C/O Travis Nguyen, Photo Editor
President-elect Simranjeet Singh discusses this year’s low voter turnout and his hopes to rebuild student engagement with the MSU
On Jan. 27, after a three-day election period, Simranjeet Singh was announced as the president-elect of the McMaster Students Union, winning 65.7 per cent of the votes.
Out of 27, 149 eligible voters, only 3,107 students, or 11.4 per cent of the eligible student population, chose to cast their votes. According to Singh, the online nature of the campaigning period may have contributed to the low voter turnout.
“When I, for example, gave class talks, it probably wasn’t as impactful [as in-person class talks] just because of the nature of how online courses are delivered,” said Singh.
However, Singh also noted that the voter turnout for MSU elections has been trending downwards for a few years, even prior to the onset of the pandemic.
“Even though 2020 and 2018, for example, were only two years apart and they were both in a pre-pandemic landscape, there was still a vast difference in voter turnout,” said Singh.
“Even though 2020 and 2018, for example, were only two years apart and they were both in a pre-pandemic landscape, there was still a vast difference in voter turnout."
Simranjeet Singh, MSU President-elect
Singh explained that the decline in voter turnout may be due to a disconnect between the programming offered by the MSU and the needs of the students.
“I certainly hope that with some of the changes I hope to bring forth, we can ensure that students are receiving the services and resources they need, and then hopefully are more engaged,” said Singh.
According to Singh, helping students to better engage with and understand the MSU is one of his key priorities. Singh highlighted how students are often not aware of which services are offered by the MSU or how to access them. This is a problem that he hopes to address in his term as president.
“Because we have such a low engagement, there's a disconnect that exists between what [students’] needs are and what the MSU is able to accomplish. And I hope, if we can change that, we can set ourselves on a path where students are more aware of what MSU services [there] are and the MSU is better able to actually serve their needs,” said Singh.
“Because we have such a low engagement, there's a disconnect that exists between what [students’] needs are and what the MSU is able to accomplish. And I hope, if we can change that, we can set ourselves on a path where students are more aware of what MSU services [there] are and the MSU is better able to actually serve their needs."
Simranjeet Singh, MSU President-elect
Aside from hoping to increase student engagement, Singh stated that he also hopes to create lasting change within the MSU, making an impact that will be noted by students in years to come.
“I hope that the impact that I have is big enough that people can look back in a few years or next year and say ‘this was a turning point,’” said Singh.
As well, Singh emphasized his intentions to work with community partners and levels of government beyond McMaster. Singh explained that, in forming these relationships, he hopes to ensure that student advocacy is received and acted upon.
However, Singh recognized that not all of his campaign points are equal in scope.
"I think I’ll have to balance between trying to understand what is a goal that I can accomplish quite quickly and immediately, and what is a goal that I know will take many years to do, but that I can make significant progress on,” said Singh.
"I think I’ll have to balance between trying to understand what is a goal that I can accomplish quite quickly and immediately, and what is a goal that I know will take many years to do, but that I can make significant progress on."
Simranjeet Singh, MSU President-elect
Overall, Singh emphasized his intention to make a lasting positive impact on the MSU over the course of his term, highlighting the importance of considering student voices in this process. He stated that throughout his campaign he had heard the opinions of a variety of students, which was important for understanding what kinds of changes need to be made.
“The questions [students] asked, the concerns they had, the feedback and critiques they gave of my campaign points, what they felt I could do better and where I could improve. . .that was a very, very insightful experience, and I really hope to take some of that feedback and actually apply it,” said Singh.
Starting May 1, Singh will officially take office as MSU president for the 2022-2023 year.
C/O Denver Della-Vedova
Denver Della-Vedova is running to be MSU president again, albeit with an updated campaign
Della-Vedova fails to commit fully to many of his platform points and lacks detail regarding consultation, raising questions about feasibility.
Amplifying Voices
Della-Vedova proposes a $1 fee per student to assist the Undergraduates of Research Intensive Universities with hiring staff and covering costs of lobbying. However, his plan does not denote any reasoning behind this number nor does he provide detail on whom he will work with within the MSU to implement this fee.
He plans to prioritize environmental sustainability in his platform; however, he only addresses the problem of non-reusable and non-compostable food packaging. Given that La Piazza has already introduced compostable options for cutlery, Della-Vedova's commitment to introduce more eco-friendly containers does not detail which areas he hopes to address.
