Jane Gerster spoke to CUSA vice-president (student life) David Tapiero and councillors Brandon Wallingford and Sarah Cooper about Wallingford’s proposed CUSA electoral reforms.
During a marathon, overnight council meeting Jan. 26, Carleton University Students’ Association (CUSA) councillor Brandon Wallingford tabled a controversial motion that would change the way CUSA elections are held.
The reforms would “increase fairness and accountability in the elections,” according to the five-page motion from the arts and social sciences councillor, partly by moving the elections to an online format.
If the motion passes, students would be able to vote for next year’s CUSA councillors and executive from any computer.
The motion was split into two, after several councillors and executives, including vice-president (student life) Dave Tapiero and arts and social sciences councillor Sarah Cooper, were upset with other parts of the motion.
The part of the motion dealing with online elections will be discussed when CUSA council resumes Jan. 30. But the other parts, which seek to bar any CUSA employees and current executive members from running in the elections, will be discussed at an upcoming constitution and policy (C and P) committee meeting.
An earlier attempt by vice-president (internal) Ariel Norman to send the entire motion to C and P was shut down.
Wallingford said his motion seeks to partially amend the electoral code in order to bar members of CUSA from running in order to help CUSA start over.
“I thought that a clean slate, new students, new faces would be a wise decision in this extremely controversial time,” he said in an interview following the meeting.
During the meeting, the motion was heavily debated.
Speaking solely to the part of the motion that would see the elections move to an online format, public affairs councillor John McRea said he felt for himself and other disabled students, online elections would be more accessible so he supported the proposed switch.
Arts and social sciences councillor Ruty Skvirsky said she was worried about putting so many amendments to the electoral code in one motion.
“Aside from having a lot of concerns, my main question is, this seems to have a huge division between what you have proposed here and switching to online elections,” Skvirsky said. “Why did you not decide to make two completely separate motions — one changing the electoral policy, and the other introducing online elections?”
Wallingford countered that it was because all aspects of the motion relate to running a more “efficient and less contentious” election. However, following Cooper’s attempt to amend the motion, it was eventually split into two separate ones.
Cooper spoke to council about a section that had been struck preventing candidates from having talks and campaigning on residence floors without permission of those floors. Without this section of the electoral code, candidates could speak on residence whenever they want — something Rideau River Residence Association (RRRA) president Kaisha Thompson strongly opposed at the time.
However, following a short recess, Thompson still shut down Cooper’s proposed amendments.
Part of Cooper’s unsuccessful amendments included sections she said targeted transgendered persons by forcing those campaigning to use their legal given surnames on their ballots.
“You are impeding transgendered students and people who associate with a different name or gender identity from having their name on the ballot,” Cooper said, while several members of council shouted “shame” at the councillors trying to push through the motion.
Wallingford said he supported Cooper’s amendments that would prevent discrimination against transgendered individuals.
“I do not want to allow that language to continue to be in the code. It was already there and its removal is something that I think should be a priority of council,” he said. “I don’t think though that those amendments relate to the intention of the motion as a whole.”
The decision to move the more controversial parts of the motion to C and P was made shortly after 3 a.m.
“It’s three in the morning, I hate everyone in this room, please let’s just get to work,” Tapiero said in a heated moment.
Less than 30 minutes later, the motion had been divided and council recessed.
In an interview following council’s decision to recess until Jan. 30, Wallingford defended his motion.
“I still wholeheartedly believe that this upcoming election needs to be run electronically,” he said. “It needs to be out of the hands of people who have a vested interest in the results.”
