On Monday 21st of October leading up to the SRC elections, a representative from each running SRC party (Revive, Together Again, Left Action, 365 for SRC, Edge, and Spice Up) gathered to debate at the Patricia O’Shane Building. Initially, the audience was sparse, but by the end of the debate, supporting members of the parties crowded the room.
The debate was hosted by UNSW student publication Gamamari in partnership with the UNSW Debating Society who provided moderators for the debate, Sidharth Manoj Kumar and Nathan Choi. After acknowledgments and apologies, a representative from each party was given the floor to give an opening statement on their party’s vision. Each candidate’s statement is in alphabetical order below.
Annikka Burge, who was running for President and National Union of Students (NUS) Delegate represented Revive. Revive claimed to be an independent, student-focused party that is experienced within the SRC. The party is interested in bringing unity to the SRC.
Akash Nagarajan, who was running for General Secretary and NUS Delegate represented Together Again. Together Again “believes in a high-quality education for all UNSW students” as well as social mobility. They want to remove the trimester system at UNSW.
Ethan Lin, who ran for Ethno-Cultural Officer and Councillor A, represented Edge. Edge claimed to be a “proudly independent” party fighting for a more transparent campus, equitable access and just education. They want to hold university management and SRC accountable to students.
Hendrix Cunnea, who ran for Councillor A and NUS Delegate, represented Spice Up. According to Hendrix, Spice Up claimed to be an independent ticket that focuses on “practicality and pragmatism”. Spice Up argued that the function of the SRC is not to be a student activism body, and instead the SRC should be realistic and work closely with university management to deliver for students.
Jamie Tyers, who ran for Education Officer, NUS Delegate, and Councillor A represented Left Action. According to Jamie, “the reality is students have gone backwards.” Sydney is in a cost-of-living crisis, and there are urgent political issues such as the conflict in Palestine. Jamie accused the SRC of being absent while courses were cut and trimesters were implemented. Left Action are an activist ticket, and they believe “the SRC should be an activist body that fights for students”.
Pepsi Sharma, who was running for General Secretary represented 365 for SRC. Sharma claimed that 365 is an independent ticket that intends to contribute to the overall student experience. 365 hopes to end the Fit to Sit policy and “break up the two-party duopoly that has plagued the SRC for the past couple of years” and “put a little more diversity” into the SRC.
The Debate
The candidates were then asked a series of set questions. They were each given 1 minute to speak, after which a single candidate could choose to respond for 1 minute towards any of the other candidate’s policies. Interjections and unprofessional conduct were not permitted. Candidates were not to speak on topics irrelevant to the question.
Much of the student population does not keep up with, or is not interested in, the SRC. Why do you think this is, and what steps would you take to ensure the student body is more involved?
The Revive party offered improved marketing as a solution to this issue. Annikka suggested forums and sharing QR codes around campus.
Together Again also acknowledged the need for better marketing and said part of the apathy comes from the SRC fighting politically instead of collaborating with management.
Left Action claimed that the SRC is not known by students because it hasn’t been fighting for political issues that students actually care about. Jamie said, “the two speakers before me [Revive and Together Again] talk about this absence despite having run the SRC for the past two years. One of them named the ticket Revive as though they weren’t the ones that killed the thing.” This was followed by laughter from the audience. Jamie was asked by the moderators to keep civil and avoid making wide sweeping statements. Jamie also claimed that Left Action will not put up with the fact the university is a profit run institution, and that Left Action’s protesting creates change without dealing with the university management.
Edge believed that the SRC was not being involved enough with students. They suggested an SRC presence on WeChat, stalls with SRC representatives and an SRC Discord server.
365 pointed out the abysmal 4% voter turnout and suggested improved marketing for the SRC. 365 claimed that the reputation of the SRC was bad even with students who were aware of the SRC, seeing it as political pandering and resume boosting.
Spice Up argued the SRC minutes show that meetings are full of federal politics and arguing. They believed students were apathetic because the SRC meetings have nothing to do with the daily life of students.
Left Action volunteered to ask a question to the Spice Up candidate on why federal politics don’t matter when talking about student education, as federal legislation has changed education drastically in Australia through increasing the cost of Arts degrees.
Hendrix representing Spice Up clarified that federal politics do matter, but that the SRC should not promote ideological issues and should be involved primarily in the improvement of the educational experience.
Improving academic welfare is a shared interest among all the parties here, how will your respective groups achieve this goal?