His plan to establish stronger relationships with faculty societies is vague. He suggests spending pooled resources between the MSU and faculty societies during events such as Welcome Week, which he hopes will encourage cross-faculty events. However, he makes no explanation of what these resources will be or whom he will work with to implement this. He states that he has consulted with a number of faculty societies but does not share any further detail as to which faculties these are.
He also plans to better connect Student Representative Assembly caucuses with their respective faculty societies but does not clarify how he will accomplish this.
Student Stability
Regarding Della-Vedova's discussion of creating student jobs, he states that he will try to create more jobs on campus for students and investigate ways to potentially connect students with jobs in Hamilton. However, he has not yet reached out to any employers on campus nor any businesses in Hamilton.
Della-Vedova states that he will work with employers such as the Physical Activity Centre of Excellence and the David Braley Athletic Centre to find more job opportunities for students. However, he has not consulted with PACE or DBAC on whether an increase in student positions is feasible.
In addition, Della-Vedova proposes the hiring of a “hype crew” within the Communications and Media department to focus on sprit and brand engagement for the MSU and increase student engagement in events. Yet, Della-Vedova fails to differentiate this from the MSU Maroons who already acts as a representative of the MSU and plays an active role in showing spirit in the community.
To inform first-year students of their housing rights, Della-Vedova proposes in-person legal clinics within residences. However, he intends to have the First Year Council host these sessions, which fails to consider that FYC members are first-year students themselves. This presents a potential issue as first-year students may lack the experience and knowledge to inform their peers.
With mental health impacts more prominent during the COVID-19 pandemic, Della-Vedova’s plans to address mental health concerns are valuable.
Although Della-Vedova did not reach out to the SWC to consult on the feasibility of expanded programming specifically, Rosanne Kent, director of the SWC, said that Della-Vedova has been actively working with the centre throughout his presidency this year. Kent shared that increased capacity is an ongoing goal the SWC strives for, with capacity already being increased this year.
Aside from expanding the SWC, Della-Vedova plans to create an online booking system, which was also proposed in his 2021 platform. However, no mention of the booking system was noted in any of his president reports in his current term. He states that this year’s approach would be different from last year’s, as he would see what the MSU could offer in the development of this system. However, details about what the development would look like and how the MSU would help were not provided.
Keeping Momentum
Della-Vedova commits to making online classes more accessible and consistent for students. His plan for how to accomplish this is to produce a set of standardized recommendations for professors running online classes. However, the specifics of these guidelines are unclear and, further, some of the issues that Della-Vedova highlights, such as the quality of lectures, are difficult to quantify and would thus be challenging to address with a set of guidelines.
Further, Della-Vedova plans to have these guidelines encourage use of fewer platforms such as Microsoft Teams and Zoom more consistently, rather than the wide range of software that the university currently uses. However, Della-Vedova does not address how different platforms may, in some cases, be better suited to the needs of a particular course.
In Della-Vedova's discussion of issues related to Student Accessibility Services, he points out that requiring students to provide a diagnosis from within the last five years poses a major accessibility obstacle; however, he makes no commitment to attempting to change this policy.
Lastly, when Della-Vedova discusses SAS, he suggests that McMaster offers rewards to notetakers, such as references or gift cards. However, references are already being offered to notetakers as rewards. Additionally, regarding gift cards, Della-Vedova does not outline how he would ensure that such rewards could be acquired and distributed.
Throughout his platform, Della-Vedova proposes ideas that he hopes to further investigate. He does not offer many concrete and actionable plans demonstrated by the evident lack of consultation with relevant university members.
The announcement of an acclaimed MSU president-elect should raise questions as to why no one is running for MSU positions
Graphic By Nigel Mathias/Contributor
By: Belinda Tam, Contributor
On Jan. 26, 2021, it was announced that Denver Della-Vedova was acclaimed for the position of McMaster Students Union president for the 2021-2022 academic year.
Taking into account both world events and student’s everyday lives, this news may not be on the top of everyone’s mind at the moment. Knowing that this semester is a continuation of a time where the majority of classes are being conducted online — besides a small subset of students being on campus — there’s no doubt that students have been pouring more time into their studies.
Since an acclamation hasn’t occurred within at least 40 years, it's important to discuss the barriers in running an election. There are multiple rules in place for running candidates, which can pose as a potential financial barrier if you get fined.
Since an acclamation hasn’t occurred within at least 40 years, it's important to discuss the barriers in running an election. There are multiple rules in place for running candidates, which can pose as a potential financial barrier if you get fined.
