Back on the steps of the Dining Hall, the first hustings of this year’s Trinity College Dublin Students’ Union (TCDSU) election campaign saw a friendlier affair than last year’s fiery online events. Reverting to the traditional format of opening speeches and a handful of questions, the hustings allowed for a first look at candidates without forcing them to go into deep policy detail.
There are few genuine outsiders in this year’s lineup – so it remains to be seen which issues will be most divisive. Union engagement was, as always, a hot topic, but there was a notable absence of accusations that TCDSU is insular – usually a common feature of election season.
Overcoming microphone issues and cold weather, candidates stuck largely to their manifesto points, making today’s event an uncontentious event overall – but campaigns can change quickly, particularly when faced with questions-and-answers formats from tomorrow.
President
Both presidential candidates spoke with confidence and conviction, coming across as driven and ambitious. Gabi Fullam opened on the offensive: “I’ve tried to spend the last four years in college trying to raise some noise about the things that matter.” Listing the adversities she’s faced as a student of colour – “lecturers who told me to drop out of college” – Fullam spoke with all the traits of an activist candidate, but her rhetoric was very Trinity-focused.
R. Kelly quickly pitched herself as a candidate in search of service, not power, asking the crowd: “What do you want to see your next president do?”. While less powerful a speaker than her competitor, Kelly was poised, zeroing in on accessibility and inclusion. Her speech was somewhat vague, however: she said that “these elections are inaccessible in themselves” and spoke of creating more accessible education policies.
Paralleling Kelly, Fullam said she planned to “reform the tutor system”. On these issues, neither candidate matched their plans with suggestions of how to wrangle Trinity’s famously cumbersome bureaucracy. Kelly specifically was asked how she would implement a Trinity-specific sexual assault policy, and while she was able to assure that her plan was “already in the works”, she couldn’t specify how she planned to get it over the line.
Fullam appeared better versed on the issue of sexual violence, referring to the Department of Higher Education’s consent framework, as well as declaring that any such policy should be “trauma informed”.
Kelly was more sure of her answer to a question about promoting the Irish language on campus – she said it was an “awful shame” that Gaeilge is predominantly found in events organised by the Cumann Gaelach. Fullam was passionate in her response, remarking that debates around the use of Irish had to consider it as an “indigenous” language which wasn’t widely used because of “colonialism”. Impassioned as her response was, her rapid diversion to “other actual ethnic minorities” may not satisfy Irish-speaking students.
Ultimately, though both candidates spoke well and appeared genuinely motivated, their speeches quickly fell victim to vagueness and uncertainty. Both have strengths that they can refine, but Kelly is overpowered by Fullam’s rhetorical skills, while Fullam runs the risk of alienating apathetic voters.
Education
Sole education candidate Zöe Cummins stuck largely to the script of her manifesto today: focusing heavily on accessibility, she looks set to make a mantra of her commitment to ensuring “no student gets left behind”.
While she’s not the first education candidate with promises to make marginalised students’ academic experience easier, Cummins has a number of fresh ideas, including reviving modular billing and giving students an advance ready-reckoner of how much they’ll have to spend on the likes of lab coats.
Leaning heavily on her experience of taking a year off books, Cummins has done her homework on modular billing – which was mooted some years ago as a replacement for going off books. Going off books, she said, is inaccessible for many students due to the high fees involved and the lack of access to student services. While it was clear that she was genuinely passionate about getting modular billing back on the table, she was somewhat unclear on how she plans to see it through.
All candidates were reluctant to mention the pandemic – but if any sabbat has to deal with the aftermath of lockdown next year, it will be education. Trinity has been vague on whether it has any long-term plans to retain virtual lectures, but Cummins favours the retention of “hyflex – not hybrid” learning. She pointed out that extensive training will be needed for staff on how to record high-quality lectures, but, again, was vague was her plan for working with College to realise this.
Arguably Cummins’s most ambitious plan is to take on the Foundation Scholarship exams (Schols). Returning again to equity and fairness, she argued that Schols in its current form is “highly inaccessible”. However, after her declarations that she won’t make “sexy” campaign promises, reforming such a centuries-old institution seems to contradict her message.
Overall however, Cummins was steady and her experience is clear. However, if she is to truly convince students that her plans are more substantial than sexy, she will have to prove she is trustworthy enough not to bog voters down with details of her plans for the inner workings of Trinity.
Welfare
This year’s welfare and equality candidates stood up with similar experiences and aims, but markedly different approaches to putting themselves forward. Cúnla Morris, a previous Oifigeach na Gaeilge and member of both the union’s LGBT and disability committees spoke convincingly, saying they had “already worked to take care of you… I’m not finished making time for you”.
Chloe Staunton took a more measured approach, outlining her extensive experience in “casework campaigns and committees”.
Noticeably absent from either candidate was mention of College’s counselling or health services, both of which have seen long wait lists plague students throughout the pandemic.
Missing, too, was the cost-of-living crisis and student hardship. While both candidates pitched themselves and their experience, neither meaningfully addressed the enormity of the challenges facing students. Predictably, the candidates prioritised sentimentality over policy, with both content to campaign on their qualifications and personality rather than their manifesto points.
When quizzed on plans to collaborate with Ents to make nights out more suitable for students’ well-being, both candidates responded with commitments to fixing the inaccessibility of venues in Dublin. Morris raised the issue of prioritising the issue even when the most popular venues might not be the most accessible.
Little separates the candidates so far policy-wise, so hopefully the next hustings should be more telling. The two are leaning heavily into the need to be approachable and caring, but this could result in a failure to address the more somber aspects of the role: students on the verge of dropping out, students in financial difficulty or students suffering mental-health crises.
