Nicholas Maronese
Editor-in-Chief
“Towards a More Level Playing Field.”
That’s what John McCamus, York University ombudsperson, titled his report on the fairness of the York Federation of Students (YFS) election process.
It’s a report that, by its very nature, defies student union autonomy; that in principle tries to wrestle power away from what’s supposed to be a self-governing body. It’s inevitably an example of the administration sticking their noses in places they don’t belong.
The very idea of the report makes me shudder in revulsion – they’re telling us how to run our election?!
But after thoroughly reading through “Playing Field,” I find I’m not really offended.
In fact, I feel like commending McCamus for getting the report just right.
While the “Playing Field” is an affront to autonomy in principle, in practice it simply serves as a carefully considered list of recommendations on what the YFS can do to ensure not only that the elections are fair (the report never outright condemns last year’s student government elections as undemocratic) but that they are transparent, so that students can see they’re fair.
There are some proposals that do approach a breach of autonomy – the notion that the election committee include a member of the administration, for example – but overall the suggestions are reasonable, balanced and conducive to leveling what may indeed be an uneven playing field.
Outlawing non-York students (for example, members of the Canadian Federation of Students) from campaigning for a party? Makes sense. Making sure the election committee and appeals body are distinct groups so that they aren’t ever tasked with deciding to overturn their own decision? Of course.
Re-defining “campaign materials” so that it does not apply to a widely available, editorially autonomous student newspaper? Anything less would be uncivilized.
Furthermore, the university was pretty much compelled to draft this report; when the elections process inspires a massive campus uproar like it did last year and dozens of students send in calls for action to the administration, it would be irresponsible for them to sit idly by.
That’s not to say I think students, candidates or parties should petition the university for election reform. On that point I concur with the third-party audit into the controversy that the YFS themselves commissioned; they conclude that once the process has been revamped, candidates who subvert the process and appeal to York for help should be penalized.
I think those who submitted complaints to the administration last year, however, may be excused: when it comes to changing the system, they can’t be expected to employ the very process they were trying to reform. The university was the only outlet they could approach.
The point is that McCamus, on behalf of the administration, is simply offering his take on what the YFS could do to prevent another avalanche of election-related complaints this coming year; they are not forcing the student union to comply. They don’t – and shouldn’t – have that kind of power.
But you know who does? You. The students.
I encourage you, reader, to review the report yourself, to listen to both sides of the argument carefully and, if you come away dissatisfied with how the elections were conducted, let the YFS know. Let the student union know that you won’t participate in an election process you think is undemocratic. In short, do what a student does best.
Read, think and then act.