Depending on the position the person is running for, guidelines and rules can vary. Violation of election rules may cause you to be fined unless you go through an appeal process. Furthermore, there is the issue of having financial accessibility if a candidate racks up lots of fines, which in turn may stop them from wanting to run.
With that said, there is actually a lot of work to be done when running for one of these positions. In previous presidential elections, candidates often take time off from class, especially for the campaigning period in order to inform the general student population about their mission and what they are hoping to do when elected.
When taking time off from class and possibly even work, not only does the student have to put in extra time and effort to catch up but this time off may also impact evaluations at work as well as testing in courses. Based on the amount of time required to dedicate yourself to running, this may also eliminate more candidates from applying.
In addition, the candidate also often makes a campaign team and has to coordinate the more minor details such as making sure someone was always present at their campaign table.
With that being said, having a team does alleviate the workload but much work is to be done at the beginning of this process when it comes to planning your campaign, as well as managing the team.
This is a lot to handle in conjunction with coursework and personal life. With this level of commitment and time invested, candidates seem to be willing to do whatever it takes to get the position.
Another important note is that you may have a better chance of winning the election if you are more involved and connected with people in the MSU.
Another important note is that you may have a better chance of winning the election if you are more involved and connected with people in the MSU.
Previous presidents such as Ikram Farah, Josh Marando and Giancarlo Da-Ré were all heavily involved in the MSU, which may have had a role in them winning since they had connections to others in the MSU.
As a result, they are more likely to know people who are in positions of power, so it’s easier for them to reach out and build their platform. While opinions may vary, having connections could mean that you have a better chance at winning.
However, we might be missing out on those in the student population who want to run — and might actually be good at the job for that matter — but won’t win because they don’t have those connections.
If this indeed is the case, this means that there is a bias in the system. Those who choose to run by themselves are at a greater disadvantage compared to those who have connections with the predecessors in the role they are campaigning for.
With Della-Vedova’s acclamation of such an important role within the MSU, it is important to reflect on why this issue may have arisen in the first place. If elections aren’t accessible for anyone to run, we may see more acclamations in the future.
Get to know the newly acclaimed MSU president-elect Denver Della-Vedova
The nomination period for the 2021 McMaster Students Union presidential election ended on Jan. 21. As the only nominee received by the elections department, Denver Della-Vedova has officially been acclaimed as MSU president-elect. Della-Vedova’s presidential term will begin on May 1, 2021.
Della-Vedova is currently in his fourth-year of honours life sciences with a minor in environmental sciences. In addition to his passion for guitar, gaming and seeing trails and waterfalls around McMaster University, he has been involved with student government for several years — including throughout his high school years and his past three years at McMaster.
In his first year of university, he was a member of First Year Council and has been part of the Student Representative Assembly for the past two years. His passion for student government finds its roots in his drive to empower others around him and to help his fellow students get the most out of their learning institution.
“I really like helping people,” explained Della-Vedova. “I like making sure people get what they want out of their learning institution. And I really wanted to be able to focus on bringing folks together, especially this year.”
“I really like helping people,” explained Della-Vedova. “I like making sure people get what they want out of their learning institution. And I really wanted to be able to focus on bringing folks together, especially this year.”
Della-Vedova was the only nominee for the MSU presidency this year, which has been the cause of discussion and debate on social media, but is focused on looking to the future. Some students have expressed frustration over there being no student input during the process of Della-Vedova being acclaimed as MSU president-elect.
To this, Della-Vedova expressed understanding — an understanding of the frustration, gave a promise to show the student body who he really is and that he is ready to serve the Mac community to the best of his abilities.
“I'm really excited to move forward. As for you know, obviously, it's an issue among students with the acclamation process in policy issue. So I'm sure that the SRA is gonna work on that and debate about that. But as it stands, I'm trying to focus on the future,” ” said Della-Vedova. “
"I'm trying to focus on the future,” said Della-Vedova.
Part of Della-Vedova’s focus on the future is ensuring the student body is made aware of his campaign and plans as MSU president, something that would typically happen during the campaign period. Della-Vedova’s campaign is centered on three pillars: accessibility; bettering advocacy; and community, togetherness and support. The three come together to form his slogan, “Denver’s ABCs”.
