EUSA Presidential Round Table

Just over a week before the polls officially opened, The Journal got the three presidential candidates together for a discussion giving them the chance to outsmart, outwit and generally disagree with each other without the constraints of the debate.

Once the conversation started flowing however, and the head-nodding got more and more vigorous, it soon became clear these three have a lot more in common than appearances first suggest.

Laura-Jayne Baker, sat up straight and perched on the edge of her chair, was keen and alert while Liz Rawlings, slightly more at ease with the format, never failed to impress with her extensive knowledge of the issues that were raised.

Tom Crewther, as the largely unknown candidate, surpassed expectations. After a rather unconventional approach to his campaign he had given the impression of your typical happy-go-lucky candidate and yet with his pint in hand, and the occasional witty remark, he earned his right to remain alongside the race favourites.

Blissfully unaware of the controversial and chaotic events that would occur at the GM the very next evening, student apathy was the first issue up for debate. “I don’t think students are apathetic” insists Liz, “I just think we need to engage the students more.” This, the first of many sentiments to be echoed by her opposition.

“This is exactly what I want to base my entire campaign around,” announces Tom. “Every week we would release a statement stating exactly what we’ve done so the students will feel more involved.”

Laura-Janye interjects: “To an extent that already happens.” Responding to blank looks all round she adds, “Well it’s online but no one really goes on the EUSA website that much.”

Laura-Jayne has been involved in EUSA since her first year and was also Freshers' Week co-ordinator last summer.

Tom continues, “I mean the GM only having 6 or 7 motions submitted? Out of this huge university it seems strange. It’s the tiny changes, like nicer cider on tap that should be heard as well.”

“Hopefully the online referenda will fix that,” pipes up Laura-Jayne; an interesting remark to say the least as she controversially abstained from the vote the following night.

Tom is a first year Physics student and is completely new to EUSA. The Journal asked whether this would pose as a disadvantage: “Well I don’t think I am campaigning harder, I definitely don’t think I’ve got enough posters up.

"Someone new and fresh could be good to make the whole system work in a different way. When I started getting involved I noticed this EUSA group of people and it is a little bubble in itself to an extent.”

Laura-Jayne chooses to stay notably quiet as Liz says: “I 100 percent agree. It’s a really tough place EUSA, and the bubble gets to you, the people get to you and it is really difficult to get things done with that mindset.”

Liz ran a strong campaign last year and missed out on the presidency by less than 200 votes. This is her first year involved in EUSA and as post-graduate convener.

Tom refocuses on the original question: “So you’re asking is my lack of experience a disadvantage? In an ideal world this wouldn’t be a question. Because everyone has a voice and if they can get enough supporters behind them they should be able to run.”

The comradery continues with Liz turning to him and saying, “That’s why I’m so glad that you’re running, it’s nice to have a different voice.

"This year I’ve got five people to run who haven’t before. I think the students will agree with me and say the bubble is destructive. I started from outside last year and I hope I’ve stayed true to those values.”

This may be the first year the EUSA elections are without a candidate with an ulterior political agenda. Laura-Jayne notes, “Fair enough we don’t have personal political aspirations but that is not to say we don’t have the understanding of the importance of politics.

"If I get elected I will push for students to vote on matters that directly affect students regardless of political parties.”

“Yeah” Tom muses, “I don’t think we’re like that. I don’t see myself going into real life politics.”

Reacting to a comment made about Thomas Graham’s recent trips, Liz says: “You have different types of presidents. National student issues are obviously important but at the same time I won’t be flying to China. I want to spend the majority of time with Edinburgh students and that means being here on campus.”

Talk of Thomas brings the conversation back round to the GM with Laura-Jayne making the point, "It’s great that people came last time but I think everyone left a little bit disenfranchised.”

“We don’t know that everyone was disenfranchised” objects Liz. Finally a moment for potential disagreement but Laura-Jayne is quick to cover her tracks “I’m not saying that everyone did at all Liz.”

Tom adds, “And anyway, in my opinion, all the right decisions were made.”

Unable to mask the surprised tone to her voice, Liz once again turns to her left, “Were you there?” to which Tom confirmed that indeed he was and a nervous silence follows while we all take note of this questioning of his political engagement.

The next item up for discussion is the teaching and research trade off. Liz’s experience comes to the fore again as she mentions that the league tables are assessed on the research and not the teaching side of things.

“Edinburgh University has for too long prioritised research over teaching and teaching standards have slipped. I’m not going to settle for that,” she insists.

Tom is keen not to rule out the importance of research, raving over the Physics department as Laura-Jayne interupts, “I’ve noticed in the last year there have certainly been improvements in the Politics department.”

Liz replies, “I agree we’re moving in the right direction but a lot of ground needs to be covered.”

Rounding up their collective thoughts, Tom suggests, “The key is employing academics who have a dual love of teaching and research.”

Keeping on the academic issues, the recent news of the possible Edinburgh and ECA merger is something the new president-elect will have to deal with: “As long as they keep their own representative structure, I’m all for it,” says Liz, as Laura-Jayne exclaims, “They can liven up our walls a bit!

“They are quite an individual body and I don’t think that will be lost.”

Tom suggests that, “when you combine two excellent institutions it can benefit everyone as long as you go in to it as partners”.

We’re nearing the end of the discussion and at this point no striking differences between the three of them have emerged. This lack of difference is put to them. “This is what annoys me about wider politics,” says Laura-Jayne, the first to respond, “Opposition for opposition’s sake!”

“Yeah!” Liz fittingly agrees.

Tom, last to give his thoughts says, “We all want what’s best for the students. It’s our methods that differ and we do have different personalities, that’s for sure!”

Laura suggests, “If you’re looking for differences, the main difference is the different level of involvement we’ve each had in EUSA. Our agendas for the year ahead are led by our individual experiences.”

Liz shapes the main focus of each of their campaigns, “Laura wants to put students first, welfare being a main priority, and I want to focus on more educational matters and I don’t want to speak for Tom...”

“I want to make EUSA more fun and engaging for everyone and I think you want someone different to run a different institution,” says Mr Crewther, the man behind the alternative campaign videos.

You’re the candidate for reform then, Tom? “Yeah, I like that one.”

After spending an hour in their company, it is evident this has potential to be a tight race. Liz certainly seems sussed after a year to rework her manifesto. Laura-Jayne is ready for the challenge and Tom is determined to change EUSA for the better once and for all.

They may agree on a lot of things but this is indicative of the kind of overarching issues facing students in the coming years. One thing is clear: they are all aware of those challenges - some exhibiting more understanding than others.