Spice Up proposed to cap final exams at 50% weighting and have all assignments due by midnight.
365 proposed to abolish the Fit to Sit policy, improve access to recorded lectures, lobby against Arts faculty cuts and get rid of trimesters.
Edge agreed with the removal of trimesters and proposed universal short extensions of 1 day, subsidised placements and subsidised textbooks.
Left Action said that students were overloaded by the university, and that education should be free. They also called for the abolishment of the trimester system, pointing out that the other parties have supported trimesters in the past.
Together Again agreed with other speakers on the removal of trimesters. They proposed simple extensions on all courses and a 50% cap on exam weightings.
Revive also voiced their agreement with other candidate’s viewpoints, including the 50% cap and short extensions. They also proposed textbook equity scholarships, and brought up Revive’s previous accomplishments, like free menstrual products in UNSW bathrooms and mental health workshops.
Pepsi spoke to all candidates regarding the key issue with leaving trimesters being a lack of space on campus to run more classes, claiming 90% of spaces on campus are already being used. Spice Up’s candidate Hendrix responded that once university management stops seeing the SRC as a nuisance that “complain[s]” and “shut[s] down classes”, they would be able to work closely with them to find a solution.
COVID-19 has significantly impacted the way students attend universities, for example, more students are now attending lectures online than before, were these changes factored into structuring your policies for next year?
Revive spoke on the negative mental health impact of COVID-19 and wanted to bring back authentic human connection to the SRC. They emphasised flexible learning and policies to accommodate disabilities.
Together Again promoted online learning for neurodivergent students as well as students with long commute times. Online learning may be a solution to the space problem transitioning into semesters.
Left Action was against prioritising online learning as it has lowered the quality of university courses. They pointed out that the university controls the digital recordings and material the staff produce, and so staff can be cut when it suits the university. However, they do support hybrid learning to improve accessibility. Left Action aims to reverse the many course and staff cuts that are still in place from COVID-19.
Edge believed that online learning should be as smooth as in-person learning. They proposed a centralised database for lecture recordings, and that all recordings should have subtitles.
365 agreed with Edge that recordings should have subtitles. Lectures should be available online to allow flexible learning. Especially since COVID-19 is still around, staff and students should not be forced to take unnecessary risks to attend lectures. They proposed free vaccinations on campus.
Spice Up focused on mental health and preventing stress via academic policies. They supported flexible learning but wanted to prioritise in-person, community-based education for a vibrant campus environment.
Left Action asked a question broadly to the other candidates regarding their approach for collaboration with the university. Jamie questioned the fact that the issues brought up by candidates to be negotiated with UNSW are decisions that have been implemented by the university itself, so collaborating with management is not expected to be effective. He used the trimester transition in 2019, pointing out that the university is a for-profit business.
Revive responded by saying it is disingenuous to say that the SRC has effectively no impact over university management. Annikka used the example of short extensions for the direct positive impact of the SRC using pragmatic methods for change.
A few parties emphasise the student need for greater affordability, for example by reducing accommodation or public transport costs. What actions will you take to address these issues and how will you implement them?
Spice Up proposed textbook subsidies. Hendrix said, “the last thing students need currently is hundreds of dollars in SSAF fees, which just end up in the pockets of people who want to have activism on campus.”
365 jokingly suggested that surface parking areas on campus could be used for other things, like a go-kart track. They also mentioned the empowerment of the Inter-Residence Council to improve on-campus living.
Edge pushed for more affordable campus food options, public transport, and rents. They want more equity on campus and proposed that more of the SSAF fees go towards UNSW Health services.
Left Action proposed a cap on rents and student food expenditure, to be subsidised by the university. They argued for a $100/week rent cap on campus.
Together Again questioned the feasibility of a $100 rent cap, although they believed that the university should not be profiting off rent. They called for concession public transport rates for international and part-time students.
Revive agreed with the other candidates overall. They also proposed cheap lunches, similar to existing policies in European universities, as well as concession transport rates. They want to see a contract extension for Food Hub, which is utilised mainly by international students. They also want fully funded mental counselling and better subsidies for mental health.
Spice Up asked about how rent caps were going to be proposed without having dialogue with the university. Hendrix stated that only a small proportion of students live on campus. The audience responded to this claim with denials of the previous statement, and moderators stepped in to remind the audience to not interrupt.
