There is no slate: Stoicheff


TANNARA YELLAND
Associate News Editor

For those of you still wondering, Chris Stoicheff, Leon Thompson and Matt Donlevy did not run as a slate for the University of Saskatchewan Students’ Union election.

Controversy erupted on the Sheaf’s website after the candidates’ surveys were posted on March 17, with students commenting to inquire if the three were running as a slate. Most of the questions were related to the three candidates’ posters, which were remarkably similar. The three were quick to say publicly that they were not running on a slate, though many commenters seemed either not to realize this or not to believe them.

This year’s election is seeing a surprising amount of attention. In last year’s USSU election every position was uncontested, so that rather than having a choice between candidates, students were asked to give a vote of confidence to each person running.

In the last six days there have been over 100 comments left on the Sheaf’s website relating to the election, and many students have followed the live coverage of the forums.

“They’re similar, but they’re not the same,” said Stoicheff, who is running for USSU president, of the posters.

“I think we also would have all been on the posters,” vice-president operations and finance candidate Donlevy said.

The three have not endorsed each other or anybody else and have never said they are running as a slate.

Running as a slate offers no tangible benefits to a USSU candidate. In fact, it could present a problem if the non-slate candidates were elected and part of the executive for the next year. This would be especially difficult for Stoicheff, whose job as president is to co-ordinate the executive, which will require him to work closely with each vice president.

While the three have been quick and vocal in their response to the issue, students have continued to flood the comment section with queries about the election.

“Neil,” one of the earliest commenters, left an open letter to Stoicheff saying, “Having a running mate who knows nothing about his position reflects badly on both of you. It will be difficult voting yes to you as President knowing you thought Matt was qualified for Op Fin.”

Stoicheff and Donlevy voiced regret that their substantive platform differences are being ignored in favour of a debate on the slate non-issue.

“I think it’s extremely unfortunate,” Stoicheff said of all the student interest in the slate. “There are real issues in this election and the fact that we’re somehow running on a slate, even though we’ve clearly said that we’re not… it’s a non-issue.”

One of the most substantive policy disagreements between the three is that while Donlevy and Thompson have spoken favourably about looking into sponsorship for the USSU’s student centres, such as the Women’s Centre and the Pride Centre, Stoicheff does not support this plan.

- -
photo: Robby Davis


Social Networking

Follow the Sheaf on Twitter, Facebook and YouTube.

,

  • Katie

    If these folks did not want to be considered as a slate, formally or informally, perhaps they should have altered the design of their posters. The posters are basically the main part of campaigning…they're all the students see. It cannot be accept as merely a coincidence.

    • Stephanie

      Well maybe people should not jump to conclusions.
      This is clearly a non-issue and I think people are wasting their time worrying about it

  • http://www.facebook.com/Claydros Clayton Jr Tootoosis

    the students are not idiots. the candidates should just admit they are running as a slate instead of denying it. personally i think that they should just admit it and come clean.. and so what that the future president doesnt accept what thompson and the other guy are interested in they could have set it up that way. who knows.. other than them… why are they raising their salaries and taking from our tuitions.. they shouldnt be paid more. i believe that they should be paid less… being a student leader should be a privalage..not a perk. you volenteered to lead us students into a brighter better future. why should you be paid to do so? that is idiocy.. i am the VP External for the ISC and i am not paid to do my job.. i do it as a passion and privalage. them running as a slate gives them more power in making such decisions such as increasing their pay.

    • Matthew

      Actually Clayton, to increase their salaries they would have to first go through the opp/finn board and then through the USC.

      As a member of the Opp/Finn board and also as the Co-Chair for JDC West, I believe the salary change was warranted.
      Being a Student Leader usually is not a 40 hour a week commitment (though sometimes it is!)
      For the USSU their positions ARE 40 hours a week. They give up scholarship opportunities, they graduate later due to their restrictions on classes, and they give up the opportunity to work in summer jobs in their fields.
      So, even if they were a slate, the boards, management, and USC all restrict them from arbitrarily raising their strategies.

  • Blair Shumlich

    Clayton, the candidates this year have no impact on the salary increase. That decision was made by the current op/fin board.
    Also, the ISC is important; however it is not a full time job. The USSU adds a year to your undergrad, no matter what. In fact our executive is underpayed compared to other schools. I agree that student representation should be a privilege; students should not go deeper into debt doing it.

    And finally, what is a slate? If friends using the same photographer means they have a hidden agenda to you then I suggest you delve a bit deeper into their policies. If they don’t endorse eachothers, don’t have the same policies and deny running as a slate– then what slate like qualities do they have? This horse has been beaten to death, it is clear there is no slate. Stop kicking the poor dead creature.

    Sorry for spelling errors on my phone.

  • Christine

    I agree, students aren’t stupid.

    Three friends are running together, and they’re not supporting each other?? They’re either terrible people, or hoping for control of the USSU. Three people would give them control of the USSU as there only 5 executive members.

    Blair, you’re either blind or … Well you get the point.

    Go vote no for slate Stoicheff. And yes, it’s obviously a slate.

  • That Guy

    Go Vote!!