If candidates had expected the final hustings of this year’s Trinity College Dublin Students’ Union (TCDSU) elections to be something of a formality, they received a rough surprise tonight in the face of robust and skillful questioning on the part of the JCR and the residents of Trinity Hall.
Taking to the stage this evening under a slightly sombre atmosphere, as news of the emergence of a racist and antisemitic Twitter page attacking some candidates filtered through, the speakers were forced to deal with an additional, unwelcome distraction to their preparations.
Nonetheless, there were stellar performances from several candidates who, having struggled in the pressure-cooker atmosphere of previous hustings, thrived in the less formal atmosphere of tonight’s challenge. Meanwhile, the audience covered a huge range of questions, all the while proving unafraid of straying from the traditionally Halls-focused nature of questions, as they engaged in a comprehensive examination of the candidates’ policies.
President
In the final hustings of this presidential campaign, both Laura Beston and Daire Hennessy faced perhaps their toughest grilling to date. Before a well-informed audience of Halls residents, the candidates were challenged on a range of issues. If candidates hoped to pick up votes among the members of what is usually a well-engaged constituency, they were certainly made to work for it.
Hennessy, returning to a recurring theme, bemoaned the lack of engagement between the union and the average student: “If you leave this room and pick a student at random, the odds are they either actively dislike the SU, or they just don’t care all that much about what’s going on.” Lamenting a “group mentality” among those involved, Hennessy references the lack of “reaching out or co-ordination” by the union.
Beston began her speech by approaching a similar theme on a more introspective note. “I know when I sat in those seats as one of you that the SU hadn’t done much for me”, she said. “I want to be able to come here next year watching the next batch of candidates knowing that every single student sitting in that crowd has felt listened to and supported by their SU.”
Incumbent TCDSU President Shane de Rís probed both candidates on their solutions to the union’s budget deficit. Hennessy floated multiple solutions, calling the funding of The University Times and “maybe a sabbat” into question. Beston noted that she had discussed the issue with Donal MacNamee, the sole candidate for Editor of The University Times, before suggesting limiting the paid hours of the Entertainments Officer.
Ultimately, tonight’s hustings displayed a trend that has been evident from the start of this campaign. While Hennessy has grown as a candidate during the hustings, he has failed to enumerate and develop the sort of policy proposals that are expected of a union president. By contrast, Beston, who grappled with some notable missteps at times, has constantly seemed the more prepared and informed candidate, dealing with tough and challenging questioning exceptionally well on a night that was undoubtedly challenging for her personally. With Beston holding a commanding, but not insurmountable, lead as we enter the final days of campaigning, it will be interesting to see whether the consistently anti-establishment tone of Hennessy’s campaign is enough to help him overcome this.
Education
As the race for Education Officer draws to a close, McCay and McCarthy tonight gave one final push to differentiate themselves in a race that has been tightly contested since their opening statements on the Dining Hall steps.
Aiming to end her campaign with a bang, McCay brought her trademark enthusiasm and positivity to Halls in a performance that was brimming with smiles, laughter and plenty of student-experience anecdotes. Urging students to keep next year’s first years in mind when casting their votes, McCay promised to be that resource when “everything is overwhelming”. Referring to her manifesto policies, including lobbying for grace periods prior to exams, Skype office hours, and her previous experience as JCR officer, McCay said it was these things that separates her from McCarthy and give her the edge: “You deserve the best education officer possible and I know I’m the right person for the job.”
Conversely, McCarthy roused the audience by again playing on her frustration with the union, opening her speech saying: “If I, and the students I’ve represented, had been listened to by college, by the SU, I wouldn’t be running.”
Like McCay, she relied on her manifesto material, focusing again on class representation and her previous involvement within the union. McCarthy emphasised her involvement in Trinity in the past four years as Engineering, Mathematics and Science (EMS) Faculty Convenor and as a voice for students – closing her speech with a final request to keep that voice: “I’ve been in your corner, I’m asking you to put me in your corner again.”
In an interesting twist to their campaign, while both candidates appeared well versed on their manifestos throughout the campaign, for the first time this evening, they appeared to falter.
Testing their knowledge of Trinity Education Project – a relatively straightforward question considering the nature of the role – current TCDSU President Shane De Rís asked the candidates to name three features of the project outside of semesterisation. Surprisingly, it was met with clear unease from the candidates and the audience alike. McCarthy took to the microphone first, firing off the introduction of electives, new science streams and broader policy on capstone projects. Meanwhile, McCay appeared flustered, failing to provide three unique changes of her own, instead elaborating on McCarthy’s points and the advantages of semesterisation and electives.
Ending a night filled with tough questions on the Academic Senate, student travel and disability provisions, the pair ultimately proved their capability of handling the pressures that the role demands – while somewhat struggling to separate themselves – in what might prove to be an interesting finale.
Welfare
The questioning of welfare candidate Aisling Leen tonight was notable for its softer tone. Leen provided a confident and composed performance in Trinity Hall. A trademark of Leen’s campaign has been stressing her approachability, and her speech at Halls once again relied heavily upon painting herself as an empathetic candidate.
Leen avoided scrutiny from the crowd present and delivered a relatively uncontroversial final speech of this election period. She did not break any new ground, but rather used this opportunity to cement the points she had made so far.
Having made it through an entire election period without providing much detail on her approach to her flagship campaign promise regarding sexual assault reporting, Leen did not take her final opportunity to provide any further information to students. She did acknowledge that the College’s current case-by-case policy was not sufficient for dealing with reporting of sexual assault, saying that a dedicated policy would encourage more students to come forward if they had been affected.
