When meeting with the student programs officer (SPO) candidates, one thing was clear to me: that Mac McIntosh’s platform was thoroughly researched, well thought-out, and very implementable.
During the debate, McIntosh’s answers were thoughtful and deliberate, cementing his candidacy and dedication as the incoming student programs officer. While persons in power deliberately manipulating the vote is inexcusable, I want to point out the absolute heartbreak I would feel if it invalidates McIntosh’s win. I believe McIntosh was a favourite coming into the election – he was mine since I had my interview with him – and not once had anyone reached out to me personally about my vote and who to vote for.
Yes, there was nepotism at play. To then see a worthy candidate – and winner! – be collateral and thus implicated as incompetent, or having only won due to nepotism, is simply disheartening.
No one wrote his platform for him, nor did they tell him how to answer during the debate. To then cheapen his campaign and win due to nepotism would be to undermine his dedication and passion he showed throughout this election. It is very clear that the University Students' Council is far from perfect. Nepotism runs abundant and I strongly recommend next year’s council to examine and re-examine this system thoroughly.
I believe Mac McIntosh would have won regardless; to thus see his win cheapened due to forces I assume he did not control nor ask for is saddening and hurtful.
— Jaclyn Siou, Music IV
Faculty of Music Students' Council President 2016-17