Presidentials has gone overboard.
This year sees some ambitious and infeasible platforms. The massive plans mislead students because it is impossible for them to find out what the candidates are truly going to work on during their term. There are too many ideas and too little time.
I appreciate the optimism from the candidates and their broad platforms, but let’s be serious. Universities are large institutions that tend to move slowly. The city of Hamilton struggles to even get bike lanes implemented. Anything beyond the control of the MSU requires an incredible amount of work and time.
For proof, we can revisit the accomplishments of recent presidents. The 2014-15 MSU president Teddy Saull made more lighting in student neighbourhoods part of his campaign. This point still appears on platforms in 2017.
The 2015-16 MSU president Ehima Osazuwa wanted to get gender-neutral washrooms. That project remains at a standstill.
Current president Justin Monaco-Barnes campaigned on environmental sustainability. As reported in December, plans to expand the teaching and community gardens had not come to fruition, as well as the installation of solar panels. For Monaco-Barnes, there’s still time, but not much.
So I’m pessimistic when I see candidates naming multiple projects that involve the university or municipality. It takes time to get these groups on board, and time is not something the presidents have with a 12-month term. I am not saying these presidents failed at their jobs; there are just so many hours in a week and some projects have to get left behind.
The “pillars” of their platforms are not framed in terms of priority, and that is by design: as a candidate, you don’t want to alienate the voter who supports your education ideas by ranking that platform point last.
This leaves you, the voter, in a situation where you are guessing what truly matters to the candidate in their dozen or so platform points.
They simply cannot achieve everything, and you have to hope that the reason you are electing them is for the goals they plan to achieve. The candidates will say that they can achieve all the goals, but let history be your educator here.
Be critical of the candidates with broad platforms and talk to them – not the campaign managers or team – about their top priorities and how they plan on achieving them.
You aren’t out of line; you’re holding a political candidate accountable.
The MSU can always use more of that.
Aquino Inigo’s approach to the MSU presidency is one which attempts to address wide range of complex, and fundamentally different student issues.
The Level IV Life Science student, Student Walk Home Team volunteer, McMaster Science Society Vice President (Academic) and Student Representative Assembly member plans to tackle campus safety, increase the amount of streetlights in student neighbhourhoods, lowering textbook costs, adding a counselor for first years to the Student Wellness Centre, all the while introducing new faculty conferences and a campus art crawl.
In comparison to this year’s MSU President, whose platform was focused on relatively set issues and a central campaign message emphasizing sustainability, Inigo is taking a shotgun approach to the candidacy.
To Inigo, an MSU president needs to try and serve the needs of as many students as possible. This is reflected in the sheer scope of his campaign, which will need to collaborate with university and faculty administration, as well as Security Services and Hamilton city council.
“Over the last three years, I have worked hard to bring change to McMaster….I have a passion for the school and I think the passion is really what qualifies a student to be president,” said Inigo.
Inigo identified his most ambitious platform point to be the implementation of an online open access database for university courseware. He cites a similar system that was implemented in the University of British Colombia, where students are able to access open text books, lesson plans, hand outs, and other course material shared by educators.
One of the stand-out points of Inigo’s platform is the promise to increase campus safety. This involves the implementation of 2-5AM exam season shuttle busses that run from campus to nearby Westdale and Ainslie Wood stops and the introduction of a student volunteer patrol team that will work campus security and special constables to deter crime.
Opponent’s platform he’s fond of:
Chukky’s platform
“I think he his platform is overarching in the sense that he has many points to tackle student problems, things like getting better food security, as well as better Wi Fi... small things that can be tangibly done...so I think what I like about his platform is that it’s very overarching.”
Platform he’s most critical of:
Patricia’s Diversity event
“The reason for this is that her platform is good in the sense that it brings people together but I believe that many of her points are sort of things that already exist on campus. Her point on bringing a lot of multicultural things together is already done by a club called Pangea in a big way. I think just putting the name MSU on it and making it in a bigger way is a good way of going about it but I believe she can bring more to the table.”
Website
By: Ruchika Gothoskar
Matt Vukovic is excited to run for president, not because he’s been planning on doing it for months or years like other candidates, but simply because he’s taking a rather unconventional approach to the presidential race.
Vukovic has been an active member of the McMaster Engineering Society in the past, but has no previous experience within the McMaster Students Union, something he states is an advantage due to his extensive time spent as an “outsider to [the MSU’s] system”. He also has yet to critically evaluate the platforms of the other five candidates, but believes staunchly that those running for president are more often than not interested exclusively on “leaving a legacy”, oftentimes “at the expense of the very students the MSU is charged with representing”.
