey-centric service delivery.

The bottom line

Across perks, event logistics, spending choices, and representative capacity, the through-line is consistent: students based outside Surrey face structural disadvantages created by the KSA’s own decisions. When discounts are redeemable only at Surrey, when high-demand events meet only at Surrey, when scarce tickets are handed out on Surrey, when a key constituency rep is barred from campus, and when some reps appear to have graduated while collecting student-funded stipends and salaries, students notice.

At a five-campus university, fairness isn’t a slogan; it’s about where benefits live, how access works, and who is accountable. Right now, the KSA’s choices privilege one campus—and the people at it—over everyone else.

Discuss...

— A Concerned KPU Student

Your words do carry weight. When used with intent, they can shift policies, spark dialogue, and protect what matters. 📩 Email KSA and KPU today.

A new video from the Kwantlen Student Association (KSA) features president Ishant Goyal (Goel) promoting free copper water bottles for KPU students, “while supplies last.” In the video, Goyal claims these bottles “help boost your metabolism,” “increase good digestion,” and offer “many more benefits”.

The problem? Most of these health claims are scientifically shaky at best.

While copper does have antimicrobial properties and is an essential trace mineral, the idea that sipping water from a copper vessel can dramatically improve digestion or metabolism is more wellness folklore than fact. There’s limited evidence suggesting any significant physiological benefit from drinking copper-infused water, especially in the small doses leached from these bottles. Overuse, in fact, can even be harmful.

Then there’s the curious packaging: these bottles don’t appear to be KSA-branded. That raises fair questions:

• Who supplied them?
• What company sourced these bottles for the KSA?
• Who led this initiative?

What’s more ironic is the video opens with a complaint about the high cost of food and drink on campus—an issue that disproportionately affects students already burdened by fees. Yet it comes from a president who has routinely voted in favour of increased pay for himself and fellow board members, funded directly on the backs of students via student fees.

So while free copper bottles may seem like a generous gesture, we might be better served with transparency, scientific integrity, and financial priorities that reflect our actual needs.

Sometimes what looks like a gift deserves a closer look.

Discuss...

— A Concerned KPU Student

Your words do carry weight. When used with intent, they can shift policies, spark dialogue, and protect what matters. 📩 Email KSA and KPU today.