Ottawa’s municipal election has ended with the resounding re-election of mayor Jim Watson.
While Watson wound up winning the election with about 76 per cent of the popular vote, the election’s voter turnout hit appallingly low numbers, with just under 40 per cent of eligible voters casting their ballot.
Many criticized the campaign of Mike Maguire and other challengers, for their often insufficient views on transit, taxes, and other issues that engulf the attention span of those who vote municipally.
Ottawa Citizen columnist Joanne Chianello wrote Maguire’s platform is “out of touch” with what constituents want. “It’s difficult to believe that Maguire is serious about wanting our town’s top job,” she said.
However, one topic was consistently ignored in the past four months-student issues.
On Sept. 23, the Rideau River Residence Association (RRRA) hosted a mayoral debate on student issues. Our eight candidates cared so much about these problems that only three of them bothered showing up.
Worse, only two of the candidates had anything to say about the debate topic.
Maguire, who finished a distant second to Watson, stated his plan boiled down to more than just student issues, campaigning on “hydro, taxes, traffic, and trash.”
Does the student population care about any of these issues?
I’d say that they do not. Not one candidate discussed the increased U-Pass fee for students, or the affordability of city services.
Student issues come in multiple forms at different levels of government. Municipally, the most prominent issue is housing and planning for the growing student population. This population is nearing in on 100,000 people if you include Ottawa’s colleges.
All three main candidates opposed any new student development in the area of Sandy Hill, surrounding the University of Ottawa (U of O).
“If they’re going to grow, they need to build on campus,” said incumbent councillor Mathieu Fleury, despite the fact that the U of O campus is already full.
A city of Ottawa resource document states public consultation is needed in order to decide the proper fate of planning procedures. When Fleury and the rest of council voted down the proposal, they ignored the pleas of 40,000 U of O students, most of whom are eligible for voting.
When bringing this up with any bystander, the standard response has to do with apathy.
If students aren’t interested, then why bother catering to them?
Mayoral candidate Anwar Syed echoed this, stating that it is the “responsibility” of students to vote.
This is an upsetting stance for politicians to be taking.
University students who are able to vote are citizens of this city, and deserve just as much respect as anyone else who is directly affected by the decisions of the mayor and his council.
