Student democracy is a fundamental principle of the MSU, but as participation falters, what can we do to re-centre it in student life?
Election turnout is a yearly topic of discussion at the Silhouette and throughout the MSU, whether there excitement at high participation, or more frequently worry over student disinterest.
The 2024 McMaster Students Union presidential election saw a 56 per cent increase in voter turnout from 2023, something re-elected MSU President Jovan Popovic saw as a testament to the MSU’s increasing connection with students coming out of the pandemic. But while this increase in turnout is important, it misses the reality that the MSU has been in a crisis of democratic disengagement for years.
The introduction of electronic voting to MSU elections in 2010 saw student participation jump from nine per cent to 22 per cent in one year. Over the next 7 years, turnout continued on an upward trend, remaining for 5 years at over 40 per cent until its sudden 13 per cent drop in 2018. From then on, presidential elections have continued to see disappointingly low voter turnout and overall engagement in student politics, including the acclamation of a president in 2021 when only one candidate ran.
Even last year’s rebound hides ongoing struggles. 2024’s MSU General Assembly saw a 50 per cent decline in attendance since 2023, from ten to five members present, more than 750 people shy of quorum each time. This not only means that the General Assembly’s resolutions are non-binding, but that it also fails to effectively inform the Student Representative Assembly of student opinion.
The difference between presidential election turnout and participation in the other facets of student democracy illustrates students’ complex relationship with the MSU and its president. The well publicized presidential race, with platforms full of often detailed and/or ambitious promises, attracts participation perhaps because it seems to be the easiest and highest impact way to have your voice heard in the MSU.
The well publicized presidential race, with platforms full of typically detailed and/or ambitious promises, attracts participation perhaps because it seems to be the easiest and highest impact way to have your voice heard in the MSU.
The presidential election is democracy at work without the complex procedure of the SRA, the referendum process, or the General Assembly. These procedures exist for a reason but they have to be balanced with creating a democratic spirit among students.
There is one exception to the recent democratic decline of the MSU, and that is 2024’s bike share referendum, which saw what was for a referendum tremendous turnout. In a year when the only other referendum, the Food Accessibility Initiative, failed to gain enough votes to meet quorum, the bike share referendum passed with tremendous support.
The bike share campaign was a long and very public one, with student activists pushing the measure through at every step of the referendum process. The referendum’s supporters had over a year to promote their position on the referendum.
The MSU’s election rules limit campaigning to a set period prior to referenda, to ensure fairness. McMaster bike share was able to work around this because the process of gathering signatures — which the bike share needed as a student initiated referendum — did not violate the campaigning rules. Without this extra campaign period the bike share referendum might not have succeeded in getting the necessary 10 per cent voter turnout for a referendum to be valid.
The alternative however, was demonstrated in the failure of the Food Security Initiative, initiated by President Popovic. Campaigning was limited to a brief period prior to the referendum and without ample time to inform and excite students, not enough turned out.
While the strict campaign period makes sense for the election of student representatives, as it is important that those elections be competitive and that each candidate be given a fair chance, referenda are not competitions. Limiting elected representatives' allowed time to communicate with their constituents for or against a referendum is not an effective way to encourage student democracy.
Simply informing students of a referendum shortly before the voting period without much opportunity to inspire them to take action appears to be an ineffective way of increasing political participation. If our best examples of democratic culture rely on motivating students through positive messaging — whether that be the platforms of promising presidential candidates or the potential benefits of passing a referendum — it may be time to reconsider how we allow students to be informed about their student union's initiatives.
Students need more freedom to actively and effectively participate in their student government on their often limited schedule. Empowering students and our political representatives to promote their initiatives actively
A record 79 candidates were vying for a position on the McMaster Students Union Student Representative Assembly general elections, which ended last Monday.
Seventy-nine candidates competed for 31 SRA seats across all faculties, the highest number ever.
Last year, there were just 41 candidates running for 31 seats. Two years ago, there were 50 candidates.
The highest number of candidates came from the SRA science and SRA social science faculties.
Twenty-five candidates ran for seven seats for science, while 16 candidates ran for five seats in social science.
In 2018, there were just nine and five candidates for the science and social science faculties.
Candidate turnout was higher than last year for other faculties as well.
SRA commerce had eight candidates running for four seats this year compared to five candidates last year, and the arts and science faculty had four nominees running for one seat compared to one nominee last year.
Voter turnout was markedly high as well. Twenty per cent of undergraduate students, or a total of 4283, voted in the SRA generals election, a dramatic increase from last year’s election, which saw 1064 voters.