Accessibility within the university is an important issue to Della-Vedova. His passion for ensuring accessibility is grounded in his work over the past six summers at Stripe Learning Centre for Children, a physiotherapy camp for youth with cerebral palsy. He is very interested in overcoming issues negatively impacting accessibility at Mac. He is especially interested in making the reintegration of in-person learning accessible for all students.
One of the main ways in which Della-Vedova hopes to improve accessibility is to try to centralize the avenues and channels students use to communicate within courses, such as Zoom, Microsoft Teams and Avenue to Learn.
Although Della-Vedova’s hope to reduce channels of communication within courses is a campaign point that will surely resonate with many students, it is currently unclear how he will accomplish this.
Della-Vedova also seeks to improve and expand upon the ways in which the MSU currently advocates for students. He seeks to build upon what is already in place with regards to student advocacy and implement improvements where possible.
“As for bettering advocacy, I've said bettering too, because . . . I love what the MSU does for advocacy,” explained Della-Vedova. “But I want to improve it where I can . . . so tuition advocacy, financial aid, international student representation and campus safety, these are all things that I think we need to advocate [more] on.”
Della-Vedova believes his background in student advocacy and government will help him achieve these goals. For example, he hopes to be able to use his position to implement ways for students to learn more about their tuition, OSAP and provincial government. He also wishes to help students have greater access to resources and events surrounding student housing and tenant rights.
Della-Vedova also wants to better utilize student advocacy organizations such as Undergraduates of Canadian Research Universities and Ontario Undergraduate Student Alliance. The MSU is a member of both of these organizations, which advocate to the federal and provincial governments, respectively. Although he has not dealt with UCRU directly, Della-Vedova looks forward to discussing McMaster student issues with them.
“I've looked into what we've done in the past, I know there's been advocacy that was done through UCRU and through OUSA,” explained Della-Vedova. “But I just want to lean into them a little more this year and really push.”
Racial profiling by security on campus has been a concern for McMaster students this past year, ultimately leading to SRA passing a motion calling for the removal of the head of security services and an end to the special constable program on campus. When asked about this issue, Della-Vedova explained he plans to consult the Equity and Inclusion Office and research other Canadian campus safety models to understand how to better address this situation.
Although he did not directly discuss racial profiling and racism at Mac in his campaign, he did acknowledge that the fight against racial profiling has been a student-led effort and the importance of students in this conversation.
“Students have been at the front of this advocacy and I think they're a huge part of this conversation, too,” said Della-Vedova.
The final aspect of Della-Vedova’s campaign is his community, togetherness and supports pillar. Through this pillar and his associated endeavours, he hopes to bring the McMaster community together for the 2021/2022 school year. Among his ideas, he plans to focus on improving mental health services, restructuring Welcome Week and addressing issues affecting MSU clubs.
MSU clubs provide a sense of community for many McMaster students. This year, there was a lot of concern with the MSU requiring clubs to have 25 members. Della-Vedova hopes to consult with the clubs advisory council and the MSU to address these issues.
In order to strengthen the McMaster community, Della-Vedova also hopes to improve the delivery of student mental health services. The president-elect believes the key to this is the implementation of an online booking system for the Student Wellness Centre, which would allow for empty appointment slots to be filled. Although he has not consulted with the Student Wellness Centre directly or made concrete plans for this idea, he is hoping to do so soon.
Della-Vedova has many plans for his MSU presidency, although some of them may lack clarity. He has been interested in taking on the role of MSU president since his first year. He said that the Mac community has given him a lot over the past several years and he is looking forward to giving back through this role, regardless of the circumstances of his victory.
“The biggest thing I'd like to say about Mac itself is the community has always kept me in a good mood,” explained Della-Vedova. “That was actually why I picked McMaster to go to.”
Students will surely learn more about Della-Vedova in the coming months as he transitions into the role. To learn more about his campaign and plans as president, students can also visit the following social media accounts:
Facebook: MSU President-Elect Denver Della-Vedova
Instagram: @Dellavedovamsupresidentelect
By: Ryan Tse, Hannah Walters-Vida, Natalie Clark
Click on the candidates to learn about their platform overviews.
