To the OUSA Exec: I am sorry for failing you. Let me explain.
As the news editor last year, I sat in on (almost) every weekly OUSA Exec meeting. For the most part, it was all very boring once the thrill of the invite wore off. The process was painfully formal, with each step of the meeting signalled by a “motion” that Donna (OUSA secretary and Mother) would dutifully note down. They even had to pass a motion giving Donna “speaking rights” each time. I was only given speaking rights once. The minutes from these meetings are actually publicly available on the OUSA website, not that anyone reads them. I barely did, and it was my job – though I wasn’t quite bright enough to realise it.
In between scrolling through Facebook on my laptop, pretending to take the odd note or two – jotting down important dates etc., but mostly to make fun of the Exec members’ verbal faux pas – I noticed that a recurring challenge the Exec spoke about was how to increase engagement. The Admin Vice President was bending over backwards trying to get more students to engage with the work of the Exec. That’s the whole point of their roles, after all: they’re there to represent students. And that can be a bit difficult if students aren’t telling them what they need.
A quick flick through Critic’s archives will tell you that the worry about apathy towards student politics isn’t new. In the ‘60s – interspersed with letters to the editor wailing over girls wearing pants on campus and racist opinion pieces shitting on immigrants – Critic was also reporting on lack of engagement. There’ll always be peaks and troughs, but 2023 was a deep fucking pit for student politics. Four out of ten of the Exec positions were uncontested, including the President, a position that in the past attracted controversy rivalling that of the US election (well, not really, but you get the idea).
In 2017, the race was so tight between presidential candidates that there were tiffs over how much each spent on their respective campaigns. Critic was even dragged into the foray with accusations of “undermining the integrity” of the election with reports allegedly showing bias towards certain candidates. At the forum last year, Keegan sat on stage in front of her homies and spun a yarn about pelicans in a tight race between her and Mr Vote of No Confidence.
This is where the apology part comes in. I am sorry that it took a summer of reading through past years’ issues of Critic Te Ārohi, which dutifully reported on the goings on of OUSA and documented various bits and gags, to get it in my thick skull that it’s Critic’s job (not the AVP’s) to educate students on what OUSA gets up to and why you should care. One of the major reasons why Critic was created was to function as a fourth estate for OUSA (like a watchdog, for those who haven't taken MFCO103).
At the end of the day, this is actually an apology to students. Without Critic fulfilling its function as the nark of OUSA, the 2023 Exec ran amuck, largely neglecting their duties toward the end of the year, and being paid their honorariums anyway. An honorarium is like a salary for elected positions, paid only on the basis that members are actually doing their jobs. Each quarter, Exec members write reports on what they’ve been up to and vote on whether everyone should be paid.
The Political Rep was paid her honorarium despite being absent at most meetings, choosing instead to Zoom in from the comfort of her bed. An odd habit from the Political Rep in an election year. A stern word was had with the Welfare Rep who copied and pasted her quarterly reports and didn’t fulfil repeated promises of drafting a sexual misconduct policy. She also literally admitted to me at a party towards the end of the year that she had “checked out of the role months ago.”
So, I’m sorry. I am absolutely sure that Keegan being the President alone will increase engagement just through her shit-eating aura, and we’ll be following the Exec’s every move like a chihuahua yapping at their heels. But only if I’m given speaking rights.