Month: January 2009

It seems like a long-term participant in student politics has decided that selling his integrity is perhaps more important than actually doing what he was elected to do- namely, to represent students’ interests on campus. This strikes me to be particularly unfortunate because Bijan is in position to be re-elected onto the BoG. Unfortunately, it seems like the comments linking me to the site with the information have been removed, but luckily I had saved the url.

““I have been kind of clear that if you endorse me [..] I will have a very solid commitment [..] but if you do not endorse me, then i won’t be emailing people saying this is my project this year. If i get your endorsement, this it is a contract for me, and anything otherwise would be a breach of contract from my perspective, and I know that this may sound like I…I’m not saying I wouldn’t be representing you if I get elected, but it’s that endorsement that says that we have a relationship now and we can build on that relationship.” He then added that he had calculated that he would likely win the election, insinuating that FotF was therefore forced to endorse him.”
~Bijan Ahmadian

I’m sad to find out that a candidate would be willing to sacrifice his credibility, integrity, and his candidacy by making such a remark- particularly when he seems to have a shot at winning the seat for which he’s running, at which point it makes little sense. The link to the website providing the article and the audio is as follows:

http://concern4ubc.wordpress.com/2009/01/25/bijan-ahmadian-if-you-dont-endorse-me/

One thing to keep in mind is that the comment was made by an anonymous person, and there is no way of verifying its veracity, nor the authenticity of the audio clip provided on the site. If, however, the audio clip is genuine, one can only speculate reasons for the remarks. Intimidation tactics are rarely used when one has little to gain, so I would speculate that Bijan must indeed be afraid of losing his position on the BoG to resort to such threats. Which makes sense, given that his rivals, Michael “over 1000 UBC friends” Duncan and Blake “knows his stuff/presidential candidate” Frederick. That, or he’s gotten too big for his breeches after several years in student politics. Hopefully we’ll get a response to the statement, and, hopefully, the link will remain up for some time.

Edit: Here’s a transcript of the audio recording, written up by SeriousSteve of the Devil’s Advocate (just in case the site is taken down).

“On, sorry, the first thing about whether I would do this anyway. I have thought a lot about what my other priorities would be if I weren’t doing this, and the relationship with the RCMP is one that needs to be finished; the housing demand on campus is another thing. I have been kind of clear that, if you endorse me, and if we have that contract between each other, then I will have a very solid commitment. I know that I’m emailing everyone saying that I have made this solid commitment, but if you’re not endorsing me, then I won’t be emailing people saying “this is my project this year.” If I’m getting an endorsement this is a contract for me, and anything otherwise would be a breach of contract from my perspective. I’m not saying that I wouldn’t be representing you if I get elected, but it’s that endorsement that allows me to say, okay, we build a relationship now, and it’s my commitment now to build upon that relationship. I want to also emphasize that, based on my calculations I am very likely to win this election, and I’m basing that calculation based on how many people I’ve been able to get to volunteer, which is about 100, and the size of the facebook group, which is now reaching about 500, and based on our calculations we can increase the group by about 50 per person by the time polls open. With that going on, and I like this project because it acts in my academic interests, and it also helps me just take some of that pressure off . So yes – I want to be candid about it.”

More candidates for various positions have gotten back to me with their interview responses. For your reading pleasure, here they are!

David Nogas

1.) If you had to choose one thing from your platform that you would work on, which would it be and why?

First year education reform. There’s a lot of things that can be done, the university realises there are fixable problems, lots of great new ideas floating around(that work great in other uni’s) and the AMS can help. You have to make sure first years(especially commuters) are aware of the opportunities here and make information available and meaningful.