Leen also emphasised that she was very open to working with the JCR, suggesting working with the Ents and Welfare teams to provide alcohol-free events in Halls, as well as the possibility of introducing office hours in Halls “if that is something the JCR wanted”.
Leen’s performance has significantly improved at hustings events throughout a taxing election period, and she has undoubtedly found her stride as campaigning has worn on. However, it is regrettable that she did not take the many opportunities presented to her to expand upon her campaign promises in a more substantial way.
Communications and Marketing
Sole communications and marketing candidate Muireann Kane was notably more confident in her address this evening, starting her speech off with a light-hearted story about her time in Halls. However, this personable demeanor did not stop those present from asking the tough questions about why she deserves their votes.
Kane was asked who specifically she had spoken to in relation to her manifesto point of seeking provisions for internships and grad programmes. Explaining that she would like to use “what’s already there” and look further into “what opportunities they can implement”, Kane shied away from specifics.
Kane’s online presence was subject to considerable questioning yet again tonight. When asked why she eschewed creating a Facebook campaign page until Thursday in favour of relying on her personal Instagram, Kane returned to her classic retort of she had “done a lot of research” on which platform was best. She explained that most students didn’t want to follow campaign accounts and, while this may be true, it remains to be seen whether she succeeded in convincing those present that this was a tactical move and not simply an oversight.
However, Kane was astute to use this question to highlight her readiness to listen to students. Stressing that she “did listen to the responses” and altered her strategy in response, Kane may well triumph over the campaign calling to re-open nominations if students buy into the idea that she is willing to learn from her mistakes.
Entertainments
The three candidates for TCDSU Entertainments Officer, each offering a unique take on what they might bring to the role, appeared keen to impress during this finale of sorts.
Judith Robison, who is also hosting her event “Get Groovy with Judy” tonight, focused on her organisational skills and experience – emphasising the number of events she has organised as DU Players Entertainment Officer. She also sought to highlight her relationships with major Dublin acts. Perhaps feeding off the excitement of the day, she appeared energetic and more confident than at previous hustings.
Robinson has been ever-present on campus and online throughout her campaign and – emphasising this visibility tonight – aptly reminded students that “throughout this campaign I have run as many events as both my competitors combined”. When it was pointed out to her, however, that the Pav have shut down numerous events in recent months – something that flies in the face of her “Pav Fridays” plan – Robinson clarified that they would not be large “takeovers,” but rather “chill” sets that “creates a nice atmosphere”.
Interestingly, Luke Rynne Cullen chose to specifically call out the “lad culture” that has engulfed Ents at times. He was the only candidate to mention the LGBT community, promising to protect transgender students when dealing with security at events. This trend of recognising minority groups, however, is unsurprising, as accessibility and safety has been a strong feature of his campaign throughout the last week.
Rynne Cullen, while often the most coherent of the candidates, fell behind his more outwardly charismatic competitors in terms of an ability to really engage with the crowd. His plans, however, appear bullet-proof when placed beside the unconvincing and vague promises of the more exuberant Jerico Alcaras.
By far the most enthusiastic of the candidates, Alcaras drew the biggest reaction from the crowd. Opening his speech with a line from his recently released rap song, his speech buzzed with energy and reiterated many of his policies, especially the importance of food, movies and music and repeating that Ents should have a “purpose greater than entertainment”.
However, Alcaras faced tough questioning from the crowd, with one student challenging him on how he intended to fight Trinity Ball ticket price increases. This is a question Alcaras and the other candidates have constantly faced yet he answered that he could not go into details about ticket prices until he could “see the system” for himself. Overall his plans, while passionately expressed, don’t seem entirely substantial when scrutinised.
Editor of The University Times
Like most candidates tonight, Donal MacNamee – the sole candidate for Editor of The University Times – appeared comfortable in the surroundings of Trinity Hall. Over the last week, MacNamee has grown in confidence and tonight was no different. Reminiscing on his own time in Halls, he implored those gathered to not leave it too late to become involved in something like The University Times, explaining that he regrets waiting until second year to join the paper. To this end, MacNamee hopes to bring writing workshops to Halls to encourage students to join the paper as early as possible.
While Halls is not traditionally known as one of the more testing hustings, MacNamee faced terribly tough – and at times surprisingly specific – questions. Once again, he was forced to defend the paper’s print run and funding. At one point, MacNamee was asked whether he would consider taking a pay cut in order to alleviate the current deficit. While he appeared uncomfortable at having to answer the question, he was firm in that he wouldn’t cut his wage, should he be elected, as he “wouldn’t like to set that precedent”, but that he would pursue alternative sources of funding instead – something that he has continually referenced throughout the election period.
While MacNamee has struggled at times to enumerate a clear vision for how he plans to continue The University Times, this final hustings was a last hurdle for him to clear and while he briefly stumbled on some questions justifying the salary of the Editor and the paper as a service, he largely came out unscathed.
Correction: February 26th
An earlier version of this article said that Aisling Leen called her own manifesto point regarding sexual assault policy “very vague”. In fact, she was referring to the College’s dignity and respect policy.
Aisling Marren, Robert Quinn, Rachel O’Leary, Aoife Kearins, Patrick O’Donoghue, Ciaran Molloy, Eliana Jordan, Cormac Watson, Jordan Nann, Imogen McGuckin and Malachi Ó Marcaigh also contributed reporting to this piece.