Vukovic’s platform focuses on three pillars, which he has yet to decide on where to put, and is supposedly “waiting on a quote back from a contractor”. With attention on food, campus washrooms and the Student Representative Assembly, Vukovic hopes to achieve some rather outlandish goals. He admits that his most difficult platform point to integrate within the McMaster community will be the the replacement of all campus foods with nutrient rations and meal replacements such as Soylent, but agrees that pushing further to ultimately abolish the SRA is a close second. “There is a very strong disconnect between the SRA’s action and what the desires of the faculty body are – there have been multiple attempts to remedy this, and obviously none of them have been effective,” he explained. His website suggests even more extreme measures, vouching for the fact that the attachment could range from a simple pair of handcuffs to a conjoining organ graft.
Vukovic remains firm in his belief that, although he hasn’t read all the platforms, those advocating for more student space have goals that are too lofty – including the candidates who will be voting YES to the Student Activity Fee referendum, allowing for expansion the Athletics and Recreation department.
“Even though we might need the space, I don’t think it should come at the expense of the students anyway,” he said. “Hearing what the fee structure is supposed to be, I strongly disagree with the plan.”
Vukovic believes that his platform is ultimately focused on making the MSU evolve into something it should’ve been from the start – fast, efficient and attentive to the needs of the students rather than the desires of the SRA or the Board of Directors. After being a student for five years, he says that he has yet to see any real change, and although there might be internal differences, there’s no tangible change seen for the average student.
Website
As of noon of Jan. 15, the MSU presidential race has officially begun, with the following candidates:
Athletic and Recreation Expansion and Student Activity Building referendum
A referendum asking students if they wish pay a fee going towards expansion the Pulse and new Athletics and Recreation Building.President Justin Monaco-Barnes has taken a leave of absence to represent the official YES campaign for this referendum. Shane Zuchowski will represent the official NO campaign for this referendum.
Hamilton Street Railway Pass
As a part of the MSU’s agreement with the HSR, the conditions of the pass must go to referendum every 3 years, and asks students if they agree with the new, re-negotiated pass fee.
Syllabus Repository
This referendum asks students if they wish to task the vice president (Education) to create an open access repository of course outlines/syllabi.
Voting will open on Jan.24, and both voting and campaigning will end Jan. 26 at 5PM.
On Jan. 5, the university announced their punishment towards two students who made a booking at Innis Library under the name “McMaster KKK meeting” in early December. While the Silhouette did not publish anything during the original timeframe about the controversy, mostly due to the fact that the final issue of the year had printed and exam season took priority for our student staff, the odd dilemma moving forward is the struggle presented with a topic like this.
The paper and university have dealt with heated events this year, most notably with the presence of alt-rights posters in November. The problem comes with considering how much of a voice each side actually has compared to how many people actually wish to speak about their perspective.
Basically, considerations about a silent majority or a vocal minority during any argument can easily tear apart a newsroom if not done with absolute precision. What should be covered in limited space? How much does the average contributor need a devil’s advocate to reply to their position? What do we do if we cannot find one?
While these considerations can weaken legitimacy due to potential bias, these are the questions and considerations that have also weakened our content. It is difficult to state we have had legitimate coverage if we have chosen not listen to the readers we are serving. This section in particular has failed its students during presidentials.
Moving forward, the paper will attempt to bring you the best articles possible for the MSU presidential elections. Anyone associated with the Silhouette will be taking a leave of absence if they are associated with a campaign team. Our office door will be closed from Jan. 15 to 26 with the exception of staff meetings. A number of other precautions, largely absent or deemed unimportant in the past, have been taken to ensure the paper takes as neutral a stance as possible.
While certainly not as controversial as discussions about race, it is difficult to navigate issues and politics that have far more grey area where moral integrity is not the main point of discussion. Difficulty is not a valid excuse.
Our coverage last year mostly consisted of:
• Opening statements from every candidate
• A colour and design analysis of every candidate
• Looking back at similar promises candidates in the past have made
• Overviews of every candidate
• Reactions to the Presidential Debate
• A critique on one point from every candidate
• What every candidate stated about mental health
• A fun article about a sixth candidate named Esther Chatul, the cat
The Opinion section had exactly two election articles in print during this span. One was pro-VP referendum. The other debated that the referendum did not matter because democracy dies when “argument culture” takes over. The now defunct Lifestyle section had more pages dedicated to politics.
While certainly not as controversial as discussions about race, it is difficult to navigate issues and politics that have far more grey area where moral integrity is not the main point of discussion. Difficulty is not a valid excuse.
We have failed to provide open discussion out of fear. The vast majority of content for the last few years has been from the candidates themselves, our staff and news contributors. You were left to talk about the issues by shouting into the voids of random social media or in the comments section on our articles rather than in print. The want to remain unbiased and the want for open discussion do not have to be opposing ideas.
When the nominations end on Jan. 12 at 5 p.m., I want to see your thoughts and perspectives on every candidate. I want you to absolutely grill the idiotic parts of each campaign and praise parts that you feel would be best to move the school forward into greatness. You, your peers and the school as a whole should have a more active part in bringing points to the forefront.
