By-election candidates grilled at hustings

The ‘Candidate Debate’ for the Welfare and Campaigns Officer by-election took place on the piazza, on Tuesday 1 May.

The by-election, for which voting is taking place all this week with polling closing on Friday 4 May, is taking place due to the original election winner Ben Hodges stepping down due to another job offer.

All the candidates for the position were present at the event, which lasted just over an hour: Miss Helen Gould and Naomi Watts, who both ran for the position in the original elections last term, and three new candidates in Miss Sarah McNamara, Clare O’Brien and Mr. Benjamin Sundell.

Around thirty five people were present at the start but this number slowly dwindled over the hour.

The hustings were chaired by James Norris and was filmed by SIBE and recorded by Radio Warwick.

Each candidate was given a chance to briefly talk about themselves, before they received questions from a question box, some specific to a candidate, and then questions from the audience.

Gould started by emphasising her experience regarding grassroots campaigns and highlighted the need for mental health awareness.

McNamara, whilst admitting she “wasn’t that active in student politics” previously, thinks her strength is experience of all the problems students face, and mentioned her idea for a “safe house” on campus for students who were unable to get home after club nights.

Watts admitted her proposed policies were much the same as in the original elections, but also stated she had tweaked them in response to further student feedback.

Sundell said he regretted not running originally, because of his care for students and desire to add as much personal contact to the role as possible.

Finally, O’Brien introduced herself and her wish to make “campaigning available to everyone”, as well as mentioning her proposal for ‘mind your head’, a mental health campaign she wants to run.

The debate then moved to questions. Questions submitted beforehand included queries about time management, how the candidates planned to increase interest in campaigns, as well as questions to particular candidates.

These met with varied responses from the five. Gould and McNamara both mentioned the idea of an open door/office hour policy for greater connections with individual students and Sundell talked about the importance of prioritisation, whilst Watts focused on the use of social networking sites.

O’Brien pledged to meet with societies, and responded to allegations of too many manifesto promises by saying “I wouldn’t have said them if I didn’t think I could do them.”

Watts clarified her stand on transport, proclaiming she wanted to improve links between campus and Coventry, whilst Gould promised not to forget postgraduates.

All the candidates agreed that there was a strong campaign base already at the university, but argued more could be done including greater promotion of what was occurring.

McNamara thought parents should receive as much information as students regarding university life, whilst Sundell was left dumbfounded by a question that alleged that his campaign video showed his support for ‘male empowerment’, suggesting that bad sound quality had mangled the words ‘mental health’.

All the candidates agreed on the importance of the new officer title for this year: the winner of this by-election will officially be ‘Welfare & Campaigns Officer’ whilst this year Izzy John’s job description stops at ‘Welfare Officer’. They all made the point that campaigns were the medium through which welfare was improved, and that the two roles worked together.

Questions from the audience led to mostly to agreed responses about fighting against and reacting to the fee increases.

One notable question was asked by current Education Officer Sean Ruston, who asked the candidates to name the one thing that made them stand out from the others. Sundell said his care for students marks him out, whilst McNamara thought it was her promotion of community.

Watts reminded the audience that both she and Helen Gould had previously stood in the original elections, so they had more knowledge regarding what students wanted, and said that her commitment to talk to students would make her the best candidate.

Gould recounted her large range of experience with many different welfare issues from experience, both personal and from campaigns, whilst O’Brien believes her ability to back up her own experience with solid policies separated her campaign from the rest.

Finally, as the event drew to a close, Norris posed the question as to whether any of the candidates would accept another job if they were elected, which was met with resounding negatives.