A closer look at VP elections

[adrotate banner="13"]

[feather_share show="twitter, google_plus, facebook, reddit, tumblr" hide="pinterest, linkedin, mail"]

By: Mike Gill

Following the General Assembly, there’s been a tangible stir around Vice-Presidential elections within the MSU. Currently the VPs are elected by the incoming Student Representative Assembly members and outgoing Board of Directors. Many have voiced concern, saying that students should have a greater say in this process; however, there are a number of positives for students within the way we currently elect Vice Presidents.

VP candidates typically begin the process by consulting a huge number of individuals, something that is not always done by presidential candidates, who run at-large. Typically, the first person they meet with is the President-elect. This interaction ensures that each VP is bringing forward a vision and set of priorities that aligns with those of the larger student body. If a VP candidate fails to acknowledge and support the President-elect’s platform, which all students voted for, the candidate will seriously struggle during their campaign. The President-elect’s questions and concerns carry huge weight during the election. This meeting is often followed by consultation with the outgoing VPs and President, to ensure the candidate’s ideas are realistic.

Next, each candidate will hold individual meetings with the 31 incoming SRA members. These discussions are incredibly valuable for a number of reasons. First, they allow feedback from each voice on the SRA to shape each candidate’s ideas. This ensures that a broad range of perspectives are heard and accounted for in every candidate’s platform. Second, these meetings help SRA members understand how candidates communicate and interact in a one-on-one setting. At-large elections simply don’t provide a venue to evaluate the candidates in this way, nor do they provide a meaningful opportunity to collect and implement student feedback.

The result of these meetings is usually the creation of a package, between 15 and 20 pages long, outlining a final set of goals. When compared with the platforms most Presidential candidates release, VP hopefuls are clearly expected to provide much more depth and clarity.

This expectation only exists because every SRA member has a responsibility to read through the entire platform, which cannot be expected of the broader student population.  By putting greater preliminary thought into their plan, VPs will hopefully be able to accomplish more for students during their term.

Another point worth noting is that candidates are now required to submit these packages four business days prior to the election. These will be made publicly available via the MSU website, allowing students to relay concerns to their SRA members prior to the election.

Now, having spent at least 35 hours collecting feedback in meetings and forging a clear set of priorities, candidates are ready to stand up in front of the SRA. The election itself involves three parts: a 20-minute presentation from each candidate, 15 minutes of questions per candidate that will be addressed by all candidates, and another ten minutes of individual questions. This means that, in an election with four candidates, we’ll see an hour and forty minutes of questions.

There is huge value in this question period. Unlike presidential elections, where candidates will often talk around debate questions or consult their teams to craft a written response, the immediate nature of VP elections ensures that questions are an honest gauge of the individual. Furthermore, this time gives an opportunity to assess role-specific competency. There is a unique set of skills and background knowledge that is necessary to be a successful VP. For the VP Administration, managerial skills and a knowledge of the MSU’s services are essential. A rigorous knowledge of our advocacy structure and the policy process is critical for the VP Education. The VP Finance must understand the financial landscape within the MSU, as well as across the university. These are not items that can be well communicated through a class talk or poster.

Looking to other student unions, there is good reason to be wary of at-large elections. Most organizations who take this approach use a slate system, where a presidential candidate runs with a set of VP candidates. Western’s student paper, The Gazette, recently published an article describing how the slate system they implemented two years ago has led to less diverse elections, as well as lower voter turnout. Queen’s uses the same system, and this year their president ran unopposed. If we avoid slates, then we run a high risk of voter fatigue. After Presidential and SRA elections, VP elections might become be a dull, tired affair.

Of course, these examples don’t change the principle that students should have more say in determining their VPs. Changes to our current system could also effectively address this issue. I would love to see the MSU facilitate public VP debates and platform presentations, to engage students and encourage greater input. I would also love to see SRA members more actively consult with students regarding candidates.

Further, the meeting to elect VPs typically runs for 12 hours or more. It is completely unrealistic for most students to attend a meeting of this length. If we spread the elections out over multiple days, we might increase student interest while making the process more accessible.

Our current elections ask a lot of candidates, during the busiest time of the year. To this year’s candidates, thank you for all your hard work thus far.  We appreciate you.

[feather_share show="twitter, google_plus, facebook, reddit, tumblr" hide="pinterest, linkedin, mail"]

[adrotate banner="12"]