Jack Leahy and Aine O’Connell
Day 2 of The Leadership Race 2015 offered the first significant opportunities for candidates to spar, and spar they did. Multilingual self-presentation was the order of the day, as the 16 teams escalated their pitches at the traditional lunchtime Dining Hall hustings and the second annual Cumann Gaelach hustings in the evening. The glut of candidates in this year’s election was to blame for a much-reduced speaking time at the lunchtime event, with prospective sabbatical officers and newspaper editors offered only offered 90 seconds to elucidate their wares. To the credit of organisers, it worked well and resulted in focused, snappy speeches to a large and attentive audience.
President
Gabriel Adewusi performed well at hustings, and opened the affair by detailing how “it took [him] four years to see the worth of the SU, and that’s not good enough”. Adewusi pledges to address what he sees as a deficit in democracy in the union by adding “ordinary seats” to the SU Council membership, which would essentially allow the Union to broaden its active participants beyond those elected to class rep. Despite a day or so of a delay in getting a hold of election materials, this campaign has taken off, with strong presence and dedicated volunteers.
Nessan Harpur used the occasion to highlight three of his five manifesto objectives: the introduction of semester assessment, a sexual consent awareness campaign, and a healthy body, healthy mind campaign. Harpur’s presentation was less polished than that of his opponents, but he deserves credit for a manifesto that isn’t afraid to tackle big issues. He’s the only candidate for president who highlights the startling statistics surrounding sexual assault and harassment on campus, and is unusually the only candidate talking about Christmas exams and civic engagement. Watch out for this guy.
Conor O’Meara took to the improvised stage to screams of adoration, his yellow couch-prop planted firmly front and centre. O’Meara, who cited his presidency of the JCR Halls Committee as his foremost experience, said that his manifesto was “incomplete” as he hopes to use his website to showcase ideas that students express to him over the course of the next week and – he hopes – the next year. O’Meara deserves credit for that approach, and he’s evidently putting in the ground work to talk to individual students about their experience of College.
Lynn Ruane opened her speech by tearing up her manifesto. Rather than descend into a Sinéad O’Connor moment, Ruane was expressing that the manifesto represented “only words” and that the substance of her campaign is in her experience, both as a mother and as an activist. Her speech was truly extraordinary – powerful and convincing, she held the entire crowd in a manner that no other speaker managed to. She expressed the need to come together “as a community” to combat the ideology prevalent in College that views students as “revenue”. Ruane’s campaign is gathering considerable support over the last 24 hours and shows no signs of stopping.
Education
Molly Kenny, running unopposed for the position of Education Officer, stressed the benefits of experience and know-how, which she attributes to her membership of University Council ex officio as the faculty representative for Engineering Mathematics and Science. Despite the alluring temptations of complacency, Kenny’s campus presence is generally quite strong, particularly in her familiar Hamilton surroundings. No particularly searching questions were posed, but she performed well at what was asked of her.
Welfare & Equality
The Welfare & Equality candidates deserve credit en masse for a stimulating and competitive debate, though the emphasis on issues of equality – responsibility for which is newly formalised within the welfare position – was lacking.
Conor Clancy was first up, offering a stirring and sincere account of difficulties experienced in College and the valuable assistance of College services and advocating the hiring of specialist counsellors to better address a range of mental health issues. The final year history student was well-received, and a well-run campaign will certainly see him threaten at the higher end of the table once this competitive race comes to an end. Clancy noted afterwards that there was a “range of issues discussed…that says to me that people are seeing…the bigger picture” with the race.
Muireann Montague spoke of her negative initial experiences of College, and said that she was running “for that one person, clutching a cup of tea, wishing they weren’t there”. She spoke of her experience with Q Soc, Trinity’s LGBT Society, as an indicator of her experience in both a campaigns and pastoral sense. Montague’s good start extended into the day with this performance which, save one early gaffe, was as close to perfect as one can hope for. Afterwards, she beamed that “today’s hustings shows how much people care about The Leadership Race” and said that the hustings had “put life into [her]”.
