Hyland’s platform is a smorgasbord of tidbits thrown together in an attempt to speak to as many different student issues as possible. Nothing revolutionary in other words.

Many of Hyland’s platform points bear a remarkable resemblance to other platforms in the past. If you’re going to copy other people’s suggestions, it’s a good idea to make sure they’re worth pursuing.

Hyland’s decision to consult only select “key stakeholders” when writing his platform costs him a lot, as several of his major points are already being taken care of by this year’s USC board, especially the grocery store — which the vice-president finance is already negotiating a potential agreement on.

In an effort to avoid the appearance of bias, we won’t delve too much into the whole “e-Gazette” concept, other than to say such decisions come under the purview of our internal management.

The “rebranding” of USC services, in principle, is a good idea. The USC could use a wider public profile when it comes to retail operations like the Wave or Mustang Alley.

However, the vague term “rebranding” could mean a whole lot when applied to services like Pride Western or the Women’s Issues Network — especially when both groups have shown a desire to remain distinct from the broader USC.

Ultimately, Hyland’s platform is a classic case of overreaching. He fails to provide concrete solutions to retail services and clubs, which instead we are promised will be “reviewed” or “analyzed.”