Predictions, and other thoughts on the election
March 9th, 2011 by Crystal | Featured BloggerBefore I begin, I must clarify that as a guest blogger my opinions do not reflect the opinions of the blog. Everything said here is my opinion alone. Now, with that cleared up, let’s start!
1. Predictions
It should come as no surprise when Unite For Action comes out with a clean win. Why? Because:
- They are the only slate running
- They are full of incumbents
- It doesn’t matter how you vote, UFA will inevitably have the “majority” because they have no competition.
I will be the first one to say that I really do hope that Nathaniel Tang, the incumbent running against Corey Scott for VP Internal, gets a spot on the executive board. Unfortunately, unless the tides turn, I don’t see that happening. Sorry Nathaniel. I really do love your 5 pillars. They make sense. They have a purpose. Much better than the rather confusing “let’s bring more life into our services because I want to be able to cook food for you guys and extend it to other faculties” — an answer Corey gave us in the recent debate.
Having said that, this should not deter anyone from voting, or at least finding out why they are the only real slate running in the executive positions. When you think about it, the issues that our university faces will not change. We will always want lower tuition. We will forever want affordable public transit. We will always want an “SU that listens to YOU” (you can thank me later for that catchphrase). The difference is who is leading these initiatives and how they plan on doing it. This is where our voting becomes important. It doesn’t matter how many votes they do get when a certain number of them are spoiled. I know that Students First (the “banned” slate, according to many people) candidates are boycotting the election, and I am sure that many of their followers are doing the same. However, all that achieves is a cover on The Varsity and an even lower voter turnout.
2. Votes and how people will cast them, if they do.
The way I see it, there are two and a half ways to vote. The first being that you vote for UFA, the second being that you spoil the ballot and the half being boycotting. I already discussed a bit of this above. As a recap, SF executive ex-candidates are boycotting the election and I have no doubt that their supporters are following suit. They’ve got the press for it, so it will be effective as a way to make a statement.
As regular students, we will probably not make the headlines by boycotting the election; it will just be considered student apathy. We can make a statement by spoiling the ballot. If you are as unsatisfied as I am about this election, nothing will catch their attention more than blank votes or ruined ballots. I am not sure if they do a count on it like other elections, but even if they don’t officially publish those numbers, the counters and eventually the board will notice. To me, spoiling a ballot is like saying “I am not happy you’re in there again, but I have to live with it because you [insert verb here] the opposition.”
3. Why the UFA has a weak panel of candidates.
Last night (Tuesday), Alex, one of the co-editors of blogUT had a chat with VP External candidate Shaun Shepherd and, from what I gather, she was not impressed. To be honest, neither was I. I have a feeling that Shaun will be in a tight position since he is a life science student like me. In fact, he is in my class. As a follow life sci-er, I know just how busy he can get. That’s why it struck me as funny when he was passing around the clipboard for for nominations during one of our lectures during nomination period. Already, strike one against UFA: you have a candidate that is so busy with his own commitments in school that he does not take the time to learn about the issues he claims to be dealing with.
Now, as a former debater, I hold a lot of stock in how someone performs and supports him or herself in a debate. It is a mark of how well a person acts under pressure, especially when questioned about their beliefs. Obviously, an executive position lends itself to being a very high pressure job. As I was reading The Varsity’s cover of the event I grew increasingly worried for the UFA platform. Unfortunately, I was unable to attend because “ordinary students” like us didn’t know anything about it so please take my evaluations with a grain of salt.
Of all the candidates, only Presidential candidate Danielle Sandhu stood up well to her question. In a nutshell, she was asked why UFA did not stand for the “ordinary” student. She gave a long spiel describing who “ordinary students” were and how “[UFA] especially needs to safeguard the rights of those that are traditionally marginalized within our community and broader spaces.” Bravo. That was the most satisfactory answer of the debate.
Meanwhile, her VP candidates were less explicit. As mentioned before Corey wanted to bring more life to his services and ensure that everyone gets food (yay?). He also wants to make sure cheques for funds are allotted to clubs and expand club funding and training. Question: as current VP Campus Life, why in the world did he not try to do that now? As an executive member of a campus club, I can safely say that my club waited ages for our cheque. Not to mention, he didn’t do that great a job ensuring that all clubs were fairly represented, since there was many a time that we didn’t get any notice whatsoever for events like the spring term Clubs Days.
Claro Ho, VP University Affairs candidate, was even less explicit. Copied directly from The Varsity:
She said that in this position, she will “work to eliminate flat fees […] mobilize students from across faculties and departments to help to prevent program cuts,” and lobby to stop the sale of bottled water on campus.
Ho responded to questions of how she planned to deal with the administration with plans to “do a lot of research” and “be constructive.”
All I can say is… Well, what can be said, really? She’s covered it all with her plan to “do a lot of research” and “be constructive.”