Several current SRA members and winning candidates attributed the increase in candidate turnout to more effective advertising from the McMaster Student Union elections department this year, made up of chief returning officer Uwais Patel and deputy returning officer Emily Yang.
“This year, the CRO and DRO did a really good job in doing outreach. It was a lot of promotion, and it was faculty-specific promotion as well,” said Tasneem Warwani, current SRA arts and science representative.
“I think what they did really well was reach out to SRA members to ensure that they were reaching out to their constituents,” said Devin Roshan, current SRA health sciences representative.
One new initiative the elections team took on this year was sending faculty-specific emails directly to students to remind them of nomination deadlines and how many seats were available.
“On the MSU pages, social media-wise, I saw more promotion about it,” said third-year social sciences student Allie Kampan, who won an SRA seat. “More people were aware of it this year.”
Some faculties also tried to host more faculty-specific events encouraging students to run. For example, the social science caucus ran an event where they handed out nomination forms.
“I think the SRA reps made it more approachable this year,” Kampman said. “There’s a stigma around a lot of MSU things, specifically SRA, which is that it’s unapproachable.”
Roshan pointed out that increased turnout also comes from regular efforts through the year to educate students on issues and what the SRA is doing.
The health sciences election this year featured eight candidates for two positions, building off seven candidates last year after just two in 2017.
Students entering post-secondary education may also be becoming more interested in politics.
“Looking at the first years specifically, in my interactions I’ve had with them, they’re very passionate about getting involved,” Warwani said.
First year council elections this year featured a record high of 54 candidates running for sixteen positions.
Not all faculties saw a rise in candidate turnout. Humanities had only three nominees, meaning all three available seats were acclaimed. There were just two nursing nominees for one seat and four kinesiology nominees for two seats. SRA engineering also had just eight candidates for six available seats.
All of these faculties have struggled to put forth nominees in recent years, with seats often being acclaimed.
According to incoming SRA engineering representative Hawk Yang, one possible reason for the typically low candidate turnout is that the engineering faculty has a prominent engineering society, which often overshadows SRA engineering initiatives.
Nonetheless, as evidenced by the SRA statistics, the MSU is still seeing refreshingly high interest in student government this year.
[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
By: Maanvi Dhillon
Voter turnout in the 2019 McMaster Students Union presidential election fell 1.2 per cent from last year, marking the lowest rate since 2012.
Just two years ago, voter turnout sat at 41.6 per cent and saw 9,327 student voters.
“The voter turnout rate continues the impressive upward trend in McMaster student voter turnout, and marks five consecutive years with more than 40 per cent of students voting in the MSU Presidential election,” reads a statement on the MSU website from 2017.
This ‘upward trend’ did not continue the following year. In particular, the 2018 election saw voter turnout fall 13.6 points.
Following last year’s election, the MSU elections department promptly investigated the sharp decline in voter turnout.
After finding no issues with the voting software, Simply Voting, low turnout was estimated to have been caused by students opting out of receiving elections emails.
“Students who voluntarily opted-out of emails from the MSU’s election software provider, as per Canadian anti-spam legislation, did not receive future emails,” said Uwais Patel, the MSU’s chief returning officer.
Patel pointed out that this did not necessarily prevent students from voting in the election as they could have received a ballot if requested. However, it still likely would have reduced their likelihood of voting.
Low voter turnout is a serious concern given the role and position of the MSU president, who Patel describes as “an important representative who will help shape the student experience for years to come.”
As a result of the change, in this year’s election, students were able to
access their online ballot with their Mac ID instead of email.
Students were also enabled to use a general link and log in with their McMaster login information, eliminating the necessity of email for access and making the process fit more naturally with other online McMaster activity, like accessing Mosaic or Avenue to Learn.
For these reasons, Patel believed the transition would make “voting more accessible and the process of voting more reliable.”
Before the election, Patel was confident that the MSU Elections’ lineup of strategies would give students access to the details they need to easily vote.
“Using resources and technology, we are maximizing the way we deliver… information,” said Patel. “By voting and engaging with the election this year, students can be confident in who they elect as MSU President to represent them on issues pertaining to student life and advocacy,” said Patel.
In effort to increase voter turnout, the elections department also released an instructional video showing how to vote.
They also asked committee members and MSU Maroons to promote the election on campus and encourage students to vote.
However, this year’s drop in voter turnout suggests that the new voting system and array of promotional efforts did not sufficiently improve the turnout rate.
This year’s notably low voter turnout casts doubt over the new MSU president’s capacity to ‘represent’ McMaster’s nearly 30,000 undergraduates when only 6,576 voted in the election.
[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