Specific academic things that can be done are organising speakers to talk to undergraduates(with a recommendation system and social aspect), giving non academic credit as incentives for UBC supervised leadership and participation, reforming worthless tutorials, introducing the P/F system to eliminate the discouragement of broadening horizons by potentially bad grades, video podcasting lectures, etc. Its critical to show them what they are working for, making them aware all the cool and interesting things being done in upper year classes so they don’t get too discouraged by a boring or bland first experience, thinking thats all there is to the field. There’s nothing sadder than hearing a friend say “I would of loved to be in cognitive systems if I knew it existed”

You got to get these kids early, the cigarette companies know it, the drug dealers know it, and now you know it too. Once they see the possibilities and are interested in learning and getting involved good things happen, no sense it opening their eyes when they are out the door

2.) How would you describe your leadership style?

Lofty and King-like. The job is all about delegation and communication, you have to tap qualified and motivated people and trust them enough so you don’t have to micromanage their responsibilities, they’ll do a better job for it. People will impress you if you give them time, as long as they want to impress you.

I believe in workarounds, the visible result is all that matters, not how you get there. The best ideas can come at the oddest hours, sometimes more progress can be made when sharing beers and stories than when sharing documents and soundbytes at meetings.

When talking to people who have different int rests than myself, its important to keep that in mind. In a negotiation you always need to look at the big picture. You can’t make concessions that are detrimental to students unless they are absolutely necessary to gain value, and its ok to pause _everything_ while you figure it out.

Everyone deserves to be treated like fellow human beings,
Nobody likes fancy titles thrown in their face.

Finally, the presumption of knowledge is dangerous. If you assume you know everything you will be less receptive to reality and will make more mistakes

Oh, and I don’t mind a bit of disorganization, the wiggle room makes things run more smoothly

3.) If you had to select another candidate, other than yourself, for your position, who would you select and why?

Tough question. I can’t give you a reason that will make you’d want to pick them over me, backhanded compliments are lame, and I can’t just slander them and ignore your question

Honestly theres no one to get excited about in this race
Jeremy – Passionate but uninformed
Sonia – Informed but ineffective
Johannas – Motivated but seems to care about himself more than others

I think Johannas or Sonia would do fine, but candidates next year will be talking about the exact same things. Johannas would prop ably do the best job with academics, but I wouldn’t trust him to make the right descions on campus development.

Sonia as a caretaker, Johannas has more upside but more risk

4.) What experience have you had leading a team?

Nothing too impressive. When I was in high school I led kids in a stewardship program for the Vancouver Aquarium(making sure they didn’t wander off), when I got my blackbelt I mentored the lower levels. With friends, I’m usually the person who gets the group organised to go to a movie or skiing

People were pretty lucky to have me in their lab group for most classes. I’ve been working in labs as a research assistant since my second year so I have alot of experience, many of the experiments that were completely new to most people I’ve done a hundred times. My groups were usually consistently the first to finish.

5.) How are you different from the other candidates running for your position?

I think the difference is personality and skill. I like talking with people, coming up with schemes, and have a good sense when people want something from me. You have to see opportunities and I think I have better vision. I see how things could work

One difference between me and and Sonia is that she works harder than I do. Johannas is living in the future, planning how he’ll get there.

6.) What would you say is the single most important issue concerning UBC students right now?

It will be the Olympics soon, but that’s a short term thing that will pass(hopefully smoothly)

The SUB renewal project is the issue I can act on that will have the greatest effect on students. If its done competently, it could be the best part of the university for generations. Badly designed it could be an albatross hanging on our necks for the next 30 years. (I’m on the SUB renewal committee)

Thinking more holistically, the single most important issue is the changing role of university in society. The ground is moving underneath our feet. A degree doesn’t mean the same thing as it did 20 years ago. Jobs that require a high school diploma now require a university degree, jobs that required a university now require a Masters. Its a discussion we need to have with the people in charge and with the people who will be affected. People are uncertain about what they are going to do when they graduate, what they got out of their years here

7.) If you could go anywhere in the world, where would you go and why?

Too many to pick from, I love the whole world – all its sights and sounds

Recreating Project Excelsior would be something else, a 4 minute freefall over a gorgeous part of the world

If you don’t mind a bit(lot) of cheating, if I could go anywhere in the world it would be the 1995 London office of Alastair Fothergill along with the rest of the “Blue planet” crew to celebrate the beginning of shooting.

