Hugh Mitchell | Contributing Writer
As students, the Students’ Union is our representative body on both College and national issues. When an issue that affects students arises within College it should be the responsibility of the Students’ Union to deal with it. The union provides us with a voice to the various boards and committees on which the sabbatical officers sit throughout the year. But what is the relationship between College and the SU like? Since entering Trinity in September it has seemed to me to be increasingly antagonistic.
The majority of the communications to students pertaining to the SU and College seem to contain a relative amount of animosity between the two, highlighted in a recent example with the news that College is attempting to increase its income by introducing higher charges across many student services. In January the SU held a town hall meeting and the President, Domhnall McGlacken-Byrne, was particularly vocal in his opposition of these charges. This one topic seemed indicative of the link between the SU and College: the overwhelming sentiment emanating from the SU was of two parties pulling in opposite directions, not just on this issue but on a regular basis.
This, surely, should not be the case. In an ideal situation the SU and College would work together towards the ultimate goal of improving the student experience in Trinity. Collaboration of this kind, I am sure, does occur, yet it can appear to the student population as if College is continually trying to disrupt student life, and that it is the role of the SU to prevent this. Perhaps this is simply because the SU has a problem with communicating their own work, that they only publicise issues that require some form of student mobilisation, or perhaps it is in fact a true reflection of the relationship between the two. The sabbatical officers work closely with College all year round on most aspects of the College and so a positive relationship between the two is not only desirable, it is of paramount importance.
As we are immersed in the furore of elections for next year, it is interesting to see how the association between the SU and College will develop. A quick glance through the manifestos of the candidates in the races show that next year’s SU may well have a similar attitude towards the College. In the manifesto of presidential candidate Lynn Ruane she says she will be a “fighting president.” Gabriel Adewusi, also running for the position of president, says in his manifesto that students “continue to suffer” in their education. Molly Kenny, unopposed for the position of Education Officer, promises to challenge College “to be more student focused” and Muireann Montague laments the “crisis of resources” currently available. I am not suggesting that it is a bad thing for the SU to confront College and its approach to various issues. The officers are, after all, elected to ensure students’ interests are protected, but the relationship between these two core institutions of the university seems to be, at times, less than harmonious. Communications from the SU and the officer candidates seem to repeatedly highlight where and how College is failing us as students and how we need an assembly of uncompromising officers to force College to release a multitude of resources for the students.
Without the students there would be no Trinity College, and the SU is mandated to campaign for improvements in student life. A common criticism from students is that they feel greatly disconnected from the SU, but there also appears to be a great disunity between the SU and College, with a lot of focus on how College and the SU fail to agree on key issues. Clearly this means that students are dissatisfied with how they have been treated by College, particularly in relation to the financial cutbacks of recent years. As part of the student body in Trinity I would hope that the SU would not only represent me, but that they would foster a better relationship with College to ensure that progress can be made where possible to improve student life.
