Voting is now open for the 2019 Students’ Association elections. For this issue we have devoted a double-page spread to the candidates and analyses of their manifestos. The full manifesto analyses are available online and you may have already seen them released over the past few days.
In previous years we have often held the majority of our coverage until voting commenced. However, this year we have elected to stagger this content and make it available to you in a more timely manner.
Furthermore, our Devil’s Advocate this issue addresses the question of whether students should be responsible for the day-to-day running of the large entity which is the Students’ Association.
Our elections team, headed up by our Deputy Editor, Annie Smith, have done a phenomenal job at compiling the mass of information distributed by sabbatical candidates.
The approach we take to elections is fairly simple. The Saint has a close working relationship with the Sabbatical officers, and this means that we are able to provide a fair and honest opinion of what you might expect from them should they be elected.
As usual, The Saint have not endorsed any particular candidate. Nonetheless, the manifesto analyses are reflective of what is plausible and what is not. Moreover, our analysis is not representative of the commitment of the candidate to student interests.
On a personal level, this is the fourth election that I’ve covered for The Saint. Many of the prospective manifestos I’ve glanced at for this election and ones past are not very well thought through. I believe that if the Students’ Association hired Sabbaticals, not many of them would make it through the first round of selection by HR.
Simply put, they do not understand the job they are applying for. As a result, they promise things they cannot achieve, or tell you, the reader, that they will change aspects of the University they have absolutely no control over.
In the case of politicians, they make these promises to entice the voter, whereas I am almost certain that these promises come from a position of naivety on the part of the Sabbatical candidate.
It is rather disappointing to observe that a student from Scotland’s best university (in my opinion) hasn’t done the proper research. If one of our manifesto analyses seems frustrated or slightly vexed with a candidate, in most cases this is why.
Candidates shouldn’t promise students something they cannot deliver. We have aimed to tell you what they can and cannot. I would encourage you all to read our full manifesto analyses online, and vote for the candidates you think would be best suited.