[popup_anything id="36661"]
[button link="https://www.thesil.ca/msu-presidentials-2019-madison-wesley-platform-critique" color="red"] MADISON WESLEY PLATFORM CRITIQUE[/button]
[popup_anything id="36659"]
[button link="https://www.thesil.ca/msu-elections-2019-jeffrey-campana-platform-critique" color="red"] JEFFREY CAMPANA PLATFORM CRITIQUE[/button]
[popup_anything id="36669"]
[button link="https://www.thesil.ca/msu-presidentials-2019-josh-marando-platform-critique" color="red"] JOSH MARANDO PLATFORM CRITIQUE[/button]
[popup_anything id="36662"]
[button link="https://www.thesil.ca/msu-elections-2019-justin-lee-platform-critique" color="red"] JUSTIN LEE PLATFORM CRITIQUE[/button]
[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
This year’s McMaster Students Union presidential election was a wild ride from start to finish, after two candidates were disqualified and then later reinstated, all done over the course of the winter semester. Ikram Farah is the official president-elect, but the question still stands: why was she disqualified in the first place?
The MSU Elections Department recently published their meeting minutes, which outline the discussions their elections committee had when making sense of the complaints filed against each candidate. On their website, one may find the minutes from the Jan. 25 meeting, the Feb. 5 meeting and the Feb. 15 and 16 meeting.
According to these documents, Farah was initially disqualified due to a complaint from another unnamed candidate, who stated that it was unfair that she was not disqualified given the number of fines Farah received.
According the the Feb. 5 meeting minutes, the complainant stated that she had submitted multiple complaints against Farah during the election period which she felt had compromised the integrity of the election, and that she had taken her case to the Ombuds office and that they had agreed with her.
It should be noted that three of Farah’s violations were overturned during the Feb. 5 meeting.
The complainant stated that her trust in the Elections Department had been shaken.
“[The complainant] didn’t understand why [Farah] was not disqualified with the number of complaints and their nature, and that this was a blatant disregard of election rules and compromised the integrity,” read a portion of the Feb. 5 meeting minutes.
The complainant also stated there were other complaints she wanted to file but chose not to due to their personal nature. The complainant also argued that the number of broken links in Farah’s team members’ posts were deliberately done to maintain the focus on Farah.
All candidates are expected to add links to the MSU Elections Department on their social media posts in order to ensure that voters receive unbiased information about all candidates in addition to the campaign material.
After the complainant spoke, the elections committee reconvened and looked into the complaint concerning broken links being done in bad taste. After checking if it would auto-tag using a post from a member of Farah’s core campaign team, they found that it did and deemed this to potentially be deliberate and with large effect.
Thus, on Feb. 5, the elections committee overturned their original decision to not disqualify Farah, making Muhammed Aydin the unofficial president-elect.
On Feb. 15 and 16, Farah made her appeal to the elections committee where she argued that the broken links did not influence the election enough to garner a disqualification.
Farah offered the slides from her volunteer orientation package which showed the correct link and that any broken links were a mistake. She stated that these broken links were mistakes and should be deemed as a deliberate attack, especially when there were examples of the correct link in other volunteers’ posts.
Farah was particularly concerned with the labelling of the broken links as “bad taste”, as she felt it was clear that the broken links were not posted to deliberately sway the election. Farah also pointed out that the majority of the links were correct, proving that this was not a deliberate action.
Farah also reiterated that she had taken the steps to rectify this issue, contradicting the assumption that she was deliberately breaking a rule. She also stated that data from the backend of her campaign website showed that only 39 people had been referred from the links, and statements that links stopped people from accessing information about the election was unsubstantiated.
Farah also stated that she had proof that two candidates had conspired to get her disqualified and that the integrity of the election had been compromised.
“Farah stated that having someone come forward and imploring the Committee to look at their decision again was malice as they were the reason why she had so many fines. She stated that the idea of colluding should be held into account and encouraged the Committee to look at her package point by point,” read a portion of the Feb. 15 and 16 meeting minutes.
Ultimately, the elections committee voted to maintain Farah’s disqualification, and it was only through the Electoral Appeals Board, the highest electoral board in the MSU, to reinstate Farah.
During this meeting, the EAB overturned eight of Farah’s fines, upheld seven and amended four of her violations from severe violations to standard violations. Following these deliberations, the EAB reinstated Farah, making her the official MSU president-elect.
How this year’s tumultuous election season will affect future MSU elections is currently unclear. But for now, Farah will be the the next MSU president, full stop.
[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
This story has been edited to reflect new information revealed since its initial publication.
Now well over a month since the campaign period ended, the McMaster Students Union finally has an official MSU president-elect: Ikram Farah. Following this year’s race, students may see changes in the Elections Department as they reconsider their current system.
This year’s MSU presidential election saw two disqualifications, something unheard of in the MSU’s history. Candidates Farah and Rabeena Obaidullah were both disqualified.