Left Action responded that the university is not going to change their policies and therefore activism is the only way to fight for rent caps, which would also affect the rent rates in the adjacent areas positively for students. They also want the university to subsidise rents for other students, saying that “we should be demanding more, not less”.
365 clarified that a minority of students do live on campus, with Left Action responding by asking whether the minority of students who live on campus “don’t matter”. Jamie and Pepsi continued to discuss this issue until moderators intervened and proceeded with the next question of the debate.
How do you aim to ensure the student body is kept informed of SRC initiatives and movements, such as ensuring meeting minutes are uploaded?
Revive claimed that the SRC’s achievements and impact were not advertised enough to the student population. They also want more transparency and accountability through the SRC President enforcing the members of the board to abide by the requirements of the SRC.
Together Again noted that the SRC’s O-Week stall does not promote much visibility, and therefore they want to increase the SRC’s digital footprint. They argued that SRC meeting minutes should be publicly available and that the meetings should be in-person so that they can be accessible to students.
Left Action have fought for meetings to be uploaded, although they have not been regularly done so this year. They accused the previous General Secretary of purposefully not uploading the minutes to hide their voting records. Left Action is willing to put up physical posters on campus, to increase visibility.
Edge emphasised accountability and engagement in their proposed approach. They wanted to increase transparency regarding SRC meetings.
365 proposed monthly town halls where students can talk to members of the SRC, as well as using weekly email newsletters to increase visibility and upload minutes promptly. They said that students should be encouraged to be critical of the SRC and that student media needs to have the right to report on the SRC.
Spice Up claimed that the SRC has no social media presence. They proposed engaging with clubs and societies directly. Spice Up’s representative Hendrix said that students will be apathetic to organised protests, which evoked a negative reaction from the audience.
Left Action volunteered to ask a question to Spice Up, saying that the SRC members are there to make money and decorate their resume, claiming this results in a “fuck the Instagram page, it doesn’t really matter” mentality towards keeping people informed.
Spice Up responded cheekily, “Where was the question in that question?” which was met by laughter from the audience. Left Action struck back “Why are you laughing as people critique you?” No candidates decided to respond to Left Action’s statement.
How do you propose to support the wellbeing and mental health of UNSW students, and what tangible action will you take to make this a reality?
Revive pointed out that Michael Rahme, the 2024 President of the SRC and a member of the Disabilities Collective, ran welfare events. They promoted advocacy and funding for disabilities.
Together Again claimed that the current mental health facilities at UNSW are understaffed and proposed to have them fully staffed. They pointed out that currently, mental health appointments are not easily available, which they want to change.
Left Action agreed with increasing the funding of the mental health facilities at UNSW. They again pointed out that the university is a business, which is why such funding issues exist. Left Action also proposed to address the cost-of-living stresses.
Edge wants to expand health services and increase awareness of these services to students. Ethan said, “I’ve had students in second and third year tell me I only realised last week that we had tax and legal help available [at] UNSW.” Edge also proposed an established multilingual centralised directory connected to support services to engage international students.
365 pointed out that other universities have initiatives for affordable food, while UNSW does not. They also proposed textbook and clothing swaps, as well as cooking lessons for students.
Spice Up proposed that student services should be more accessible since they are not well known by students. They also aimed to create a vibrant on-campus community to promote wellbeing through in-person interaction.
No questions were asked by any candidates.
A SGM (Student General Meeting) witnessed an overwhelming support from the attendees for a “Free Palestine” and UNSW’s divestment from weapons companies, proving that this is a major concern of the student population. What is your party’s stance on this issue and what action, if any, do you aim to take?
Spice Up opened with a statement that students are each entitled to their own opinions on the issue but the SRC as a body should not have a particular stance. This was met by shouting from the audience, with some exclaiming “that is outrageous”. They were asked to save their comments for later by the moderators.
365 showed a firm stance for UNSW’s divestment from weapons companies. They argued that since students fund the university, they should have a say in where their money goes, and that the SRC and students should advocate for the end of the “genocide in Palestine and now in Lebanon as well”.
Edge expressed that the university needs to be more transparent about its dealings so that students can scrutinise the institution.
Left Action helped organise the SGM for Palestine. Jamie explained that UNSW is complicit in genocide. Jamie believes the SRC should “back a free Palestine”
Together Again empathised with students who have been personally impacted by the conflict. They proposed to follow UTS’s lead and negotiate with UNSW to publicly disclose the monetary relationship between the institution and weapons companies. They also wanted to safeguard students against Islamophobia and anti-Semitism.
