Lochlann KerrEvery year, The Gateway hosts a panel to discuss the Students’ Union (SU) election. This year’s panellists provided their insights on the candidates running, student politics, and who students should vote for in the 2025 SU election.
Opinions expressed by the panellists do not reflect those of The Gateway.
Due to time constraints, panellists were unable to discuss the UPass Referendum or the Faculty of Agricultural, Life, and Environmental Sciences (ALES) Undergraduate Association Fee (FAUnA).
The Panel
This year’s panel included:
- Areeha Mahal: The Gateway 2021–22 News Editor, former Deputy Arts and Culture Editor, and former Deputy News Editor
- Mason Pich: fourth-year political science and religious studies student at the University of Alberta, former SU arts councillor
- Habby Zoud: second-year philosophy student, secretary of the Campus NDP
Pich declined to comment on all referendums and plebiscites.
“Yes” Side: International House Community Council Association Fee
In advance of the 2025 SU elections, The Gateway hosted Q&A’s with all of the candidates, referendums, and plebiscites. The International House Community Council (IHCC) declined the invitation because only I-House students would vote on the fee, but Mahal still found it “a bit unfortunate.”
“I think that would have provided [an] opportunity for students to learn more about it.”
IHCC ran a referendum in the 2024 SU elections, which did not pass. Considering IHCC’s past loss, Zoud thinks it is likely that students “don’t really know what they’re voting for.” This time around, Zoud hasn’t seen “much of an effort to engage with students.”
Mahal noted that IHCC’s proposed fee — $50 for students moving into I-House in the fall semester and $25 for students moving in during the winter semester — is “not by any means a small fee.” But, if the IHCC fee passed, students would have the ability to opt-out.
“I think voting no for this is just saying nobody has the option to opt-in or opt-out,” Mahal said.
Additionally, she thinks the IHCC fee could provide valuable events and representation for the residents of I-House.
“For international students I think [it’s] important to provide a hub for them, provide opportunities for them to meet other folks, to feel supported on campus both academically and socially,” Mahal said.
Will they win: two votes for “no”
Should they win: one vote for “yes,” one undecided
“Yes” Side: Period Equity Initiative Referendum
The panelists both agreed the Period Equity Initiative Referendum should pass. Zoud said the group running the referendum, Club Periodically, has done “a very, very good job of engaging with the community.” As with every referendum, Club Periodically had to collect signatures from 15 per cent of the SU membership for a spot on the ballot. The Period Equity Initiative collected over 5,700 signatures which Zoud called “very impressive.”
Mahal agreed with Zoud, stating that “they do very important work.”
“I think this Period Equity Initiative is a way for students to have one [less] slightly small stress in their life.”
She also noted that the fee is “quite small.” If passed, students would pay $1 per fall and winter semester and 50 cents per spring and summer semester. As well, students would be able to opt-out.
“I think it’s very important to have this initiative and to vote yes for students to have the opportunity to opt-in or opt-out for it,” she said.
Will they win: two votes for “yes”
Should they win: two votes for “yes”
“Yes” Side: Halt the Hike Plebiscite
Zoud supports the referendum as “the SU can afford to be more ambitious with [its] advocacy.” But, he noted that when students first hear about the referendum, they may be confused.
“If you’re not aware of the existing advocacy policy and that this is specifically targeting the advocacy policy, it seems like this is not something the [SU] can do.”
While tuition affordability may not be at the front of every student’s mind, Mahal said that it likely is for many. She also noted that this plebiscite does not have a fee.
“It wouldn’t be an extra amount that you have to pay throughout the semester. It’s just amending the policy to include things like free education and eliminating student debt, which I think is important.”
Will they win: one vote for “no,” one vote for “yes”
Should they win: two votes for “yes”
“No” Side: Single Source Cold Beverage Agreement Plebiscite
The Single Source Cold Beverage Agreement (SSCBA) “no” side has done a good job at framing the plebiscite by approaching from different angles, Zoud said.
The plebiscite’s representative, Bassam Dakhel, a fifth-year software engineering student, has approached “the question from the [boycott, divest, and sanctions (BDS)] perspective. Coke, Pepsi — these companies are involved in the ongoing genocide in [Palestine] and are complicit,” Zoud said.
Zoud noted Dakhel has also approached it from a “freedom of choice” perspective for both individual students and student groups. For example, Zoud said the SSCBA closes the doors to sponsorships for student groups from Red Bull.
From a moral perspective, Mahal said she “very much [agrees] with” the plebiscite. She thinks it is important for students who do not wish to be “complicit in the Zionist occupation in Palestine and the genocide that’s happening” to have the ability to choose other products.
She agreed with Zoud that “looking outside of the moral and ethical angle,” the SSCBA takes away choices from students as to what cold beverages they can purchase.
“It’s just providing, in my opinion, more choice on the things that are available on campus.”
Even if Zoud did support the SSCBA, he said he’d “probably still vote “no,” just to put pressure on the SU to make a good deal.”
“That gives them more leverage to Coke to say ‘hey, look, the student body is very, very divided by this.'”
Will they win: two votes for “yes”
Should they win: two votes for “yes”