Both candidates appealed to the highest electoral board, the Electoral Appeals Board, whose decisions are final and binding. According to the declarations released on March 13, the EAB overturned a series of violations for both candidates and reinstated both.
The rationale behind Farah’s disqualification and for both candidates’ reinstatement remains unclear as the MSU has not yet released the minutes from any of these meetings. On March 13, both Obaidullah and Farah were reinstated, resulting in Farah securing the MSU presidency.
On March 11, the Elections Department presented a delegation to the Student Representative Assembly, where they outlined some of their major issues with the current system for electoral appeals and fines.
The two representatives, Shaarujaa Nadarajah and Iku Nwosu, spoke of the difficulties the Elections Department and committee have.
In particular, they highlighted three major issues: limited information, a strict time constraint and lack of perspective as to why certain fines were submitted.
During an election, all MSU presidential candidates are subject to the Elections Department’s rules. If found violating multiple rules, the Elections Department has the power to disqualify a candidate.
According to the meeting minutes from the Election Department’s Jan. 25 meeting, Obaidullah was disqualified for campaigning in private Facebook groups, among other infractions.
The exact reasoning behind Farah’s disqualification remains unclear as the meeting minutes from Election Department’s Feb. 5 meeting have not been released, but according to press releases, two additional violations were ratified at this meeting against Farah, resulting in her disqualification.
During the March 11 SRA meeting, Nadarajah stated that one of the major limitations of the current fines process as the limited information presented to the committee.
Currently, elections committee members are presented all complaint forms the night the voting period ends and are expected to come to a final decision before the night is over.
When it comes to fines, elections committee must decide whether or not to fine a candidate based on a complaint form which they received a few hours prior to the election night meeting.
The form asks the complainant to outline the infraction, tie it to a rule and provide any supplementary evidence along with a witness signature.
Candidates are only informed of their fines following the final decisions. Candidates may contest fines, so long as they announce their intent to appeal a decision within five business days.
“One of the limitations of elections committee is that we can only look at what’s in front of us… a paragraph is describing a situation to us,” Nadarajah said.
In addition, Nadarajah also stressed that the time limit meant the elections committee would be forced to do a cost-benefit analysis of their decisions and ultimately value the quickest decision in order to announce a president-elect before the next morning.
Nadarajah also stated that while the elections committee has eight members, it only needs five to reach quorum, meaning that under certain circumstances only three members are enough to disqualify a candidate.
She also discussed the subjectivity of election committee’s decisions, namely that it is difficult for the election committee to establish when a candidate has impacted the integrity of an election.
They then went over the structure of other student union electoral offices, such as the University of Western Ontario and Queen’s University. UWO uses a demerit system and candidates are informed of any fines throughout the campaign period. At UWO, 30 demerit points automatically results in a disqualification.
At Queen’s, their equivalent elections team is comprised of five others in addition to the Chief Returning Officer and each person has a specific job, whether that be investigating fines or handling finances.
Both Nadarajah and Nwosu stated that the Elections Department may need to mirror some of these systems, whether it follow UWO’s quantitative approach or Queen’s and its delegation of duties.
Nadarajah and Nwosu offered a list of recommendations for reform. They argued they should increase transparency between candidates and their office with respect to fines, increase the threshold within the elections committee to disqualify a candidate from half the committee to two-thirds the committee and better outline and detail the appeals process.
This year’s MSU presidential election and its disqualifications was unprecedented event that may alter the way in which elections are run through the MSU.
[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
By: Kieran Douglas
The recent McMaster Students Union presidential election concluded with two of its candidates disqualified, including the president-elect. Rule-breaking among the candidates was so common that Connor Wong, the satirical option, was the only one to abide by them.
Is it the case that this class of presidential candidates fought particularly dirty campaigns? Hardly. An examination of the election night meeting minutes reveals a fleeting glimpse at campaign regulations that seem to nearly guarantee a candidate will blunder into violating at least one of them. The standards by which a candidate will be judged are frustratingly opaque in their public inaccessibility. The “How Do I Run?” guide on the Elections Department’s website states that rules are distributed in the nomination package and recommends candidates become familiar with them, though the website is unclear about where they can be found.