Liam Mulligan also deserves credit for a strong performance, offering a succinct assessment of the work of previous welfare officers and his vision for how the role can be improved. Of mental health campaigning, he posits that “it’s time to take the onus off sufferers and start acting”, proposing a campaign titled “TCD Acts”. Mulligan appears to be the early front-runner in the race, having amassed a considerable following online and matching it on the ground. Afterwards, Mulligan spoke to The University Times about his nervousness regarding the Cumann Gaelach debate, having never studied Irish in school.
Louise O’Toole, a final year student of social work, stressed on a number of occasions the need for the Students’ Union to engage members with positive mental health campaigns. She pointed to her experience as a member of the Student2Student committee as an exemplar of her ability to bring people together, support peers, and run alcohol-free events. O’Toole later noted the success of her trip to Trinity Halls, having also received “a standing ovation” in a Junior Freshman class this morning.
Aoife O’Brien opened by saying that she was the best person for the position by virtue of her willingness to offer support to “anyone going through a tough time”. She responded well to a question as to the “broad” nature of many of her policies by astutely detailing some finer considerations that she had given to specific promises. O’Brien said she was “happy to take questions” about her manifesto and hoped that her answers were “clear enough”.
Communications
Aifric Ní Chriodáin, a final year TSM student, took to the stage bedecked in her signature fluorescent orange, speaking of her experience in online marketing, her having “decided the price” for the €6.50 Gourmet Burger Kitchen student deal, and her experience as Librarian for the University Philosophical Society. She articulated the need for sabbatical officer roles and work to be better marketed, particularly the Education and Welfare Officers, who she said offer important support to students who may not be able to access professional counselling support when they need it. Slick online graphics and a well-organised social media campaign have given Ní Chriodáin a strong base, as have her noticeable orange t-shirts.
Jemma O’Leary spoke of the union’s need to improve information provision, the scope of its engagement with students, and its strategy in relation to students based off-campus. She disagreed with Ní Chriodáin’s assessment of the need for “big-name, headline sponsorship”, saying that while sponsorship was important, the Union should work first on engaging students with its activities before acting as a “corporate mouthpiece” for commercial interests.
The disagreement continued, as both candidates posted graphics on their respective Facebook pages to further articulate their perspectives. Ní Chriodáin linked the Union’s sponsorship to the financial feasibility of the Senior Tutor’s Student Hardship Fund, while O’Leary countered that the position should first prioritise “a serious reworking of [the union’s] relationship with its members”.
Entertainments
Earlier in the day, a post on The University Times website pitched three questions to each of the candidates for Ents in relation to their manifesto promises. At the time of writing, no candidate has made contact in response to an invitation to answer the questions on the site.
Katie Cogan opened the Ents hustings, addressing the underrpresentation of women in the role in the past. She cited the length of time since the last female Ents Officer was elected (2000/01) as the basis for the quip that “there’s a lack of women bringing the craic”. Extra points to her for mentioning that. Cogan performed well, with the crowd responding positively to her suggestions for shaking up what she sees as an unrepresentative Ents programme, including on-the-spot feedback from event attendees.
David Gray spoke of the need to “finally” bring back and Ents crew, stressing the importance of involving a diverse range of students in the organisation of events. He spoke of the need to invest a portion of the HEA student services fund in a creative space for student musicians, and rejected suggestions that there is a better use for the funds. Gray launched his campaign video on Monday to much acclaim, parodying the well-known trailer for the forthcoming Fifty Shades of Grey movies.
Conor Parle opened assertively, insisting that he could “bring the innovation that these two are preaching about”. He insisted that his experience was the most unusual and diverse among the candidates in the race, and claimed that part of his impetus for running came from what he saw as “unrepresentative”. He proposed an Ents calendar involving more performance-based festivals, and a unique policy of working with welfare services to assist in helping those who suffer from the negative consequences of substance abuse.
The University Times Editor
Edmund Heaphy, currently the deputy editor of this publication, said that his experience of the paper so far had taught him that candidates for the position routinely underestimate the level of expertise required to implement their promises in relation to the paper’s multimedia output, but that he had a realistic grasp of the requirements and was capable of implementing his promises. He lamented the paper’s lack of space for student society events, and promised a new section called “Radius” to increase focus on such. In response to a question, he told the crowd that the paper costs twice as much as what it should to the union, and that he was confident that he could reduce the paper’s dependence on the union by generating advertising revenue.