Revive emphasised that students should feel safe at UNSW and condemned the fact that personally affected students had to send video evidence to receive extensions. They want to unify people by supporting student welfare.
Spice Up proposed a question, asking how ideological activism impacts students in a pragmatic way in day-to-day life. Hendrix understood that people are suffering but wanted to know what the proven result of the protests were.
Left Action responded to the question by stating that the recent SGM was the biggest anti-racist rally since the 1980s. By fighting back against the Australian government, they are standing against genocide. Since UNSW has a monetary relationship with companies that are involved in weapons manufacturing, there is a “tangible link”.
On the issue of the right to protest, how will your party balance ensuring student safety and the protection of activism?
Revive responded by saying that the right to protest should be protected. They believe students need to feel respected and safe on campus. Diverse opinions should be allowed to exist. Revive also has activists on their ticket.
Together Again agreed with the right to protest. They supported the SGM and want to ensure that protests are accessible while not impacting the education of other students on campus.
Left Action agreed with the right to protest and expressed gratitude that the other parties were supporting their activism. As the main activist group, they claimed that students at UNSW have not complained about feeling unsafe about protests, except for activists that have been harassed or disaffiliated with.
Edge also agreed with the right to protest. They believe in promoting solidarity within the student body via non-violent protests. They believe that the location of protests should not obstruct students.
365 pointed out that there was a silent implementation of a policy that obstructs student voices, with the SRC not being consulted about the policy. This issue must be addressed by the next SRC.
Spice Up also agreed with the right to protest and that the protests should not disrupt classes. They also believed that students “have a right to not be harassed and to not be involved in such protests.” They said that there should be processes for students who feel unsafe due to protests.
Left Action asked what the parties will do to protect students’ rights to protest, since there have been attacks towards Palestine activists. They said that the SRC has not been backing the protests.
365 responded to the question by saying that the campus policy only came in this year due to a rise in protests and activism and that the SRC needs to lobby against this policy.
No other parties chose to answer the question.
How do you aim to address the issue of women’s rights on campus, for example by increasing menstrual aid, and how would you ensure these issues are given priority in campus policy?
Spice Up fully supported previous policies such as free menstrual products in UNSW bathrooms. They believe there is a lot more to be done for women’s rights on campus, taking into account sexual assault statistics. They believe it should be clearer for students how they can get help when incidents occur.
365 claimed they supported the free menstrual products in UNSW bathrooms that were implemented by the SRC. They noted that the university’s gender violence policy was also amended because it was “pretty terrible” in its previous state. 365’s Women’s Officer candidate Ellena is pushing for an independent commission into campus sexual violence. They mentioned that research candidates, postgraduate students, international students, and disabled students are at the most risk for sexual violence.
Edge’s representative Ethan acknowledged that as a man he is not qualified to speak on women’s issues. However, he believed that women need to feel empowered on campus, especially to report issues. They want to ensure that menstrual products in bathrooms are refilled regularly.
Left Action believed that a lot could be improved regarding women’s rights, saying “I don’t know how empowering just having menstrual products in the bathrooms is.” They proposed that UNSW should have free abortion and free childcare for women on campus. They also want to fight against sexism on campus.
Together Again endorsed the 365 candidate as they do not have a Women’s Officer candidate.
Revive’s representative Annikka, the only woman on the panel, explained that the menstrual products initiative was pushed by Revive’s past Welfare candidate. She believed reviewing the “woefully inadequate” gender-based violence policy is a high priority. As well as supporting women in STEM and initiatives for all genders including safe space initiatives run by the Queer Collective, the existing programs could be extended to things like contraceptives.
No questions were asked by any candidates.
Surprise Round
In the debate’s surprise round, each candidate was given a random question to answer, with any other candidate being allowed to rebut.
For Spice Up: How do you propose to support students with disabilities and what actions, if any, will you take to implement this?
According to Spice Up, every building should be fully accessible, “no ifs, ands or buts”. He explained that not all elevators at UNSW are disability accessible and it is Spice Up’s goal to standardise all elevators on campus. He also believes the university should expand its Equitable Learning Plan.
Edge’s representative said that more information should be available for the Equitable Learning Services at UNSW. He proposed having a dedicated stall during O-Week.
The 365 representative agreed and added that ELS should have a centralised list of all the services they can provide. There should also be more international student support.
For 365: How do you propose to support international students and what actions, if any, will you take to implement this?