The contents of the meeting minutes from Jan. 25, election night, are alarming. The elections committee sustains a habit of retroactively adding individuals to campaign teams, often resulting in multiple violations and fines levied against candidates for a single event. This happened six separate times across all candidates, even in situations where it was unclear whether the relevant campaign had control over the individuals responsible. Muhammed Aydin, now president-elect, was fined because “an eager friend” posted to a Facebook group in support of him; I fail to see how Aydin was culpable in this case.
Ikram Farah was similarly fined for appearing in the Instagram story of an MSU part-time manager. The individual who posted it was added to the campaign by the electoral committee, who then fined the campaign a second time for employing a PTM not on a leave of absence. Sensible as it is that the Elections Department would be interested in monitoring the social media activity of candidates to ensure a consistently fair competition, it is difficult to ignore the fervent excess with which the Committee motions and unanimously passes fines.
There is also the matter of Rule 7.9.8, which is violated with the “deliberate” violation of any other rule. I presume that it was introduced to deter candidates from simply embracing the various fines they incur, as its conviction entails an additional $30 fine for any offence it is attached to.
However, its use seems to instead normalize the frequency with which the committee charges ambiguously responsible candidates for seemingly minor offences. The existence of a rule that distinguishes some violations as ‘deliberate’ implies that a lack of culpability is no defence even while it can be used in prosecution. This judiciary double standard ensures that candidates may be fined when fault is not theirs, and that they will be fined more heavily when it is.
While a functional system of regulation and adjudication is an intrinsic virtue, the behaviour of the Electoral Committee has real consequences. Though her violations in part seem more serious than those of the other candidates, Ikram Farah won the vote and was disqualified days later. The decision of the Electoral Committee in this case obscures the ostensibly democratic will of the MSU. Whether Farah deserved this fate or not, this decision should never be taken lightly, and the saturation of severe violations this election cycle suggests that sometimes it might be. Furthermore, though individual violations usually incur fines between $15 and $30, those charges can easily snowball, especially given the tendency of the Committee to “double-up” offences.
In the face of such a rule-breaking epidemic, it is worthwhile to consider that the rules and their application might be the cause. This evidence shows that reform is necessary for both the maintenance of democracy and the sake of student candidates. The campaign rules should be revised and published, as the students of the MSU deserve transparency, efficiency and sensibility in their elections.
[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
After deliberating once again, the McMaster Students Union elections committee has decided to disqualify the unofficial president-elect, Ikram Farah. After tallying the votes once again, Muhammed Aydin is the new, unofficial president-elect.
As of Feb. 5, Farah has five business days to declare her intent to appeal to the elections committee. Rabeena Obaidullah, who was originally disqualified on Jan. 25 and whose disqualification was maintained, has five business days to declare her intent to appeal to the electoral appeal board. In all cases, the electoral appeal board’s decision is final.
Farah plans on appealing her disqualification to the elections committee in the coming days. Obaidullah also plans on appealing to the electoral appeal board.
According to the MSU’s announcement, the elections committee did not disqualify Farah on Jan. 25 as they did not believe the violations her campaign had accrued had affected the integrity of the election.
After deliberating on Feb. 5, the elections committee reconsidered some of the original complaints levied against Farah and decided she had violated two additional rules, resulting in her disqualification.
In particular, they ruled that Farah’s electronic media had not provided a sufficient link to the main Elections Department website. She was also penalized for knowingly violating a rule.
Farah plans on appealing her disqualification to the elections committee in the coming days. Obaidullah also plans on appealing to the electoral appeal board.
If a candidate has one “severe violation”, the elections committee considers disqualification. A candidate is only disqualified if their actions were deemed to have affected the integrity of the election.
According to the meeting minutes from the Jan. 25 meeting, the elections committee also considered disqualifying Aydin.
Aydin received two severe violations for sourcing campaign materials outside of the MSU Underground and for deliberately breaking a rule. They ruled that these infractions did not affect the election and maintained the legitimacy of his campaign.
They also discussed disqualifying Farah at this meeting, who received severe violations such as incurring more than $30 in fines for the same violation; a fine for deliberately breaking a rule, disrespecting the deputy returning officer of the MSU Elections department and for campaigning in bad taste.
According to the meeting minutes, Farah’s campaign team ignored the DRO when she asked them to stop using unapproved amplification equipment, something the committee deemed disrespectful towards elections officials. Farah was also fined for “bad taste” due to some of her campaign team smearing another candidate’s platform. During the Jan. 25 meeting, however, the committee felt that these violations had not swayed voters.
Following their Feb. 5 meeting, the committee ratified two more severe violations and deemed it grounds for disqualifications.
