Gabriella MenezesThe University of Alberta Students’ Union (UASU) vice-president (external) (VPX) race at the Indigenous Students’ Union (ISU) forum on February 28 had it all. There were debates over funding, promises of consultation, and a showdown over who can best advocate for Indigenous students. One candidate is owning up to past mistakes, another is pushing for faster action, and a third is relying on broad vision over specifics. At this point, it’s less of a clear-cut election and more of a three-way tug-of-war.
Abdul Abbasi, who is running for re-election, emphasized his past efforts in supporting Indigenous student enrolment and post-secondary student support programs. To his credit, he did acknowledge a shortcoming in his previous term. He admitted that consultation with the ISU was an area where he needed improvement. He committed to more direct engagement. Abbasi plans to increase visits to the ISU lounge and integrate Indigenous student leaders into advocacy meetings at the provincial and federal levels. His focus remains on securing provincial grants and expanding Indigenous student support funding.
Nate Goetz presented a platform prioritizing proactive consultation and safety. He pointed to the concerns raised by the ISU following a reported assault in their lounge. Following this, he criticized the reactionary advocacy that only occurs after incidents happen. He pledged to push for culturally sensitive mental health resources. Moreover, he wants to ensure that the ISU has a role in municipal advocacy efforts. He positioned himself as a listener who would work closely with Indigenous students. Despite this, his performance lacked any particularly defining moment that set him apart from the competition.
Juan Munoz framed his campaign around long-term structural improvements for Indigenous students. His focus extended beyond education to career opportunities, advocating for greater participation in work-integrated learning (WIL) programs. He also placed significant emphasis on consistent communication with the ISU. Munoz pledged to avoid sporadic meetings and instead pledged to engage in ongoing dialogue. Despite showing strong momentum in the previous International Students’ Association (ISA) forum, Munoz’s performance at the ISU forum was underwhelming. He did not appear as prepared with fresh ideas for Indigenous student advocacy. Instead, he reiterated general points about communication and long-term change without presenting clear, actionable policies.
A notable moment of the forum was the back-and-forth between Abbasi and Goetz regarding the National Indigenous Advocacy Committee (NIAC). Abbasi disputed Goetz’s claim that NIAC had not been active in the early part of the year. He also asserted that it had been functioning as part of the Canadian Alliance of Student Associations (CASA) for years and that ISU leaders had participated in related advocacy efforts. He referenced meetings with the Minister of Indigenous Affairs, where Indigenous student leaders were present. Furthermore, he emphasized that his approach to advocacy included ensuring Indigenous students had a seat at the table. Goetz, in response, acknowledged that NIAC had been operating but maintained that its impact had been delayed and insufficient, arguing that more urgency and direct engagement were necessary.
The debate over NIAC underscored a broader issue of effectiveness in Indigenous student advocacy. Abbasi framed his approach as one of steady, incremental progress, ensuring Indigenous students were in the room for key policy discussions. However, Goetz argued that simply being in the room was not enough. The slow pace of NIAC’s action over the past year demonstrated the need for stronger leadership to expedite meaningful change. He criticized the delay in NIAC’s mobilization, emphasizing that it took months to get fully operational. At which point, it was too late for significant policy outcomes. This exchange highlighted a key difference in their approaches — Abbasi focused on demonstrating his past involvement, while Goetz positioned himself as someone who would push for more immediate action and responsiveness.
When questioned about Indigenous student safety, Abbasi stressed his experience working with provincial ministers and municipal transit authorities to address security concerns. This would be particularly around LRT stations near campus. Goetz reiterated that safety policy largely falls under the vice-president (student life)(VPSL) portfolio but saw an opportunity in the upcoming municipal election to push for broader city-wide safety measures. Munoz reinforced his commitment to direct ISU engagement but offered no distinct strategy on safety issues.
As the race enters its final days, Abbasi’s self-awareness regarding his past consultation shortcomings could work in his favour. It shows a willingness to improve. Goetz, while committed to advocacy, has yet to distinguish himself with a standout policy or initiative. Munoz, despite his previous momentum, struggled to deliver a compelling argument that would set him ahead, particularly at the ISU forum where his lack of new ideas was noticeable. With voting set for March 5 and 6, students will soon decide which vision for external advocacy best represents their interests.