I always wanted to go backpacking in untamed Africa.

Tim Chu

If you had to choose one thing from your platform that you would work on, which would it be and why?

First of all, I intend acting on every single issue that is on my platform, not just one. Having said that, I think one priority I feel very passionate about is the issue of AMS representation. Women and ethnic minorities are grossly underrepresented. It is not acceptable that at a university where more women graduate annually than men, less than 25% of council is female. Yet paid student services positions are overwhelmingly composed of females. The fact that AMS Council is not truly representative of the student body is very frustrating and pressing because those groups who are underrepresented, their interests are often overlooked in AMS Council. I want to not only examine the reasons why this is the case but work with campus clubs, resource groups, and Council to ensure that VP Externals don’t have to worry about this issue. By making AMS Council truly repre
sentative, we would shift the direction of the AMS towards the way that students actually want. And I intend on doing so.

How would you describe your leadership style?

Very inclusive. I believe in including all the stakeholders before making a decision. For far too long, the AMS have always neglected certain groups on campus. I also believe in listening and addressing the concerns of the various groups on campus. However, I am also very realistic. I understand that not everyone’s concerns and needs can be met but certainly the AMS can.

In my work with the AMS and the AUS many leadership opportunities have come up, and my colleagues all agree that I am a capable leader who knows how to combine inclusivity with effectiveness.

If you had to select another candidate, other than yourself, for your position, who would you select and why?

Fire! In order to survive in the AMS, you need to have a fiery passion for the job. The AMS can be very tedious and frustrating. I certainly have the fiery passion, I think Fire as well.

What experience have you had leading a team?
The experiences I had in leading a team include when I was an AUS councillor. When organizing FrAUSh, I was responsible for coordinating and leading the volunteers. Furthermore, I was the Assistant to the Academic Coordinator of the AUS. However, during the period between the resignation of the Academic Coordinator and the appointment of a new Academic Coordinator, I had to step up to the plate and lead the Academic Committee to do various tasks, including the planning of the Performing Arts Showcase.

How are you different from the other candidates running for your position?

There are two major distinctions between me and other candidates running for my position.

The first is that I am very serious about this position. I understand that students turn to the AMS when they need help and I understand that this position entails a fair amount of pressure to perform. I am very serious about this position.

The second is experience. Of all the candidates running for VP-External, I have the most experience to do the job. I have been involved with the AMS and I understand how it works. And I work well with the staff and other councillors. I sat on a total of five committees of the AMS, two of which were the External Lobbying Committee and the Equity Committee chaired by the VP-External. Furthermore, I worked for the AMS in the External Lobbying Committee and led the AMS through two elections, a municipal and a federal election. I know what techniques work and what methods don’t. A provincial election is coming up and my experience is essential. That is what makes me distinct from other candidates. Furthermore, to truly work to change the status quo you must know and understand what the status quo is, and why it is flawed. I know and understand the problems facing the AMS because I have been actively involved in the AMS. I am the right person for the job because I understand how to go about making the necessary changes.

What would you say is the single most important issue concerning UBC students right now?
The upfront cost of education is the single most important issue concerning UBC students right now. Students are struggling with the cost-of-loving, are burdened with the increasing tuition fees and are faced with rising student debt. This is the single most important issue concerning UBC students and I want to work with students and the government to address this concern.

If you could go anywhere in the world, where would you go and why?

If I could go anywhere in the world, I would go to the centre of the earth. ‘Cause if I start digging a tunnel to China, well, I’d already be halfway there right?

Sonia Purewal

1.) If you had to choose one thing from your platform that you would work on, which would it be and why?

I would work to consolidate the academic services offered by the AMS, AMS constituencies and UBC so that students know exactly what is offered and how to access them. I want assess the quality of these resources, rank them in terms of usefulness by faculty, year and major and create a webpage that would allow students to do a custom search so that they only get services that would be most useful/applicable to them. I feel that many services are accessed by a small subset of students and many do not even know that they exist. So I would heavily publicize these services and ensure students can easily access them to improve their academics at UBC. I would choose to focus on this because this is an area of the portfolio I have complete control over. Achieving this goal doesn’t depend on lobbying the University but rather on whether I decide to dedicate myself and thus any failure to implement changes would be on me. I want to take action and see tangible changes that are going to effect current students. Too much time is spent creating policy and writing reports, its time to implement those policies.

