VP Referendum: Defending the right to hold the SRA accountable

[adrotate banner="16"]

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

This is an argument independent of the opinions of the Presidential candidates.

But when it comes to the referendum on VPs at-large, it's clear that it's unfashionable to be against an at-large vote.

To catch anyone up: until now, the Student Representative Assembly has internally elected the McMaster Students Union’s three vice presidents. The three VPs, along with the President, make up the Board of Directors that deal with the daily concerns of the MSU on a full-time basis.

However, after a push from students that began last year, the student body will be voting in a referendum on whether or not they want VP elections to be open to the general student body.

YES, for VP elections to move to an open vote.

NO, for VP elections to remain decided by the SRA.

So on one hand, it's understandable why it's unpopular to be against VP elections at-large. By saying no, are you against the opinions of the students? Are you against what democracy stands for? Are you saying that students can't decide for themselves what is right?

But this is a perversion of what a "no" argument entails: that a body of evidence indicates a host of issues with moving to an at-large system for VPs.

Sure, correlation does not equal causation, but voter turnout has steadily declined at Western University by 50 percent after moving away from internally elected VPs.

And by running a slate model (where candidates must run in teams) at-large, Queen's University has had its Board-equivalent acclaimed for the past two years.

Anecdotally speaking, this fatigue shouldn't come as a surprise if students are asked to make an informed vote on their MSU President, their Vice-Presidents, their SRA members and the various positions on their faculty societies, usually within the span of a month.

I have zero allegiance to the SRA, and if I felt that there was real, tangible evidence on why moving at-large is healthy for the democratic process, I would support it.

And yet there is none.

I am not defending the SRA's right to decide our VPs. I am defending our right to hold the SRA accountable.

Because if we argue that the SRA is unable to make appropriate decisions on our behalf, then we are arguing about a much larger problem; that our student representatives no longer represent our opinions.

If the SRA is biased or unrepresentative, what about the other decisions they make on our behalf? Should the introduction of every MSU service be decided by a public vote? Each new service involves the hiring of a paid, Part-Time Manager, and the impact of a service arguably lasts far longer than the one-year term of a VP.

I am glad that a service like WGEN was voted in unanimously by the SRA, instead of held to an open, at-large vote where toxic and sexist comments might have been made in ignorance.

And while I'm voting no, I want to clarify my stance, as I still want to see two major changes to the VP elections process.

The first change is for the VP elections to be decided by an open ballot, where the votes of each SRA member are transparent to the body of students they represent.

My representatives should not be afraid to explain their choices if they claim to represent my interests, and they should be accountable for the decisions they make on my behalf.

And the second change I want implemented is for the VP candidates to begin their internal campaigns at the same time that SRA positions open up.

Why does this matter, if the general student population isn't voting for our VPs?

Primarily because it forces individuals running for the SRA to be informed and accountable about our VP candidates.

Even if I invest my time to learn about each of the VP candidates, I'm not concerned if I prefer VP candidate X, while my prospective SRA representative prefers VP candidate Y. What I care about is that the people who claim to represent my interests have put in the time to have an informed opinion, and it's an opportunity for someone to prove just how serious they are.

This is not telling you that voting YES is wrong. If you're frustrated with the SRA, that's more than fair. I am still irritated by the SRA’s decision to remain neutral and it makes me wonder how that could possibly be helpful to the student body.

You should expect more from your SRA, and you should want to hold them accountable. Moving VP elections to an at-large system is ignoring a problem rather than fixing one.

[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]