Democracy shouldn’t be a buzzword

[adrotate banner="16"]

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

By: Alex Wilson

There has been quite a bit of hype recently around electing McMaster Student Union Vice Presidents. We’ve witnessed hastily made, last minute, post-quorum motions at last year’s General Assembly, the formation of the Vice Presidential ad-hoc committee, persistent tabling in the student centre and a vote of support by the Inter Residence Council.

As a result of a circulated petition it appears that we will be moving with a referendum on the issue of vice presidential elections sometime in the near future. However, so far the only vocal participants in the debate have been the proponents of at-large elections. I strongly believe that student government is useless if it is not representative of student voices and that the coming referendum can act as an excellent medium to hear these voices. Democracy for the sake of democracy is nowhere near as valuable as an informed democracy.

The VP Ad-Hoc committee produced three detailed reports throughout the summer with the purpose of informing the Student Representative Assembly on the multitude of complexities associated with VP elections. After research into multiple direct and indirect democratic electoral systems and the process used by other universities’ student unions, the committee voted to provide five ranked suggestions to the SRA. The first suggestion comprised extensive changes to the current system. Modifications included changing the term of SRA members, the format of elections and the nominations timeline. As a member of this committee, I would like to share some of the rationale behind why I voted for this option over an at-large system.

Vice presidential candidates currently spend over 35 hours consulting with the president-elect, the outgoing Board of Directors and each of the students’ representatives on the SRA. Through this consultation, platforms are developed and aligned with the directly elected president and SRA’s views. These platforms are frequently close to 20 pages long and go into extensive detail based on the scope of each vice presidential position. Asking students to be informed on and to have carefully examined over 200 pages of platforms for three VP elections is ridiculous. The purpose of the SRA is to represent student interests and they are elected by students to do just that. The SRA helps shape these platforms through extensive consultation and I would rather they make an informed vote, than lower the caliber and extent of discussion by making it at-large. Vice Presidents have very specialized roles from service administration, to advocacy, and finance and I want their hiring process to be just as intensive. This is starkly different than the varied and more visionary role the President of the MSU occupies.

Proponents of at-large elections have been quick to point out that we are one of two schools in Ontario that doesn’t have at large elections, yet I don’t believe this paints an accurate picture. The McMaster Student Union currently boasts a voter turnout of over 42 percent for presidential elections, by far the highest in Ontario. We also have a large and diverse group of students that run for both President and Vice President positions. Western and Queens both have seen less diverse elections with fewer candidates running after switching to slate systems. In addition, Western has seen a drastic decrease in voter turnout. While the psuedoslate option being proposed is different from a slate system, voter fatigue is still a very real concern.

While I don’t agree with the direction of the discussion so far, I too feel the problems that have sparked it. Students clearly feel that they should be better educated on the governance structure of the MSU, that they should have more say in the governing bodies, and that there needs to be more outreach. However, I don’t believe that directly electing VPs will fix the larger issues. I believe drastic changes need to be made to SRA communication and outreach policies. These are our representatives in student government and they should be in extensive communication with students. While I know my opinion is not the only one on this issue, I hope this starts more of a two-sided discussion moving forward.