2.) How would you describe your leadership style?

I love working with others to solve problems. I like facilitating discussion and allowing individuals to take initiative and pursuing issues they are passionate about when possible with oversight. I am ultimately responsible so I ensure key tasks are completed on time with a set date for deliverables to ensure that work is done and we are on track to completing whatever it is that we are working on. I find individuals do there best work when they have ownership and know that they have a responsibility and obligation to ensure that what needs to be done, is done. I am not controlling in nature and recognize that I am not an expert in all areas. So I find it extremely important to recognize the skill and knowledge of those who work with me and thus encourage collaboration. But most of all, I am reasonable and realistic and respect those around me which creates an excellent working environment which is the first step in accomplishing anything.

3.) If you had to select another candidate, other than yourself, for your position, who would you select and why?

I would choose Jeremy Wood. With respect to the other candidates, he is most genuine and that is an important quality if AMS executives are going to connect to the student body. There is no question that he cares about issues with respect to sustainability and the Farm and if that passion extends to the rest of the portfolio, tangible change can happen.

4.) What experience have you had leading a team?

This is what I do. I began my involvement as Philanthropy Chair of Phrateres UBC. I was responsible for the coordination and organization of the Terry Fox Run for the UBC Community along with a multitude of charity events. That required effective communication and organizational skills. I was a SUS councilor and executive. As Director of Sports, I coordinated and managed 13 intramural Rec teams involving over 150 students, created a series of activity workshops to get students active and engaged in a healthy lifestyle and organized events such as Science Olympics. I am also a Computer Science Student Society Executive. I work to engage Computer Science students and create a network that provides them with the support to get through a strenuous program. I have been involved in Imagine and Gala…

5.) How are you different from the other candidates running for your position?

I am the only candidate with any AMS experience as a counselor. In order to be an effective VP Academic and University Affairs, you need to know the structure of the AMS and how it works. You need to know what’s broken and what the AMS is doing well in order to accomplish anything tangible. There is a process in implementing change within the institution of the AMS and the university and that has not been addressed. I have noticed how easily expe
rience has been dismissed in the VP Academic race as the other three candidates have none. Citing experience within an AMS constituency or advocacy group is not good enough. I have been involved at the constituency level and the process in getting anything done and the politics are vastly different. If the other candidates were elected, they would spend more time learning how to do the job than actually doing it whereas I could hit the ground running. This is really important when you only have a short amount of time in office to accomplish anything.

Furthermore, the other candidates have great ideas, but many are unrealistic or infeasible as they require massive amounts of funding which is not available. They expect the provincial government to contribute but this is unrealistic as the provincial government has just cut funding and any funding received will need to go towards areas that lost that funding in the first place. They offer no short term solutions to address current needs of students.

Finally, I genuinely care about this position and have no other reason for pursuing this opportunity but to improve the student experience because I feel cheated that I did not have the experience I expected. No one would put more of themselves into this job to make things happen. When I reflect on my time in student government, I want to be able to say that I made a real difference and took action rather than draft policy and write reports. I understand the role and responsibility of the VP Academic and University Affairs and will not make empty promises and say I will do something that I know I can not accomplish. I refuse to use buzzwords and issue sound bytes. I am not good at spewing rhetoric. I try to honestly address answers and I hope the electorate can see that. I may not always be eloquent but it’s the truth. It would be easy to speak in generalities and simply say I will support and lobby the university to put student interests first but these are empty statements. It’s more important to address how this will be done and the approach that will be taken. I hope the electorate will recognize that

6.) What would you say is the single most important issue concerning UBC students right now?

