The first night of debates has already proven this election to be an interesting one. With discussions being conducted via Zoom, unpredictable seems to be the word for the occasion.
Liberation
Candidates: Jasmin Deans (she/her), Clare Steele (she/her), Shona ‘Sho’ Tulloch (she/they), Wiktoria Wrzyszcz (she/her), Jordan Frith (he/him)
Whilst all five candidates for this role agreed on the welcome change to the previous title of Women’s Officer, Jasmin Deans made herself known by claiming that she “would never want to be the white saviour” in pursuing this Liberation role. Candidate Clare Steele also saw this change as a positive development and thinks that “this isn’t just a position to start talking to people about the issues, we need to actually work towards something tangible”. Shona Tulloch said it was “a long time coming” after having fought for it as part of her role on the BME committee, and Wiktoria Wrzyszcz said she is “really excited” about this change in helping to ensure more groups are represented.
The changes to this role means that it is no longer confined only to those identifying as women and an interesting candidate in this debate was Jordan Frith, previous LGBTQ+ SU Council Rep. Frith hopes to pull ahead in the election by emphasizing that his “role being a cis, white male is to be a good ally”. He would like to continue with his work improving LGBTQ+ participation in sport and said he is here to push boundaries.
The accessibility of the University counselling service was a source of debate, with Deans saying she is keen for its reform. She said it is “absolutely vital” staff are trained to help with any mental health problem or disability, having been told herself that she was “too serious” for support. Rival Wrzyszcz agreed, saying that she has had a similar experience with the service, while Tulloch said this is also something she has been pushing for.
Asked what support they can offer without relying on societies to represent students, Tulloch said she is keen to use her lived experience as a black, queer, disabled, female student as an advantage. She wants to make university courses more accessible for those with hidden disabilities, highlighting that disabled students were pushing for teaching online prior to the pandemic.
Steele said she would provide informational, emotional and practical support to students and when asked about her policy to spread out deadlines more evenly across semesters, said she plans to lobby departments to enforce this change.
Wrzyszcz wants to make sure everyone feels included and safe in Sheffield, and has focused her campaign on accessibility in terms of creating a volunteer-led ‘walk-home scheme’ to help “people get back home, even from the library” without needing to walk on their own.
Both Frith, as a qualified Samaritans listener, and Deans, in her role running a safe house for modern slavery survivors, said they would use their communication skills to ensure they are approachable in the role.
International and Community
Candidates: Taylor Ogle, Lizhi Hao, Brad Racette, Eileen Woo, Ningjia Liu (Skye)
Connectivity issues seemed to hinder some of the communication in the International and Community Officer debate, but it kicked off with the four candidates outlining why their experience would help them in the role.
Taylor Ogle said she has learned a lot through the difficulties she has faced in employment support and financial flexibility and is keen to help others through these processes. Having studied in Korea, Malaysia and China, Lizhi Hao said he knows how to deal with culture shock. Brad Racette comes from a healthcare background and has been an active participant in the Global campus team, while Eileen Woo said as someone who is outgoing and a good listener, she is keen for cultural exchange.
How the candidates would make Sheffield feel like home was perhaps the biggest debate of the evening. Ogle set out her plans to implement an international-home student mentor scheme in order to help international students feel more connected in Sheffield. Racette and Hao had similar ideas around the promotion of food as a way of making international students feel more at home. A key part of Eileen Woo’s campaign has been creating more online activities in order to “provide more opportunities for international students to connect”.
Specific policies focused on helping students adjust to life in the UK. Ogle said job opportunities do not suit visa requirements and would like to train a member of staff in the JobShop to help with this. Hao and Woo agreed that policies need to facilitate communication between international students. Hao would implement a language exchange and Woo said after a “tough year”, opportunities to communicate online need to continue. Racette also mentioned the pandemic, saying it has led to a loss of connections and wants to make sure international students are given the information they need.
Education
Candidates: Ella Mendham, Savannah Hanson, Lauren Jenkins (she/her), Joe Rebak
The debate between the Education Officer candidates felt more like a friendly discussion than cut-throat debate with all three candidates expressing very similar views.
The discussion kicked off around what the purpose of the role was, with Mendham choosing to focus on the approachability of SU officers, saying that currently they “aren’t as approachable as I’d personally like them to be”. Hanson agreed, saying it’s “more than putting your face on the SU building”. Jenkins said a good Education Officer will push through barriers when enforcing change and Rebak thought similarly, saying “we need someone who is going to stand up for the rights of students”.
All four candidates faced the inevitable question of how they would tackle the effect of Covid-19 on students’ education and the general consensus seemed to be communication with the University. Asked about how she would mitigate the impact of the pandemic, Mendham said she was purposefully not specific in her manifesto to explore all options but noted that the reweighting of grades would be “fantastic”.
Part of the debate focused on teaching staff, with Jenkins wanting to see a higher standard set for personal tutors across all departments and Hanson calling for better IT training for lecturers.
Asked about how they would tackle the persistent inequalities between white and students from ethnic minority backgrounds, all agreed that every student is different which the elected officer must be careful to recognise.
Hanson said she is passionate about decolonisation and would like to set up student inclusion committees to ensure underrepresented groups feel represented whereas Rebak is very much in support of “concrete actions” and wants to see “more teaching staff hired from diverse backgrounds”.
Day 1 has shown to be a strong start to these SU officer debates, with all candidates seeming very confident. Voting opens in four days on Monday 22nd March at 10am and will close on Wednesday 24th March at 5pm.
Debate coverage between the other SU candidates will be coming soon so make sure you’re keeping up to date with the latest information from the elections by following Forge Press at forgepress.org
You can find all the candidates’ manifestos here or visit https://su.sheffield.ac.uk/student-leadership/officer-elections to find out more.
Image: Forge TV YouTube
