We already have “Proportional Representation” at UoM.
I find myself returning to the my original post/rant on Prof. Aquilina ToM piece, and his opinions on the KSU Electoral system. More specifically his belief that the KSU statute needs to be changed to allow for proportional representation, just like real world politics. It just left me wondering whether he actually understands the system he’s talking about or not.
First and foremost, we are talking about the executive branch of student governance on campus, not parliament. How should the 11 executive roles represent voting habits like a parliament? Last I checked we were voting on people to fill roles, the fact that they are nominated by SDM or Pulse (when they decide to participate again) is irrelevant. Yes people block vote, which is moronic in my opinion, but at the end of the day, we are technically voting for individuals who believe that they can fulfil a specific role better than the other guy, an electorate that doesn’t see that is the problem of the student body and not the system, which doesn’t need to be made even more complicated just to say it’s fairer for the loser.
Let us not forget, that we already have “proportional representation.” There are structures such as KPS, KE and even the admin forum, which can collectively be considered the parliamentary branch of student governance. This is where all organisations, who’s executives are also elected and represent multiple students for different criteria, whether it’s as a Faculty Organisation (which tend to be better positioned to represent students of various courses), or as a interest group (whether its social, sport or otherwise). Let us not forget the Faculty Reps, who also have a say within KSU’s structures. Are they not representatives of the student body’s various segments?
To make KSU’s executive “more representative”, will only artificially inflate the importance of organisations such as Pulse and SDM, whilst further reducing the overall importance of other student organisations (which should count more, especially faculty based organisations), and worst of all, only further enforce the SDM-PN and Pule-MLP Stereotypes.
All this will do is create even more apathy from the general student population towards an electoral system and structure. Which, if we’re being honest, is a system that cannot afford even more apathy. The system isn’t broken, it’s just become obnoxiously boring and almost entirely irrelevant for anyone who isn’t directly participating (ie the other 80–90% who don’t vote for KSU).
Till next time,
— — — — — — —
This is part of a series of Blog posts which form part of a Synoptic Portfolio Project for a Final Year Communications student at the University of Malta.