I would say that it is the disconnect between the students and the university campus and the AMS. Many students are being cheated out of an amazing university experience us because there is very limited communication. The onus is currently on students to find out what’s happening. Although, it’s important for students to take initiative in this regards we need to make an effort to inform them. Students need to recognize who they are being represented by and what issues are being addressed. Once this happens, students will see the positive work the AMS is pursuing will want to be involved or at least informed of the continuing efforts and utilize the services and resources the AMS provides.

7.) If you could go anywhere in the world, where would you go and why

I would want to go to France. It’s a beautiful country with a rich history and unique culture that I would love to experience.

Stay tuned for more!

Jeremy Wood has decided to withdraw his withdrawal from the VP Academic race, and is now once again running for office. Here is the statement he released to member of his election facebook group:

“Hey everyone. As many of you have probably heard by now I today announced my withdrawal from the VP Academic race. I realize now what it was was that I felt I’d lost sight of the issues and was too focused on the race. I’ve reassessed my priorities and at the end of the day its you and your interests that matter, not just winning an election. I don’t want to let you down and I won’t. In the wake of my withdrawal I’ve seen an outpouring of support I had no idea about and it has genuinely moved me. Maybe my change of heart today will affect the results of this election. I hope they will not. But I will be there to see what happens. And I hope you will be there with me. Let everyone know. Were here to stay.”

I find this quite interesting- I’m not quite sure yet how I feel about a candidate who feels like he lost sight of the issues, only to regain focus when others supported him. It is admirable, however, that he’s more interested in protecting students’ interests rather than winning the race. There are lots of ways to make a difference and stand up for students’ interests without holding the position of VP Academic. Personally, I’d also be interested in what Sonia has to say.

According to [source’s name removed at source’s request.], Jeremy Wood will be dropping out of the VP Academic race and endorsing Sonia Purewal.

More on this as it develops.

I didn’t take notes at a debate, and it showed; I misattributed a question during the debates, and when I received a note from someone to bolster a group I immediately jumped on it instead of taking the time to ensure I was talking about the right person.

It was unprofessional of me, and unfair to one Josh Hutchinson, to whom I’d like to apologize.

As we come to the end of the first week of campaigning, here’s a look at some of the stuff we’ve been reading:

• A Perspective from the Ubyssey about how the War on Fun is really just paperwork, and a rebuttal from the Radical Beer Tribune.
• A first from the Ubyssey: a video recap and text summary of the first Presidential debate
• Gossip Guy’s lambasting of the Presidential websites.
• Candidate writeups on the AMS Elections site; it’s important not only to vote, but to be an informed voter.
• the comments section on this Devil’s Advocate post where Blake challenges Alex to a debate on tuition policy and issues.

what’s caught your eye lately?

I’m a big fan of balancing out coverage of the elections, and while it’s fine and well to analyze soundbites and award points, sometimes it’s necessary to post photos of people bearing facial expressions that only appear between words, and for us to come together as a community in laughing at the people who are putting so much of themselves out there in the hopes of serving their fellow students.

Ale Coates and Tom Dvorak, our VP Finance Candidates.

Fire was sadly unable to ignite the crowd’s interest; although there was plenty of kindling (especially with all the plants), the jokes just seemed to sputter.

Here’s Rory Green, Tim Chu’s painfully loud campaign manager. I found myself distracted by her a number of times, which did affect my opinions of Tim.

Serious VPX Candidates Iggy and Tim. Tim stood up when he spoke which really only served to highlight how he was a wisp of a man next to the Iggy.

Bruce Krayenhoff, electoral reform nerd (this is a term of endearment around here) asks a question about BC-STV.

The Kings Head sips tequila through a straw. I’m not sure why the joke candidates aren’t spread out over multiple races; doubling up as they have will only make it harder to get their 10% of the vote.

After Iggy’s opening gambit about protest politics, current VPX Stef Ratjen delineated all the ways in which protests, demonstrations, and student initiatives had been successful over the past year (especially in the case of the Aquatic Centre, which went from “closing the free gym” to “free for students almost all the time”) and asked if/how the candidates would continue.
The answers were interesting, but I’ll leave it up to Maria to examine them in depth.

