Christina VarvisIn the race this election year with the most candidates, Vice-President (Student Life), no candidate seems to stand out but no one seems to completely flop either. They’re a diverse group of students, with Jordan Simao and Francesca El Ghossein from Campus Saint-Jean, Levi Flaman, who’s older than your average student, and the gregarious promoter of international student interests, Kevin Wang.
If you’ve been watching the election forums then you might be most impressed by Simao who has taken a personable approach to campaigning and just seems like a cool guy. He’s emphasized his love of baseball and cars, that finals suck, and that he wants to make most things on campus “just a little bit better.” You’ll recognize him from his neon coloured campaign posters. In comparison the other candidates fell flatter in person. He has focused on residences, mental and physical health, and SU relevancy. None of his ideas seem bad, but none of them seem that groundbreaking either.
Reading Ghossein’s platform on her website feels like reading a textbook. It’s lengthy and hard to decipher but she seems most focused on “student representation at all levels of governance.” To her this means student groups being supported by the SU to create events and residence associations staying strong and autonomous. She has alienated voters by talking so intricately about student governance, and unfortunately, most students aren’t familiar with the inner workings of the university.
Flaman has centred most of his campaign around the U-Pass, making sure that it stays affordable and integrating smart fare technology to eliminate stickers and the line ups they produce. He emphasizes that almost all students need the U-Pass, but he’d better hope that students hate the line-ups twice a year so much that they hinge the election on this issue. Flaman’s platform is weak and ambiguous when it comes to other issues and he seems to have completely dropped the ball when it comes to residences.
Wang hasn’t stood out at forums but his platform is by far the most clear, informed and original. He skips buzzwords and opts instead for tangible ideas like defining what the Student Code of Behaviour means by “safety” and “hazing,” having counselling and clinical services and the success centre available in multiple languages, and pairing up domestic and international students during orientation.
The real battle is between Simao and Wang, charisma and ideas. There is no doubt that an approachable and fun personality is an asset in a VP (SL) and Simao seems to have the know-how and typical ideas that would make him a good representative. But Wang could bring something original to the job, and as explained in his platform, his goals are ready to be put in motion. I wouldn’t mind seeing either of them in the SU Exec, but my vote is with Wang.
