Students across campus are fed up. They should be. Apathy is on its way to an all-time high. The incumbent (albeit inexperienced) UTSU slate looks set to win again while the StudentsFirst challengers continue their journey down a path PR analysts would call “misguided messaging.”
Creating an opposition party that can outflank the incumbents, appealing to, perhaps, the most apathetic student body in Canada, and doing it all while you’re a full-time student is no easy task.
So, how can this be accomplished? From conceptually laying the groundwork of your campaign, to coming up with a wishlist of candidates, recruiting them, then agreeing on policy positions, it’s a process that should inevitably lead to a well-rounded and respected slate. Unfortunately no such slate exists.
A team needs to develop the skills necessary to run a student campaign, and it needs to familiarize itself with the U of T landscape. It should be comprised of members who have participated in substantial elections before. Arguably, the most important aspect is to not resort to using “dirty tricks” or tactics.
This sort of experience is almost absent from both slates.
Next, your team needs to represent the diverse communities on campus. From UTM to engineers, from council presidents to UTSU employees, guaranteeing that experience would not be an issue either publicly or from a performance standpoint. This is something both sides haven’t convincingly achieved.
Speaking from experience, an opposition slate cannot hope to win an election without the backing and support of the colleges. The 2010 Change slate understood very early that in order to win, it had to appeal to the only other electorate that participated on campus, those who voted in college council elections. Without them, it was forced to draw e-day voters. The only way to win those students is with a larger ground campaign than UTSU, something we knew we could not accomplish. You can thank Ryerson, York, and George Brown union executives for that.
The March 2010 election witnessed perhaps the best campaign effort this campus has seen to date from both sides. We were all seasoned student leaders, the legacy of controversial UTSU and SAC decisions was still fresh, and the sound of defederation rang amongst the colleges and engineers. Change was ambitious and our plan for the union reflected that.
Our position can be best described as working towards creating an inclusive and vibrant student experience; streamlining union operations; eliminating cronyism; reforming questionable electoral practices; rebooting UTSU’s non-existent relationship with the administration; downloading controversial political advocacy to clubs; and finally, reorienting UTSU as a leader within CFS National / Ontario rather than as a puppet to the whims of its leadership.
None of this could ever be summed up by the catch phrase “Let’s build the campus bar.”
This year’s contenders look largely inexperienced, focus too much of their energy squabbling over minuscule issues, and could end up pushing this and future campus elections into irrelevance.
The Hart House debate further reinforced this perception. Although entertaining, it has absolutely no impact on the course of the election.
I can’t help but feel upset that the next generation of Change we left in our wake chose to distance themselves from participating in UTSU elections. Most went on to attain leadership posts at their respective colleges, faculties, and clubs, resigned to the idea that it’s impossible to take down an institution that has made itself impervious to outside participation.
We are now left with a UTSU that is a shadow of what it once was, still alive only because of measures taken in the past to protect its future. On the other side we have a youthful opposition group who has abandoned the best practices used before them in favour of a radical federal style of campaigning, missing the opportunity to prevail. Finally, there’s the independent candidate who I had the pleasure of recruiting into SMC and PFAC but who will serve only as a vote split against Brent.
We can’t afford to lose our campus to mediocrity. We need change. Now go write that on your ballot.