From left to right:

• Blake Frederick — current AVP External, former Insiders writer, Presidential candidate
• Michael Duncan — current AMS President, former SUS President, often seen shirtless and painted blue
• Tristan Markle — current VP Admin, VP Admin candidate, former owner of awesome dreadlocks
• Bijan Ahmadian — current BoG rep, former AMS Ombudsman, somehow on campus for 11 years.

Mike’s the only one who seemed to watch the crowd while the other people spoke; he also ended up looking at any cameras pointed at him, which really does work in his favor.

Debate Moderator and AUS President Avneet Johal. AJ is living in a tent in the Ike Barber Learning Centre at the moment to raise awareness and funds for schools in India. He gets five minutes an hour away from said tent to do whatever he needs to do outside the tent and so ended up staying in the tent for eighteen hours (!) to bank up the time to moderate the debate. That’s dedication, folks. Or insanity. Your call.

This is just a picture I like, but again, note that Mike is looking at the camera.

I must admit that I spent a large part of the debates wondering why I was there, and then another part of them wondering “If I were Fire, what puns could I make about these debates?”. Things like “none of the candidates seemed to have spark”, or “candidates preferred flame wars over debates”, or “debates lacked sizzle”. Or something infinitely more witty. If only that was something the debates actually had- humour. Instead, I, along with many others, found the debates to be painfully dull.

I came in a tad late and thus missed the first part of the VP Finance debates, but not late enough to hear Tom advocate that student businesses at UBC need money to operate and to hear Ale say that she wants to improve club relations/promotions/partnerships by having a week-long fair that’s a major event to get clubs to work together. I wasn’t quite sure how this was different from clubs days (I know that others I was talking to also seemed confused on the point), except that it would take place in 2nd term, which I agree is a good idea- it would be great to have another club recruitment drive in January. Discussion then moved onto what to do with the ACF. Ale suggested that the AUS is capable of paying off its debt, but that if it couldn’t, then a repayment fund should be looked into and set up, while Tom said that the debt shouldn’t be put on the AUS and AMS should take the hit.

One thing that struck me as being interesting about Tom is that he is very committee-happy. While committees are often a wonderful thing, it seemed like his responses to a lot of things were to set up a committee to investigate the matter- in principle, a good thing, but I think that there’s enough information out there on some things (such as the child care problem) that this sort of thing isn’t really as necessary. The two candidates didn’t really differ much on the issue of child care at UBC, however- both agreed that it needs to be addressed, and that money needs to be put into the system to make it both more accessible and more affordable.

Discussion then turned to tuition fees, and, for the first time in my time at UBC, I heard a candidate say what I think all students know is going to happen- that tuition will continue to go up due to inflation, at the very least. Kudos to Tom for being realistic on the issue. His solution to the problem: instead of cutting things, we need to modify business practices to bring in more money. This was in contrast to Ale, who wants to decrease student fees, and who believes that the AMS needs to assess what fees need to be decreased and to retain businesses to increase AMS revenue and stabilize student fees this way. Which sounds like it’s contradictory (stabilizing student fees vs. decreasing them). So I’m not really sure what she meant, but can’t really conjecture.

In any case, other points brought up by both Tom and Ale:

In response to Ale’s question about the increasing the student reserve, Tom said that students need to be made aware of scholarships out there that go unclaimed every year, and that an increase in the student reserve does not need to happen.

In response to Tom’s question about her experience in business operations, Ale stated that she’s worked on SAC, but other than that failed to provide any more details about her previous leadership experience, and instead talked in vague terms about how she’d ensure that things would run well.

Ale wants to create a new used bookstore on campus, which will apparently go in the place of the copyright facilities, and which will make a profit- albeit a “smaller one”- simply by being around, because used bookstores have yet to lose money.

