Question Time sees candidates debate major issues

Candidate Question Time (formerly known as Hustings) saw the contenders for Sabbatical Officer positions grilled on a variety of issues.

The questioning took place on Monday and Tuesday in the Atrium, and was attended by students and the current Sabbs. The event was well attended, with approximately 50 students turning up to watch and participate.

Monday saw the candidates for Welfare & Campaigns, Education, Societies and Postgraduate take to the stage.

The Welfare candidates were Helen Gould, Kathryn Bevan, Ben Hodges and Naomi Watts.

The candidates focused heavily on the anticipated consequences of the trebling of tuition fees. Other issues raised were night safety on campus, with Hodges and Gould pledging to better publicise the Night Bus. Gould emphasised her background as Womens Campaigns Officer. The candidates also highlighted the need to better integrate international students into the Students’ Union (SU), with Hodges and Watts both advocating sports and other societies to facilitate their participation in the Union. Bevan pledged to improve the welfare services provided by the office, making sure that students knew where to come for help.

Societies candidates Alex Ooi, Ollie Coleman, Silkie Cragg and Kim Mather discussed better utilisation of space for University societies next year. Ooi and Coleman both emphasised the need for more rehearsal space, with Coleman arguing for the use of space in Westwood and the Music School, in addition to making central timetabling more approachable. Mather also promised to “make space”. Cragg took a different line on the situation, stating that she could not “magically create space”.

One World Week was also criticised by the candidates. Coleman argued that although the event was “enjoyable” it had a tendency towards being “too cliquey” and needed to be opened out to make it more accessible to home students. Cragg concurred with this sentiment, suggesting that home students were “scared” of the week, and questioning the necessity of celebrating internationalisation for just seven days a year. Mather, who has been heavily involved with One World Week, argued that the event in itself works well, but the exec must be ‘flawless’ for it to succeed.

Education candidates were James Entwistle, Eden Kulig, Abi Wigglesworth, Stephanie Josephs and Matteo Bartoli.

Contact hours was a major theme in the Education debate. Entwistle categorically stated that “eight hours is not enough” and that he would force Vice-Chancellor Nigel Thrift to “listen to students for a change.” Wigglesworth, meanwhile, said she would focus on the “main” issues affecting students; the library, contact hours and feedback. Candidates also argued over their support for the NUS walkout. Wigglesworth said that “striking doesn’t change anything – there are other ways to do things” and stated that she had not attended the National Union of Students’ march against tuition fees. Entwistle did attend the march, and pledged his support for future protests and campaigns. Josephs did not attend the march, due to being abroad at the time.

Josephs said that she thought students were “too afraid to demand more” from the University. 
All of the candidates also voiced their opinions on the SSLC system. Josephs advocated “changing it completely in the way it works”, including making it more informal. Wigglesworth wanted to raise the profile of the system, stating that “people don’t think about it”. Entwistle felt that it needed to be more relevant to students. Bartoli also supported strengthening the SSLC. Kulig akso felt that the SSLC could benefit from “greater publicity and marketing”.
Kulig argued for the use of fee waivers over bursaries, and putting lectures online.

Candidates for Postgraduate Officer were Judi Blackwell, Anna Chowcat, Andrea Di Mambro, Abdullahi Elmalik and Matteo Locane. Many of those in attendance left at this point.

Two main themes dominated the Postgraduate Officer discussion; encouraging postgraduate students to become more involved in the Union and resolving issues of space and feedback.

Chowcat said that her first priority would be to resolve the issue of library and work space, in addition to addressing teaching and parking issues. She also wants to see more students “involved directly” with the Graduate school. Blackwell focused on the importance of getting feedback back to postgraduates quickly.

Chowcat also critcised the Union for not “reaching out’ to postgraduate students enough. Blackwell similarly stressed the need to better incorporate them; “They’re isolated…they need to be in the Union, in socials”. She advocated a Freshers’ Week for postgraduate students, especially in areas other than the Union, but also wants to get them into the habit of going to Union events.

Locane wants to “demonstrate that we’re making an impact” if something is wrong. He also wants to talk to postgraduate research students and find out their problems. He wants to demonstrate that the Union does affect students’ lives and can improve them.
The other candidates for the position did not attend the discussion.

On Tuesday the candidates for Democracy & Development, Sports and President answered questions about their candidacies.

Presidential candidates this year are Aaron Bowater, Aimen Burhan, Binita Mehta, Tanmoy Sen and Nick Swain. 