365 responded by saying there needs to be more international student support – the Australian government made up to 12 changes to international student policy in the last year, including changing visa rates and a cap on students. International students do not have the confidence to stay at this university next year because they don’t know what the government is going to do. To aid students 365 will lobby to repeal the ESOS changes, reduce fees and provide strong mutual aid initiatives.
Left Action believed this simply is not enough and that students should demand “free education for both domestic and international students”. Jamie reiterated that universities should not be run as profit-based institutions. He also agreed on lobbying to remove student caps.
For Edge: How do you propose to support LGBTQIA+ students and what actions, if any, will you take to implement this?
Edge proposed an anti-discrimination tip line so that students who witness incidents of discrimination against queer people can report them. They believe that no one should feel uncomfortable or harassed due to discrimination.
Revive’s representative echoed this sentiment but praised the leadership of the Queer Collective saying that the SRC should advocate for the security of safe spaces. UNSW should have simpler processes for people to change their name and pronouns.
Left Action stated that there’s been an increase in attacks on the queer community in NSW in recent years, citing the religiously justified ban of LGBTQI+ books in Cumberland Council’s public library as one example. Jamie argued that not only should UNSW be a safe space, but also NSW, and that in order to achieve this the SRC would have to be part of activist campaigns.
For Left Action: How will you support students at UNSW’s Paddington Campus?
According to the Left Action, the main issue was the visibility of the Paddington Campus. They noted that Paddington students have been highly involved in the Students for Palestine campaign. The course cuts in the Arts sector have drastically affected Paddington students and the fight against these cuts need to be kept up to enforce changes.
365 said that Paddington students should be more autonomous, since their interaction with Kensington campus is minimal. The SRC should enable rather than control Paddington students. Paddington students should also have more voices at UNSW and be represented where decisions are made, such as the university Council.
For Together Again: How do you envision a sustainable future for UNSW, and what tangible actions will you take to make it a reality?
Together Again did not have an Environment Officer candidate running but their policy involves sustainability initiatives. They also want more transparency on UNSW’s relationship with fossil fuel companies.
Revive proposed partnering with sustainable student-driven initiatives. They would like to see students interested in renewable and sustainable engineering to work with UNSW founders or clubs to generate ideas and solutions. UNSW has made a commitment to divest from fossil fuel companies by 2025. UNSW is also currently “100% powered by renewable energy” by purchasing solar farms. Revive would like to see more commitment to addressing sustainability by partnering with students.
Edge wanted more ways that students could be empowered to make more sustainable decisions on campus. They proposed clearer signage for different waste bins. They also want to expand solar charged battery ports in the Main Library.
For Revive: How do you propose to support First Nations students and what actions, if any, will you take to implement this?
Revive said there is a lack of First Nations representation at UNSW and that the SRC should cooperate with First Nations student societies. They propose that these collaborations will allow for advocacy. Revive aims to deliver real changes for First Nations students.
Left Action noted that they are running the current Indigenous Officer Brydie who is active in fighting for First Nations voices. They have successfully advocated and expanded essential services. They claimed that mainstream politics use Indigenous issues as “political footballs”, with “massive racist campaigns”. They believe that the SRC should reject this mainstream perspective. According to the current Indigenous Officer, reports by Indigenous students have not been taken seriously by university management.
Questions from the Audience
Please note the questions from the audience have been reworded to ensure clarity.
How would you support women in STEM?
Revive said that they are running a lot of women in STEM candidates for the SRC. There isn’t enough representation in the industry, so they propose more networking events with companies that support women in STEM, as well as advocacy for mentorship and career programs.
365 pointed out that women in STEM are the most affected by sexual violence on campus, especially postgraduate students. They believe that this is unacceptable, and that there should be zero sexual assault cases on campus.
Left Action said that change for women in STEM has to start before university, rather than during university, since STEM students usually choose their area of study before. They believe in increasing women in STEM industries and building confidence for women in male dominated industries. They believe in fighting against sexism on campus, particularly from the far-right political spectrum. The SRC should affiliate with companies that are fighting against women’s issues such as the gender pay gap.
Spice up proposed more career programs, as well as working with high schools for outreach programs to promote STEM industries.
Specifically directed at Revive: This year Revive has done a horrid job of raising international students’ concerns. Alexander Pye, Revive’s candidate this year, has been constantly absent from meetings and has led the International Collective into the ground. What is Revive’s plan for this year? How are you going to change it up? How are you actually going to address our concerns?