Communications
Once again, this year’s candidate for communications and marketing officer Julie Smirnova is running uncontested. Smirnova gave a speedy but comprehensive overview of her priorities, and while she has some innovative ideas for the tired issue of student engagement, she plans on relying on the foundations laid by previous communications officers when it comes to securing sponsorship.
Smirnova focused heavily on her experience of graphic design and public relations in Trinity Vincent de Paul (VDP) and as TCDSU’s citizenship officer. She didn’t give the same detail of her issues with the union’s weekly email as she has previously, but did express concerns about its current social media strategy. “If students aren’t paying attention to the socials, the weekly emails, council, the referenda, we need to meet them where they are.”
She made use of a well-worn cliche of sabbatical hopefuls, declaring that the next comms officer would need to build a union that everyone’s a part of” and take it “out of House Six onto campus”.
Reflecting her far-reaching view of the role, drawing on her experience in VDP says that grassroots engagement is key “to large-scale political activism”.
Smirnova affirmed the union’s current financial stability but maintained that “a rainy day fund will always come in handy.” She wants to “protect partnerships established by past officers and build new relationships” with local businesses “that align with SU’s values and goals”.
Smirnova won’t have a hard time showing voters that she’s able to communicate well with students and create effective visuals. But voters should question her lack of plans for securing sponsorship – while the union is enjoying financial health currently, sponsors can pull out with no warning and spending can quickly spiral if it becomes a union priority.
Ents
Following a somewhat chaotic series of speeches, it seems that sustainability, accessibility and safety will be the main focus of the ents race this year. All three candidates seem committed to the role beyond showing students a good time, presumably in light of Ireland’s recent grappling with violence against women and gender minorities.
Nadia A boasted her experience in event management, both within and outside of Trinity, joking that she had probably been to more Ents events than lectures. She appeared confident in her success, declaring: “As your future ents officer, I promise that I will plan an unforgettable year.”
As a queer woman of colour, diversity and inclusion was unsurprisingly a key pillar of her speech. She pledged to introduce non-alcoholic events and cultural events such as marking Holi or Eid, in collaboration with other societies. Both she and Ross Donnelly emphasised their commitment to helping students get back to Trinity Hall safely following a night out, but Donnelly also spoke of using the spaces available on campus, such as lecture halls and classrooms.
Donnelly’s speech, at times muddled by his comedy, was largely focused around his plans to create events that students will remember, while also promising to create a wide network of events officers to ensure that events are creative, inclusive, and draw from everyone’s experiences. “Trinity Ents is not a singular vision, nor should it be,” he said, adding that he plans to “bring our unique new events to the forefront”.
Max Lynch’s used the opportunity to hammer home his manifesto points, advocating for a broad range of events and committed to collaborating with diversity officers in order to build inclusivity in ents.
Both A and Lynch discussed plans to ensure Ents committee members are properly trained in order to increase safety on nights out. The former focused specifically on training female security and first aiders, while Lynch took a wider approach with plans for committee members to undergo “a comprehensive course on sexual and racial assault and bystander training”.
Lynch was complementary of previous Ents initiatives, with aims to continue holding film screenings and outdoor events. “Trinity Ents did the hard job of re-introducing Dublin to the nightlife scene, but I want to take it from here and bring Trinity Ents back to the max.”
In response to questions, Donnelly and Lynch focused on reinforcing their manifesto points, while A used the opportunity to differentiate herself from the other candidates, noting that she is the only candidate to have attended a Trinity Ball – drawing laughs from the crowd.
Although sustainability and safety were buzzwords from all three candidates, they all appeared to be pitching themselves as quintessential party animals, while also attempting to address the more sobering sides of events management in 2022. This may spell trouble for all of them, but it may also force them to confront the less glamorous aspects of the role and appeal to voters by pledging to prioritise them.
Editor of The University Times
As the first uncontested candidate for editor of The University Times since 2019, Mairead Maguire returned largely to the arguments of her predecessors today. Heavily emphasising her prior experience and commitment to the paper – “it has been at the core of my college experience” – she mostly stuck to tried-and-tested points of its function as a service for students, and the perennial need to diversify its staff.
Contending that the primary role of The University Times is to keep “students and staff informed”, Maguire cited a number of stories it has broken this year, concerning issues such as the closure of the Science Gallery, “student living conditions, College governance or exams”. The candidate is shaping up to run on a platform of journalistic skill and a commitment to accessibility, but she failed to mention other omnipresent grievances with the paper, such as its cost to the union or the environmental impact of its printed papers.
Pledging to make The University Times more approachable, Maguire made a number of rapid-fire commitments to ensuring new recruits “don’t get lost in the hierarchy”. She plans to appoint an Ents Editor – something previous editors have attempted under various guises – as well as a mentorship programme for LGBTQ+ students and students with disabilities. While she didn’t mention it specifically, it’s hard not to assume that the subtext for Maguire’s commitment to inclusion is borne from the paper’s failure to cut ties with the Irish Times. She escaped questioning on this today, but it’s highly likely to come up at equality hustings tomorrow.
She was, however quizzed on a longer-standing bugbear of students’: why the paper’s deputy editor always goes on to be elected editor, Maguire was firm in her assertion that she doesn’t “think it’s a coincidence”, but added that “if somebody else has a better vision or has more experience then I would absolutely want them to run”.
An honest answer, perhaps, but one that could result in her undermining herself if she doesn’t convince the electorate that, this year, she is the best candidate.
Since this afternoon’s hustings, a campaign to re-open nominations for the race has emerged, referencing a claim in a Trinity News article that “confidential information from a UT article was leaked” by the candidate. Maguire has said the story is “wholly false and defamatory”.
Ailbhe Noonan, Michael Archer, Claire Stalhuth, Maebh Gallagher, Emer Tyrrell and Seán Cahill also contributed reporting to this piece.
