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.
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
The Candidates
Pedro Almeida, a fifth-year immunology and infection student and 2023–24 vice-president (academic) (VPA).
Ofure Eigbe, a third-year women’s and gender studies student.
Sophie Martel, a third-year criminology student and current president of the Indigenous Students’ Union (ISU).
Joseph Sesek, a second-year psychology student.
All three panellists agreed that Almeida has the strongest presence, especially online.
“I do think his stuff has been accessible and it seems well laid-out,” Mahal said.
Zoud noted Martel’s presence as the second strongest, but said Eigbe and Sesek have “completely [fallen] off for [him].”
Additionally, all three panellists noted Almeida and Martel as standouts at forums. So far, Mahal thinks Eigbe and Sesek haven’t “reached the same standard.”
“They’ve sometimes shown a bit of inexperience in student politics. I don’t think it’s necessarily a bad thing, but I think [it’s] conveyed in a lot of the issues they’re trying to tackle,” Mahal said.
She mentioned Eigbe’s proposal for an additional food pantry as an example, and said her proposal lacked context around funding difficulties. Additionally, Mahal mentioned comments Sesek made about unhoused people at the International Students’ Association (ISA) forum. Mahal called his comments “slightly out of touch.”
For Mahal, Almeida offers experience and she thinks he has showcased his understanding of the issues. Although in forums, she noted that he often relies on his past experience as VPA.
“He talks about his experiences without always [saying] what will change for the future.”
Alternatively, Martel has shown strong leadership skills, especially in her role as president of the ISU, Mahal said. But, in forums she often talks about large-scale changes and “sometimes she could clarify more practically how she would achieve those.”
Pich agreed with Mahal that Almedia has performed well, but often relies on his experience. Although, “that’s not necessarily a bad thing [as] having experience in the SU helps you be effective if you win.”
While Martel is “doing a great job,” Pich thinks that “sometimes her minimal experience inside of the actual [SU] kind of shows through a bit.”
Sesek “has a very bold campaign, but very little substance to back it up,” Pich said.
“It sounds like he’s advocating for a lot without having an actual plan for it, or without having details of how he would do it.”
And while Eigbe has done well in forums, Pich believes she’s “definitely overshadowed by the other candidates.”
While Almeida and Martel “are definitely a tier above the other two candidates,” Zoud does credit Sesek for having “memorable points.” Sesek has promised that if elected he will reduce his own salary by $10,000 in order to reduce SU fees. While Zoud said this is not a great policy, it is memorable.
For Martel, Zoud would like it if she brought up her experience as ISU president more often. Even though she hasn’t been a part of the SU, her tenure as ISU president means she still has relevant experience, Zoud said.
The Gateway asked the panellists if experience was valuable or necessary for the role of SU president.
For most of the executive positions, Pich argued that “experience plays a big role in making platforms that are feasible.”
“Without having served, or at least worked with the SU in some capacity, it’s hard to understand everything that the SU does, but also the limitations of the SU.”
While Sesek’s promise to cut his salary is feasible, it saves the average student only a small amount, he said.
For Zoud, experience doesn’t necessarily determine how effective candidates will be once elected president. However, experience does impact platform development, he said.
Zoud finds Sesek’s platform to be “kind of contradictory.” While he has promised to reduce his salary, he has also proposed adding 24-hour CCTV cameras around campus, security posts near those cameras, and extending library hours to midnight. All of these could increase costs for students, Zoud said.
Zoud appreciates Eigbe’s “community oriented approach,” although he said most of her goals are neither ambitious nor concrete.
The panellists discuss strengths and weaknesses of the candidates’ platforms
The Gateway asked the panellists which candidates had or had not highlighted the most important issues to students. The panellists all found Almeida’s and Martel’s platforms to be strong, while both Mahal and Zoud identified Sesek’s as the weakest.
Affordability is the most pressing issue for Zoud, and he found it disappointing that the only person who has advocated for affordability is Sesek.
“He isn’t trying to help support students or create new programs to help students that are struggling. It’s … very token, minor things.”
Zoud identified Almeida’s platform as the strongest, and pointed towards Almeida’s advocacy goals for Campus Saint-Jean (CSJ) and Augustana, as well as his intention to mobilize students as notable platform points. Sesek’s is “definitely the weakest,” Zoud said.
“There’s a lot of contradictions. There’s a lot of issues. A lot of promises that he can’t keep. It seems kind of gimmicky.”
Mahal appreciated the specificity of Almeida’s platform promises, as well as the variety. She mentioned his CSJ-related platform points and intention to further the Zero-Textbook Cost (ZTC) program as examples.
“It seems like there’s a lot of things that would influence a lot of different students, which I appreciate.”
For Martel, Mahal values her focus on decolonization.
“I think that’s very important and that’s something we should see a lot more of in [SU] conversations.”
Still, Mahal would like to see more specifics in her platform on how she would address decolonization.
Mahal also noted Martel’s points on addressing safety and security as “something that is on a lot of folk’s minds.”
Regarding Sesek’s platform, Mahal agreed with Zoud that his platform “sometimes seems a little bit gimmicky.”
Pich agreed that Almeida’s platform is the strongest, but that Martel “brings some new ideas, whereas on mass it feels like a lot of [Almeida’s platform] is just recycled from his term as VPA.” But, Pich argued that this is not necessarily a bad thing, and that many of his plans are more feasible.
“I care a lot about feasibility. I hope when I elect somebody they’ll actually accomplish what they promise.”
All the panellists agreed that Almeida’s and Eigbe’s platforms are the most realistic. For Almeida this is due to his past experience. For Eigbe, it’s due to “undershooting,” Zoud said.
Who will win: three votes for Almeida
Who should win: two votes for Almeida, one vote for Martel
