Lochlann KerrI won’t lie, while covering Julia Villoso’s campaign for vice-president (operations and finance) (VP Ops Fi) there has been something about it that has bothered me — something that has nothing to do with her. Villoso, for the most part comes off as a great candidate. Her promises that, while not earth-shattering, aren’t underwhelming either. She continues to stick to her platform and make improvements from her last run. But despite all this, I am still bothered by one fact about the VP Ops Fi race, and that is the fact that Villoso is the only candidate.
An election, like the one we find ourselves in, implies an aspect of choice between candidates. Having a lack of candidates in a race for an election in turn leads to a lack of a choice, and this is a fact that bothers me. While this is in no way the fault of the solo candidate, the simple notion that my ability to choose is effectively removed. This leaves me feeling worried about how well issues on campus can be represented. While I may be represented by a candidate, other students very well may not be, effectively silencing their voice.
Now in this particular case for the VP Op Fi race, I feel we are lucky to have Villoso as the sole candidate.
When I asked Villoso about how she plans on being accountable to her voters she responded by saying, “failing last year [to be elected] was the best thing that ever happened to me.”
While Villoso has undoubtedly gained a lot of experience over the last year by joining multiple committees and showing a level of empathy towards her fellow students that is reassuring, it doesn’t change the fact that this race is uncontested, and she is still the only candidate for VP Ops Fi. There is always an option to vote for none of the above. However, voting for no one is a pretty serious move. This would require big justification considering that if none of the above wins, there would be a by-election in the fall, leaving a huge portion of the year with no one in the role. This is not typically a feasible option for students.
This is not the first time we have seen uncontested elections and I doubt it will be the last. Last year we saw the vice-president (external), vice-president (academic), board of governors representative, and even the presidential position go uncontested. Even I, someone who really only started to pay attention to student politics this year, can see the massive problem something like this can cause, as this lack of choice can lead to so many issues with student representation.
I personally think that having uncontested electoral races speaks to our lack of awareness on student politics, which can have a very damaging outcome. We are lucky to have a good candidate despite the fact that the race is uncontested, but what about next year where the next candidate may not be? While we can always vote for none of the above, students should be presented with a choice between candidates. The only way for this issue to be addressed is for students to actively start participating in student politics, for it really does have an effect on us.
If I can leave people with any lasting message it would be to go out and vote this week. Yes, there may be uncontested electoral races this year, but our voices still need to be heard and represented. The only way we can avoid more races like this from happening is by making the Students’ Union a more welcoming space. Candidates have been promising to work towards this with programs like STRIDE, GovCamp, and leadership summits, but they have low turnout and there are still consistently races going uncontested — clearly more needs to be done.
I hope that next year’s Students’ Union empowers more people to take an active part in our student politics. By doing this, students will be presented with more choices, and see better representation.