In general, my impressions of the two candidates were “meh”. There was lots of rhetoric, but I didn’t really get the sense that Tom had a good enough understanding of some issues, and I didn’t come away feeling like Ale really knew what she was getting into. But I was treated with some nice assertions. I think either candidate would do a fine job, but neither really struck me as being particularly outstanding based on the debates alone.

Moving on to the VP External debates… oh, where do I even start… how about with some advice.
1.) Don’t plant questions. It makes you look like you can’t stand up for yourself.
2.) Don’t bring cheerleaders. Voting isn’t based on how much noise the crowd makes, or by the amount of applause you get. Sadly, it doesn’t always seem to be based on how competent candidates are either. So maybe I’m just missing something. But seriously.
3.) Don’t bring provincial politics into this. You’re running for the AMS, and not for your political party- by bringing these issues into it, you a.) don’t look like you particularly care about UBC students and b.) look like you’re trying to launch a political career (which, granted, you might be, but at least try not to look so self-interested? Although it might help people see through you… so maybe scratch this point).
4.) Don’t insult people. Especially when those people might be working with you. I’ve written about this before. Telling Cody (I think it was Cody) that she was “Another member of AMS establishment who is continuing to disappoint students” was not cool, Ignacio. Particularly when you’re talking to an outreach worker.
5.) Learn what responsibilities your position encompasses. Things like equity, Ignacio, are a part of the position.
6.) Don’t pretend to be Obama. We’d all love it if he came to Canada. But you’re not Obama, as much as you’d like to be.
7.) Don’t talk about being invited to AMS meetings (Ignacio) when they’re open to students. And maybe, I don’t know, attend some.

I think that gives you a pretty good idea of what the debates were like. My notes make it seems significantly more exciting than it actually was. Some important issues were addressed, however. As much as I’m not a fan of Tim’s promises to lower tuition fees, he seems to mostly be running on issues of equity and representations of minority groups, which I quite support, even if he doesn’t seem to have a concrete plan on how to do this. Ignacio, on the other hand, seemed to think that knowing nothing about how the AMS worked was a point in his favour, and emphasized instead how important “new blood” was to the AMS, and how he has fresh ideas (none of which I heard, by the way, but maybe his platform has more details?) while doing nothing but offering rhetoric and repeating the phrases “I have a plan”, “___ is broken”, and “I am running for Change”. Sadly, his points fell short of his rhetoric.

All in all, attending these debates didn’t really do anything for me other than make me contemplate the sad state of the elections and understand why most students don’t vote.

I’ve heard this question asked countless times- why don’t students care about AMS elections and student politics? Why don’t they vote? How do we get them to vote? I can’t say I have a solution, but it seems to me that this has been a problem for quite some time, so campaign promises that eloquently explain how the candidate intends to increase student participation in the AMS sound a bit hollow. From my perspective, there are at least 3 factors contributing to student apathy- not just when it comes to AMS elections, but when it comes to student government and student societies in general.

1.) Lack of knowledge. I’ve been surprised how many of my friends I’ve talked to who have been surprised to learn that AMS elections are taking place. Some of those people then go and read up on the candidates or come to watch atrocious debates, but I think one of the primary factors in students not getting involved with organizations on campus is that they simply don’t know what’s out there. I don’t think this is particularly surprising, given that UBC is a big commuter campus. However, while advertising campaigns and outreach efforts might help rope in some of the students who might potentially care about the AMS (or SUS or the AUS/CUS etc.), they don’t always increase voter turnout or student involvement in politics because those who are interested will already voluntarily seek those organizations out, but also because lots of students simply don’t care, which brings me to my 2nd point.

2.) Lack of association. Students feel like student government doesn’t actually make that big of a difference. ‘But surely they know about the UPass and the efforts of AMS execs there? Or other events that student societies put on?’ you say. Kind of. But I would argue that students don’t know who is responsible for terms of negotiation, or that even if they do, the association between the concepts of “UPass” and “AMS” isn’t strong enough. Last year, shockingly few people realized that the referendum was held by the AMS- quite a few students I talked to thought it was the university itself that facilitated it. Similarly, while some students attending SUS events might know that their undergraduate society is hosting the event, some simply attend an event- not a SUS event, mind you, but, quite simply an event. Thus, students know which events are happening, but either don’t know who is hosting the event, or else quickly forget and then assert that “the doesn’t do anything.” Which isn’t always untrue, by the way. But it’s a perception that needs to be fought nonetheless.