Annikka claimed their running officer is well connected to their community and there are other international students running with Revive, like their new representative (presumably Pragya Maini). They proposed a 24-hour Helpline for international students, bilingual mentors, transcription services for lectures, concession cards for international students, the extension of the Food Hub, as well as initiatives to ease the cost of living.
A lot of the panellists have made claims about how they don’t have an ideological affiliation, whereas the contrary is true. I wanted to ask for transparency’s sake because whether people are politically affiliated to any major parties affects where people are standing, and I think it’s good that certain people are open about that, but certain people haven’t. For example, one that’s on the executive of the Liberal Student Club, same with the Labor Student Club. Do you have members on your ticket who are affiliated to major parties or political student clubs, and how does that affect your politics and what types of issues you’ll be standing up on?
Hendrix from Spice up is the treasurer of UNSW Liberal Club but insisted that they are separate from the Liberal Party. This was met with laughter from some members of the audience which had to be silenced by the moderators.
Pepsi from 365 said no one in their party has any political affiliation, but they do have members that are executives of different societies like Queer Students in STEM and Law Society. There are no political affiliations or executives of political clubs amongst 365’s running candidates, according to Pepsi’s knowledge.
Ethan claimed that Edge was proudly independent and not affiliated with any political parties.
Jamie, the representative for Left Action, said the party is broad left, meaning they are associated with socialists, Students for Palestine, and the Greens.
Akash from Together Again was a member of the Labor Party, claiming “I have used my membership proactively to fight for students and I don’t think it affects me in any other way other than the fact that I help students”. Together Again had some other politically affiliated members.
Annikka said that Revive is an independent party with some candidates who are politically affiliated with the Labor party. They believed that political affiliation is not relevant since their goal is to focus on student issues in running for the SRC.
Is all that the SRC does is argue and get nothing done? We’ve seen some of that today, so what do the members here have to say about that? Will they just argue in every meeting? Or will they work together and get shit done?
Hendrix claimed that although unity is tough, they must compromise, to be pragmatic and get things done instead of dwelling in unhelpful debate.
In a similar vein, Annikka believed despite their arguing there should be unity in the SRC. They should try to align on the outcome of decisions.
According to Akash, the SRC should work to improve tertiary education at UNSW and any other affiliations should come second to this goal.
Ethan preferred that the SRC agree rather than disagree. Although debate is important, the SRC must work together for the students.
Jamie said that political debate is important and should happen in the SRC.
According to Pepsi, debate is important and inevitable. Because the university has such a diverse population, they simply can’t agree on everything and the SRC representatives should be listening to students’ voices instead of acting for them.
University management have made major cuts to Indigenous spaces on campus. How specifically will you ensure that Indigenous students and issues are being supported?
Pepsi believed that the university is not doing enough to support the needs of Indigenous staff and students, they said that the Indigenous Representative Council is not even mostly composed entirely of First Nations people. Indigenous staff and students were not on the panel. The Indigenous Officer of the SRC must be represented and consulted before making decisions. They insisted the micro-treaty process was about maintaining the university’s image rather than making actual changes so we should be critical of the process.
Jamie accused university management of being tokenistic towards Aboriginal staff and students. He said their party will lobby for Indigenous voices and against the university’s goal to profit.
Spice Up says the SRC should work with university management to advocate for First Nations initiatives.
Closing Statements
Spice Up’s aim is to get the SRC to be “what it should be”, which is not an activist institution but a body that works closely with university management for better education at UNSW, whether regarding mental health or study flexibility.
365’s goal is effective and proven change. They wanted to “strive for perfect” and “not settle for good”.
Edge is a party by students for student issues. They want to see more access, modernity and justice in the education system by ensuring accountability by university management.
Left Action promised to be key activists regardless of if they are elected. They will be fighting all year round – for every single left-wing issue. They believe the SRC should be an activist body for issues that students care about.
Together Again is committed to making tertiary education the best it can be for students for high quality education. They are fighting against trimesters and fighting for standardised assessments.
Revive is student focused. They have an activist on their ticket and are driven to deliver direct impacts you can see tomorrow.
Election results for the 2025 SRC are out, with three of the representatives who spoke in the debate having been elected into the SRC, as well as 365 and Left Action candidates dominating within the overall elected members.
A lot of things were promised in the Gamamari SRC debate, but will it reflect what the Council will do in 2025? We will see next year.