Prez hopefuls to salvage Concordia’s reputation

Last Thursday’s debate at the Sir George Willams Campus between competing candidates for the CSU presidency made it evident that repairing Concordia’s damaged reputation ranked high among the prime concerns of students and slates alike.
“Because of our image, people are judging us,” said Luis Diaz president of the New Organized Way slate. “[They are] saying we are radicals, revolutionaries.”
The bad image resulted from various controversies that rocked the student union, such as the student handbook published by the present student union executive and the banning of two student representatives.
“A lot of people were alienated by the handbook,” said Zev Tiefenbach from An Umbrella Party. He added that his slate would provide a moderate handbook and give other associations the chance to produce their own publications.
“The handbook expressed the opinions of certain groups but others were alienated,” said Diaz. “That is why it is important not to have a political agenda in the CSU. The students’ opinions will be expressed, just not in the negative way it was done in the past.”
Left Opposition’s Tom Keefer also had a negative opinion about the agenda, just in another context. “The handbook was really scandalous; it wasn’t left-wing enough, it wasn’t radical enough, it didn’t have enough controversy in it, so we want to take it one step further,” he said.
The Representative Union and An Umbrella Party both pointed out that financial problems, like last year’s fraud could be avoided by closely monitoring the union’s finances.
Money issues surfaced throughout the debate. While Chris Schulz of the Representative Union talked about establishing a student service fund, Diaz promised to fund clubs and associations more fairly.
Left Opposition’s VP Anti-Corporate Affairs Trish McIntosh extended that thought. “There should be free education for all students,” she said, after making clear that the Left Opposition felt strongly about student issues in general, space, funding and access to resources in particular.
However, all the slates agreed that only one semester in office puts certain limits on their ability to make big changes.
“Experience counts. There is not a lot of time for the CSU executive to learn how the university works, how the CSU works,” Schulz said.
Since this is only a byelection, the winners will have to defend their positions next year. “We only have one semester in office, [so] we have to come up with a few concrete electives and make them happen,” New Organized Way’s VP Outreach Christopher Dubois said.
Tiefenbach leaned towards the same objective. “We understand that there is not much time but we have a small program of plans that will provide concrete benefits to every student.”
In the end, no clear winner emerged from this debate, which was too often complemented by pointed fingers and destructive accusations, which at least provoked the audience to participate through clapping and/or booing.

Related Posts