SU by-election results

Publication YearIssue Date 

Five new members were elected to the Student's Union.

Unofficial SU by-election results were announced Fri., Oct. 24. Birju Dattani and Kassim Amery were elected as Academic Commissioners. Janet Downie won the position of Fine Arts Faculty Representative, Jennifer Brause won Social Work Faculty Representative and Heidi Olson won Kinesiology Faculty Representative.

Voter turnout was higher this year than in past few years with a total of 947 ballots cast. About 30 votes were cast in last year's by-election.

Dattani and Amery ran together and built their campaign around increased student input and accessibility to the SU.

"I've been here four years now and the way I feel [the SU] has dealt with me, I've been intimidated," said Dattani. "It shouldn't be a popularity contest, it should be about the issues."

Dattani promotes the formation of ad-hoc committees to get students more actively involved in the decision making process of the SU.

"The idea would be to approach people who have that interest and say 'hey, you can get involved,'" said Dattani. "I mean, you ask the token student their opinion, but I don't think that has an impact like when you get them to roll up their sleeves and get involved."

Dattani and Amery also plan to increase awareness about SU programs offered to undergraduates.

"I can make myself open to students if they have any issues," said Amery. "We've got vast amounts of resources for students. We'll try to spread the word around that these services are available."

Downie pledges to create awareness for the plight of her faculty in the face of continued budget cuts.

"The departments need to start uniting," said Downie. "We need to come together as a faculty. In five years there will not be Fine Arts programs here."

Brause sees her role as Social Work Representative as reconnecting her faculty to the university as a whole.

"For myself, [the campaign] was very grassroots because we're such a small faculty," she said. "Everybody knows everybody else."

Olsen was not present at the announcement.

Any appeals to the election review board must be filed by Fri., Oct. 31 by 4:30 p.m. Contact Chief Returning Officer Shuvaloy Majumdar at or 220-7771 with any questions.




"It shouldn't be a popularity contest, it should be about the issues." Newsflash Dattani, an election IS a popularity contest. Perhaps if the wireless internet connection had never been invented your popularity might have been better tested in the by-election.

Your missing the point of his comment Cindy. He said it "SHOULDN'T" be a popularity contest; he didn't contest the fact that it WAS one. In a by-election where there are 12 candidates, you need to use your frickin brain!! I think the wireless internet tactic was innovative. Hell if it were me running, I'd take it any way I could get it.

Whenever a candidate shows innovation, there are those sore losers who are quick to argue about the results because they did not think about the idea first. An election is about the ability to win votes by any legal means possible, and the thing that distinguished the winning candidates from the other TWELVE was the level of innovation and professionalism they portrayed. I'm also willing to bet that most elections would not be as popular as they are today without the invention of the paper and pen, and without the invention of the motor vehicle to drive to polling station. We're all damned with these crazy inventions! Go back to the middle ages if you don't agree with todays advanced society - or better yet, move to

Cheaters, directly or vicariously, will pay the consequences. God knows the truth.

The display at SLC tonight was shameful. Not only do we have a spineless CRO unwilling to stop a faulty election, but candidates who openly flaunted their abuse of the system. Is it anywonder that we aren't taken seriously by anybody these days?

I would not blame the CRO and I wouldn't blame the candidates either. The fact of the matter was that the SU implemented an e-election without bothering to make sure this sort of thing wouldn't happen. Their myopia might have cost students, but there should be rules in place to prevent this from happening. The sad part is that the candidates did not break any rules. They abused nothing because there was no apparatus to prevent this.

Ahh, but they abused the spirit of the game by conducting themselves in a manner incompible with being good representatives.

Well...I dunno. These guys might have abused the so called "spirit" of the game. There are other members of council who have successfully been brought in front of the review board and penalized. I don't see much complaining about that going on. Is that the conduct of an elected official? I still don't understand what these guys did that was so wrong. Does someone wanna explain it?