Tuition fees were once again the hot topic. Burhan said that it was “not fair” for students to be paying that amount. Sen said, “whether it’s right or wrong is very subjective”, whilst Bowater claimed that it does not matter, as he would reimburse all students’ tuition fees, adding: “if you can’t afford it, don’t get a degree.” Mehta chose to concentrate on the importance of lobbying for tutors to have more office hours. Swain added that he did not believe it was fair that students would be paying £9,000 for the same education.

The issue of the Re-Open Nominations (RON) campaign was also addressed. Swain asked why the creator of the RON Facebook page was not running if they felt so strongly about the issue, whilst Burhan asked for the person responsible to talk to him afterwards.Sen asked the question “why is that option there in the first place?”, provoking a strong audience response.

A further question on RON campaigning (as RON is not a candidate that someone can represent nor campaign for using Union budget) was also asked. Bowater stated that students are totally within their rights to campaign for RON. Mehta disagreed, arguing that “it undermines our efforts,” and compared it to bullying. Swain’s concurring statement, “that’s not campaigning,” was followed by Sen reiterating his original question of “why is RON available in the first place?”.

The issue of why postgraduate students should vote for the candidates was also raised; Mehta answered that that she would be “supporting all the students”. Burhan stressed that he would work closely with the Postgraduate Officer. Bowater reasoned that he would increase postgraduate fees “to encourage you to get a job”.

In response to a question concerning engaging students off-campus with their local communities, Mehta placed importance on ensuring that student areas off-campus are better policed. Bowater disregarded the Coventry community, simply stating that “It smells.” Sen suggested focusing on developing “a better understanding” between students and their communities.

Democracy & Development officer candidates Cosmo March, Christina McGrath, Ciaran Perucca and Jonny Sherwood were grilled by the audience earlier on that night.

Sherwood emphasised his experience of Union democracy, and said that he knew “exactly how to make Council more accountable.” Other candidates advocated a fresh perspective, “It’s a problem that it’s not more accessible,” commented McGrath, “everyone should feel involved in their Union.” March shared this sentiment, stating that “we need someone with a fresh perspective”. He added that more face time with the Sabbs would be valuable to students, along with simplifying the system of Union democracy as a whole.
Perucca suggested timetabling general meetings and capping them at two hours.

March made the suggestion of reducing Top B to a fortnightly event, based on an unsubstantiated claim that Top B occasionally loses money. He also stressed the importance of ensuring that Sabbs deliver on their manifesto promises. Sherwood stressed the importance of getting second and third-year students more involved in student nights, and building a University-long habit of attending Union events, but cited the issue of distance as an impediment to non-fresher attendance.

The issue of the £5 ‘vom fine’ was also levelled at the candidates. March said that whilst he found it “absolutely hilarious” he would not be implementing it as a policy. Perucca was also against implementing the fine. McGrath said she would “absolutely” be in favour of it.
McGrath emphasised the need to further publicise Union events, a comment which attracted criticisms of encouraging Union spamming.

Candidates competing for Sports Officer are Natasha Cabral, Ant Comyn, Lisa Petzal, Chris Staines and Benji Thompson. Questions for this role revolved around how candidates would get students involved in sports.

Cabral emphasised the need for going into on-campus kitchens and one-on-one communication. When probed about the necessity of initiations, Thompson suggested that initiations “shouldn’t be compulsory”. Staines thought that building a better relationship with sport execs would help to resolve the problem.

An audience member asked what candidates thought the biggest challenge faced by the winner would be. Petzal claimed that removing the ‘drinking culture’ of sports teams would be the biggest challenge, a key plank of her manifesto. Comyn said that it would be “making the most of the Olympics”, adding that “Societies and Sports should be involved a lot more”.
The potential Sports Officers were also asked about the biggest problem facing sports societies at the University, with minibuses emerging as a prominent concern. Comyn highlighted the problem of petrol money and Cabral suggested increasing the number of minibuses.

Ben Jones, a third-year Politics student who attended the event criticised its timing: “Hustings should be held later in the week so that students are aware of them.”

One candidate, who wished to remain anonymous, said that: “Hustings are pointless. They didn’t offer any opportunity for debate and nobody got long enough to really talk about policy.”

Voting is now open, and closes 9pm on Friday. Results will be announced as they happen on Friday night on the _Boar’s_ liveblog. RaW and Warwick TV will also be covering the elections live.

_Published on Wednesday 29th February 2012, this article originally quoted Presidential Candidate Aimen Burhan as describing £9,000 tuition fee policy as ‘fair’. This was a mistake. Mr. Burhan actually used the phrase ‘not fair’. The Boar would like to apologise for this error, which was amended on Thursday 1st March 2012._

_This article originally did not include the Postgraduate Officer discussion. Boar reporters were present at the debate, but the content was mistakenly not included. This has now been rectified._