J ’ a c c u s e
AMS Elections have rolled onto campus again with the vigour of a blowing pinecone. Well, actually, there are two pinecones. But you really wouldn’t be able to separate one from the other.
For the first time in several years, there is no “unifying” issue facing aspiring student politicians. This should be welcomed by students with open arms.
Having sat through countless student election issues such as deregulation, the Queen’s Centre or the building of the Common Ground, you start to tune out what people are saying because you know what it is before they start.
“I am against students paying more money!” Team ABC says.
“Money shouldn’t come from student’s pockets!” Team XYZ bellows. And students inevitably decide who has the nicer posters and vote accordingly.
Although it’s always reassuring to see that student politicians believe that the entire electorate stands with the same view, it becomes tiresome and repetitive.
I was looking forward to an election period without a unifying cause. Without an issue, teams are forced to be creative and think of things on their own rather then basing campaigns around emotional responses. We would really get to see what composes the aspiring executive teams.
There is already a hole for the Queen’s Centre money to fall into and Alfie’s is looking at profitability for the first time since the Berlin Wall fell. What are campaign teams to do?
Apparently they are going for the “innovative approach,” according to Team CMM. There’s “leadership and vision” from Team TPC.
What the students have ended up with, in truth, is the filler from elections past.
Previous years have had teams focus on one specific cause and then hoist that cause up on pillars of safety, the environment, the PEC, and cash on swipe cards. This year we just have the pillars, buttressed on each other like a poorly constructed lean-to.
Now there are important ideas around; there is no denying that the University needs a high-ranking and powerful sustainability office.
I’m sure the University would agree with you, too—they just need the time and resources to make it happen.
Any AMS team can make this happen. You could make this happen if you pushed hard enough.
What we want is something real, though. Students want to hear a plan, not promises, on what to be done and what should be done to make the University, student life, and our society better.
Albert Einstein said, “The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources.” Unfortunately for Teams TPC and CMM, they have chosen to be transparent.
They have selected tried-and-true Queen’s election issues that will solicit little more then a yawn from the electorate rather then taking a chance and trying something novel.
Students do want innovation. They do want leadership and vision.
But we also want a viable choice as to whose vision and what style of leadership with which we pursue innovation.
—–
Tom Woodhall, MSc ’08, will provide regular commentary on the student election campaigns.
All final editorial decisions are made by the Editor(s) in Chief and/or the Managing Editor. Authors should not be ed, targeted, or harassed under any circumstances. If you have any grievances with this article, please direct your comments to [email protected].