Obaidullah was disqualified during the Jan. 25 meeting because they believed her severe violations compromised the integrity of the election and gave her an unfair advantage.
In particular, they took issue with the violations concerning posts in closed Facebook groups, as this not only broke one of their main rules but also could not be traced unless people in those closed groups disclosed them to the elections committee.
Evidence presented to the election committee showed that multiple posts had been made on behalf of Obaidullah encouraging people to vote for her, a direct violation of one of the campaign rules. This violation, compounded by others such as mass messages and campaigning in bad taste, were the rationale for Obaidullah’s disqualification.
Before this election, presidential candidates have only been disqualified three other times. The last time a presidential candidate was disqualified was in the 2016 election, when candidate Sarah Jama was disqualified. Jama was disqualified for spending over the spending limit and for campaigning in bad taste. Following the appeals process, she was reinstated and came in second place.
For now, Aydin is the next MSU president-elect. The exact rationale behind Farah’s disqualification is still unknown as the elections committee has not yet released their meeting minutes from their Feb. 5 meeting. Until the appeals process is over, all results are unofficial.
[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
By: Razan Abujarad
As the presidential campaign season has come to an end and students have elected their new MSU president, here are a few points on why I think that student politics are preparing us for the real stuff.
While many students (including myself) are not thrilled about the fact that the MSU president is getting paid for a whole year out of the pockets of students, I believe that there is a justifiable reason.
From an outward perspective, a few analogies can be made between student politics and actual politics.
The very framework within the MSU functions is a democracy, in which, the president is elected by the people for the people by a majority vote. If none of the candidates have the majority vote, multiple rounds of elimination based on the number of votes take place until there are two candidates left standing.
The reason students vote for a certain candidate over another is decided based on the promises that the candidate in their campaign platforms made during the campaign period.
Although there are no political parties in student politics, students compare the candidates based on their presidential platforms and vote according to the candidate they agree most with.
Similarly, citizens and residents vote for a candidate based on their political experience and policies in government elections.
The very framework within the MSU functions is a democracy, in which, the president is elected by the people for the people by a majority vote
When a candidate is elected to become a representative for the student body, we, the constituents as the students and a part of the student union are contributing to the president’s salary and should recognize that as reason to vote.
This is comparable to the fact that as Canadian citizens or residents, we elect a prime minister and through payment of taxes, the prime minister can earn a salary in return for his service to the country.
In addition, the campaign team at university is the equivalent of the campaign team during federal elections.
The most valuable aspect of these elections is that student elections give us the opportunity to exercise our right to vote. Many first years are not yet 18 and are therefore inexperienced and not eligible to vote in provincial and federal elections.
The fact that students do not practice their right to vote brings an overwhelming disappointment. Getting involved in the MSU presidential election this year has opened my eyes to the bigger picture. People have been fighting for their right to make decisions about who governs the population and the fact students are neglecting it is deeply saddening.
Voter turnout for the 2017 MSU Presidential election was 41.6 per cent, as well as a 7.3 per cent abstinence abstention rate. These numbers imply that many students chose to not vote in any form, even simply to abstain.
Some may argue that having the right to vote includes having the right to abstain from voting, while this is true but would imply that one simply uninterested about whom they are governed by which eventually may prove to be problematic.
In Jason Brennan’s book, The Ethics of Voting, he states, “Voting changes the quality, scope and kind of government. The way we vote can help or harm people. Electoral outcomes can be harmful or beneficial, just or unjust.”
Simply put, whether a voting member decides to vote or abstain, they will become directly responsible for the resulting decision that will be made.
Each vote counts because each vote represents a voice in the matter which can recursively add up to create a bigger impact than anticipated.
For those who cannot find the incentive to vote, you must take into consideration what would happen if the majority of members did not vote and what the consequences would be.
On the scale of student politics, an example of the consequences could be inflation of meal prices instead of the reduction that was promised by a candidate who you didn’t vote for.
As members of an organization such the McMaster Students Union, we have a responsibility to ensure to voice our opinion on important matters such as who governs us as well as the referendas that are taken. Most likely the referendas will have a direct impact on our tuition fees which we must consider carefully.
Remember, a candidate will represent you whether you are voting for a student body president, the next mayor in city hall or the prime minister of Canada, the candidate will represent us as a union.
So vote when you have the chance, vote for the candidate you agree with, vote for the platform you approve of the most, because a vote is much more powerful than we take it to be.
[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
