on student politics

--------------------

In the most recent edition of our school newspaper, yet another salvo has been fired in the ongoing war of words between the Obiter and the venerable Chair of our Student Caucus. To us amused (and bemused) readers, it just epitomizes the ultimate “forbidden thought”: student politicians and student newspaper editors can sometimes take themselves way too seriously (on the other hand, mere contributors of articles always hold the higher ground). Despite operating under the guise of legitimate critique and public discussion over issues of accountability, it’s not difficult to discern the mutual dislike between these warring factions. However, it’s entirely understandable, as a matter of civility, political correctness, and concerns over defamation, for everyone involved to have attempted to maintain a measure of decorum.

On a positive note, this has revived some interest (at least, for those of us here that pay attention to such things) in student government and the relevance of these institutions to our community. It is also interesting to note that, just around the time the election writ was dropped, the Pandora’s box was opened about dissolving Student Caucus and/or merging it with the Legal & Lit Society (I would have said “collapsing” or “folding in”, but that’s another debate). As we again head into the popularity contest known as student government elections, we should really be examining and discussing the purpose and mandate of our would-be representatives. It would definitely be for everyone’s benefit to understand why exactly it is that we spend so much time caviling over certain issues when pragmatism would suggest simple and straightforward solutions.

However, let there be no mistake: I have absolute respect for anyone and everyone that’s been involved in student government and/or is thinking about running for the upcoming elections – having been marginally involved this year with academic politics has cemented my abiding esteem for those who care enough about this community and are trying to make a difference. That said, we need to ensure that the individuals we are going to elect can actually do what it is they say they’ll do and what we entrust them to do – as demonstrated by the admissions policy debate, even those with the best intentions can sometimes become ineffective as a result of the surrounding political climate. We need individuals who have the skills and experience necessary to navigate the landmines of academic politics, who can build coalitions and bridge gaps between differing interests, and who can be entrusted (in the broadest sense of the term) – and make no mistake, this is ultimately a question of trust – to represent the interests of the student body. We need people with vision and perspective, not simply those with “pet projects” or a single-issue focus. We need listeners and doers, the type of people who can strike the appropriate balance between consulting and acting. And we need people who are in it not for their own personal/professional advancement, but because they have a demonstrated commitment and desire to make a genuine contribution to the Osgoode community.

Yes, student politicians and student editors can sometimes take themselves too seriously. And yet there are times when they – and these issues – need to be taken seriously. As the Osgoode election looms, let’s scrutinize those holding themselves out for office and ask ourselves: can I take this person seriously enough to see them as my representative?

--------------------