3.) Lost trust/hope/faith in the system. There are other students who know perfectly well what’s going on, but refuse to get involved and to vote- and sometimes, I can’t blame them. While student politics are sometimes exciting, the ‘debates’ today were nothing if not disappointing. The problem is that students keep seeing the same types of people running for office- people who seem like “hacks”, for lack of a better word, or people who aren’t hacks, but who are blatantly rude or disrespectful to students who are trying to make a difference or who they may have to work with (I’m looking at you, Iggy. Or Ignacio, rather, as I fear the nickname might spoil the positive associations I currently have with that nickname and the current Leader of the Opposition, who has some admirable qualities that don’t involve insulting others; or for the hockey fans out there, Jerome Iginla), or who seem like hacks. Students also feel like the people running for office aren’t actually addressing student needs, but rather promoting their own personal agendas/political careers. I feel that an effective leader must have the trust of their constituency, and I think that’s simply not the case. Furthermore, there is such a lack of continuity between leaders that it becomes difficult to believe that anything can really be accomplished by any one leader in a given year. As a result, the impetus and incentive to vote, and the belief that one’s vote will actually make a difference, is in essence quashed. When candidates make empty promises (please, I beg you, stop talking about lowering tuition and be realistic!), students clue in, and oddly enough, it doesn’t hurt the candidate so much as it hurts the entire system. It is the entire system that loses the trust of its constituency. There have been interesting psychological studies on the matter that I won’t go into, but I think this is a major reason for students not voting- and I can’t blame them.

I’m not saying that we need an Obama to fix our system (as aMAZing as that would be). Rather, I’m saying that candidates need to be realistic, to realize how they are coming off to students, and to address students’ concerns beyond making empty promises. I think that greater transparency on the AMS’s behalf would start to address these concerns. The problem is that when even AMS candidates don’t know that AMS meetings can be attended by anyone, without invitation, how are students who aren’t interested in the system supposed to be informed about how the AMS operates (or at least how your portfolio operates)? And how are they supposed to trust a candidate who doesn’t have such basic knowledge to represent them? The problem is that candidates simply don’t present themselves well quite often. Joke candidates, while hilarious, should serve to raise important issues instead of making the entire business of elections seem like a joke by offering no substance. Don’t get me wrong- I love joke candidates- but only when they actually raise good points that serious candidates must then address. Serious candidates, on the other hand, shouldn’t be insulting, and nor should they bring in their personal cheerleaders to debates to ask rehearsed questions. And provincial politicking shouldn’t come into the picture. Perhaps if candidates were a bit more respectful of each other, they could finally get some (much deserved, at times) respect from the average student, and increase student involvement in the system. Until then, all we can do is lament about the state of apathy prevalent in our student body.

So I recently made a post about a rumour that I heard students discussing. I posted the rumour and flagged it as such, as I felt that it was something that students were talking about, and felt that it was something to be discussed. I feel that part of covering elections includes posting things that I feel students are discussing, and that may be raised as issues. However, there was a potential to substantiate the rumour despite any disclaimers, which was not the purpose of the post, so it’s been taken down. As someone rightly pointed out, sometimes informing people of a rumour causes the information to be taken seriously, and the false information is remembered as truth. This is something that I do not like, and the purpose of the post was to inform students of the fact that this specific rumour did not have evidence to support it. As such, the post, and all comments relating to it, have been removed in order to prevent adding fuel to the fire. I am sorry if the post offended anyone- it was not intended to do so, nor was it intended to hurt any of the candidates. Please consider this an open thread about the role of rumour in student politics (the goal of the original discussion). Thank you.

Here is a link to the article I read about rumours- take a look, it’s quite interesting.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/27/opinion/27aamodt.html?_r=1