Political organisations have a place in SRCs

By Amanda Ngwenya

Kate Wilkinson’s Thought Leader article that SRCs are for students not politicians provides a good platform off which to make the case for the inclusion of political organisations in Student Representative Council (SRC) elections because it posits the classical fallacy that attends the debate. The fallacy being that political organisations further some external national mandate as opposed to championing student issues. This fallacy arises mostly out of the growing detachment of many young South Africans from politics and consequently the lack of political astuteness that results from this phenomenon.

This comment is not intended to offend but to be candid about the nature of the opposition. One who cannot identify the ideological values at war in debates over access to higher education, admissions policies, funding models and curriculum development and the link these issues have with other national discussions outside the higher education sector will find themselves strategically weakened. Higher education issues do not exist in a vacuum. There is a contestation of ideas: entitlement vs merit, individual identity vs group identity, big government vs limited government, dependence vs empowerment, institutionally funded religious bodies vs privately funded religious bodies, freedoms vs ideas of respect and dignity. These are very crude divisions of the ideological terrain but they are at play not only in the politics that happens “out there” but inside many institutions as well. An SRC that fails to connect the dots between student issues and the national discourse fails its students.

The first thing to point out is that Wilkinson does little to convince us that an independent mandate serves students better than a national mandate from a political organisation. In fact as far as logical reasoning goes a position that is the culmination of analysis, debate and criticism from a broad pool of students from a number of institutions would serve students better than one which derives from the fancies of a single student.

Further, in Wilkinson’s mind student issues merely provide a useful bandwagon to lobby support for a political organisation but in reality they are of no real concern to political student leaders. This notion too must be dismissed as wanton opinion. Students who contest SRC elections under political banners have just as much an interest in the governing of the institution as any other student. There are many students in political organisations who are committed to certain ideas and ways of being in the world not for the sake of intellectual posturing but because those ideas shape and impact on their lives in very real and tangible ways. When I join an organisation that gives prominence and meaningful recognition to individual identity and pursuits I do so not because I like talking about the idea of individual liberties but because I expect the idea to find practical expression in my daily life.

There are important beneficial features that political organisations bring to student governance. One of these important features is certainty or rather predictability over a wide range of issues. It makes little sense to vote for the guy who promises a more environmentally friendly campus. While I may like that proposition I need to know what value set he offers so that I know how he will represent me on other issues. The last thing I want is a racist, fascist environmentalist who sells himself as only an environmentalist. Organisations tend to have a history of responses to issues and in that way bring a measure of stability to student governance that independent students do not.

It is true that by joining a student political organisation and in partaking in its activities one might have the opportunity to meet and impress figures in the “parent” or “mother” party. Many independent students run for positions in student leadership as extra bullet points to buffer their CVs. The point is that there is always individual gain attached to being appointed or elected to a leadership position. I do not see why this is a problem nor why it is more acute in the case of students with political interests as opposed to other professional interests. At most it is an opportunity to build a profile it is not a big stepping stone or a guarantee to a successful political career.

It is also true that student political organisations have greater access to resources than independent students. I don’t find it necessary to defend, it being so basic, the right of people or organisations with legitimately gained resources to use them as they see fit. People must get the government of their choice. If voters choose to vote for the flashiest campaign then they have the right to do so. The institution must create equal platforms for candidates to present their ideas to students. Aside from institutionally created platforms candidates should be allowed to use whatever is at their disposal to win votes. And yes if you have an electorate that is apathetic and could not be bothered to investigate their options, the flashy campaign will win at the expense of the under-funded student with a better value proposition. I believe this to be right. But even if you do not agree this point does not justify the exclusion of political organisations from the SRC as reasonable limits may be imposed on spending.

To turn to Wilkinson’s last point of party lists — I am not sure which Student Representative Councils in the country are elected via party lists disclosed to students only after the election has taken place. That to me seems to be a fault of the electoral system used not the fault of political organisations. While UCT has a system of individual seats I do not disagree in principle with the concept of organisational seats as long as the organisation is forced to disclose their list prior to the election and for there to be stringent procedures for the removal and replacement of elected candidates. I am in firm agreement that a voter has a right to know whom they are voting into office as this ensures direct accountability. This is a useful debate to have but I am yet to hear convincing arguments for the exclusion of political organisations.

Amanda Ngwenya is the president of the Student Representative Council at the University of Cape Town. She writes in her personal capacity.