As for VP Equity candidate, Lena Elamin, she started off her part by describing what she likes to do in her free time. Perhaps it’s a way to seem personable? Fair enough. She then went on to describe an experience she had in the past which even I can admit was pretty terrible. However, in the face of a tricky question, she did not hold her fort quite as well as one would expect. Mind you, it was a very tricky question so maybe she should get some brownie points. She must have ended off with the most redundant closing statement of the evening. “At the end of the day, we’re basically, we’re like, we’re all the same.” Good call, VP Equity candidate.
UFA achieved its goal of being diverse. It also does have experience on its side. Both Corey and Danielle are current UTSU VPs, while Lena is the Anti-Racism Coordinator at UTMSU. Clara and Shaun are executives in VUSAC and the Black Student’s Association, respectively. At the end of the day, we’ll have to see how their experience holds up to the building pressure and issues.
Wow, that was long.
4. Nathaniel Tang is brave.
He is brave for being the only independent candidate running for an executive position. He is also quite brave in pointing out that the current UTSU (think UFA) is not transparent enough and that the process needed democratic reform. I saw him campaigning by in front of Sidney Smith and felt that by campaigning alongside his adversary, he is putting himself out there in a way UFA candidates cannot: by being different. UFA stresses diversity, but diversity brings us nothing if there is no solid action. Nathaniel has a plan, and I can only hope that he will get a chance to show more of what he’s got.
Also, his little flyer is red and white. It stands out among all the light blue and pink UFA posters. It may be small, it may not be printed in card stock, but in the world of UTSU politics this small, unassuming sheet of red and white paper is refreshing next to the suffocating blue and pink. (I’m sorry, but are we painting a nursery?)
5. There was little, if any campaigning this year, and maybe that’s on purpose.
Does the “ordinary student” even know what’s going on in this year’s election period? When I interviewed some of my classmates, they all answered with variations of “no”.
Point made.
Whose fault is it? I would like to lay blame on UFA, but I risk having people accuse me of scapegoating them. So I present to you this:
How do you know when there is free food on campus? No, not when UTSU spams your facebook inbox. By advertisement. Who puts up these advertisements? The people who are involved with the whole shebang.
According to an inside source, voter turnout was under 20% last year. I have a feeling that it’ll be even lower this year. How does this make UTSU a fair representation of what the student body actually wants?
That’s it, guys. That’s all I’ve got to say for now. Any questions? Leave it in the comments below.
March 9th, 2011 at 11:36 am
“He also wants to make sure cheques for funds are allotted to clubs and expand club funding and training. Question: as current VP Campus Life, why in the world did he not try to do that now? As an executive member of a campus club, I can safely say that my club waited ages for our cheque.”
Oh my god thank you for bringing this up. I thought we were the only club who had so much difficulty with getting our funding, as we are out hundreds of dollars from our own pockets, which we will never get back
March 9th, 2011 at 11:40 pm
I have no idea how they evaluate their funding, but I do know that it is never enough. I mean, I don’t expect them to subsidize everything, but I do hope that they’re on time.
We’re not that rich. I’m not even from Toronto. It costs me so much money to even be here. Do they seriously think that the majority of students want to shell out our own money when we’re told we’re partly subsidized?
March 10th, 2011 at 12:05 pm
I think they give us 50% of what we need and expect us to hold fundraisers to pay for the rest :/
March 15th, 2011 at 2:59 pm
The campaigning this year was completely the opposite of last year. Last year the campaigning got so out of control that I had to tell at least ten people while trying to get inside Bahen that no, I didn’t have time to listen or to vote, or to do anything else they were asking. I was a little grateful it wasn’t as crazy as last year where I only saw people wearing green and orange for an entire week.
That said, Unite for Action seems to only promote their diversity, and nothing else past that. When I talked to some of the candidates running (Shaun and Corey in particular) they did not offer a clear explanation of how they planned on lowering fees, or a clear plan on how they intended to do anything. Corey spoke of UTSU positives: getting the metropass price lowered for full-time students. This was not just done by the UTSU alone, this was done by many universities working together, and it was in fact Ryerson I believe, who managed to get a vast majority of the votes. UTSU from the St. George campus came with 300 signatures. 300 from a campus of 50,000 undergrads. I think they require more signatures to even be nominated.
The next plan is to get metropasses for part-time students. Although it is a nice idea, I am highly critical of it. A student with one course is considered part time. If a student with one course can be considered financially strapped enough to need a metropass discount, why not a single mother with a child? There would have to be some sort of a cap on the number of courses being taken, which I still feel is not satisfiable.
Shaun talked about a school-wide carnival to increase school spirit. The concept was that you would see people eating cotton candy in class and want to get some yourself. Nice, but I’m not sure if I want to pay with my tuition fees for cotton candy for everyone (I don’t understand how that would increase school spirit anyhow).
Danielle is honestly the one who seems qualified for her position. I have seen her dealing with students, answering their questions, and actually discussing the issues. She seems committed to help the “normal” student, and actively shows up to different events. That being said, if your team is bad, how well can you do on your own?
February 6th, 2012 at 5:49 am
Hey………….
This is awesome. This website very informative creative ones. Each and every students got good information from this . Thanks a lot .