Do policies actually matter more than personalities in student elections?

Liam Trim, Online Editor, urges you to consider the importance of manifestos before voting in the upcoming Sabb Elections…

Image Credit: BloomingBath.com

Us students are an educated bunch, that’s why we’re here at the University of Exeter. When we graduate we get to wear the badge of education proudly for the rest of our lives, regardless of whether or not we actually spent more time memorising the exact taste and texture of curly fries than reading, or writing essays.

When elections dominate the news educated people (that’s us remember) often like to make a fuss about voting for a party and the policies that party is advocating, rather than voting for a person  because their smile seems genuine.

We, the educated, make a number of convincing arguments. Firstly, many people don’t understand the system. They think the wannabe Prime Ministers are like X-Factor contestants. They forget about the parties and the MPs and the complications.

Crucially, they forget about the policies, the promises and ideas that actually matter. Shame on the voters who ignore a candidate because he or she was a bit too shy. They may have had the ideas to make our lives better, in a significant and tangible way.

We know better, don’t we, us educated people?

I’ve certainly found the tendency of my parents to vote for the party that their parents voted for depressing. Surely they should think for themselves? Perhaps we’re too young, optimistic and snobby due to our wonderful education, though. Maybe they think we’re naive for casting our votes based on false promises in a manifesto.

The candidates in the imminent Sabb Elections will have manifestos. But, as a final year student, I’ve already been through two student elections and I’ve learnt that it’s hard to find the time to read them all. It’s hard to escape the everyday concerns of your own life, for something that doesn’t seem that important, pressing or relevant. We forget our principles about educated people taking the time to vote for policies, not personalities. In fact, us students are social beings as well as educated ones, so we’re likely to vote for our friends or acquaintances.

So maybe we really are too quick to judge our parents and those disillusioned with voting throughout society, or even those who do so in a hurry or out of habit. And maybe we’re wrong to place such an importance on policy in student elections anyway.

Devonshire House, home of the Guild and its Sabbatical Officers, is not the Houses of Parliament. The policies are not important on a national scale. Many ideas in the manifestos of candidates will be based on genuine student concerns, but others will be crowd-pleasers. Not all of the policies will be feasible, even if they mean well, and we can’t blame candidates entirely for that. They do not have the resources of political parties to check facts and gauge opinion.

But 2014’s new Sabbs will be in a position to make a difference. Devonshire House isn’t Parliament, but it does provide an outlet for democracy and student opinion. Sometimes the views of students will bring about genuine change. This year’s Sabbs have increased society funding, helped keep street lights on and assisted students with their search for accommodation. If they do their job correctly they will pass on the concerns of students to the Guild, and make sure the Guild act on those concerns.

So how do we choose between the candidates in February? Is a trustworthy, approachable personality more important than a manifesto? If the Sabbs are just our representatives to the Guild, shouldn’t the student body be choosing the policies, and our Sabbs simply passing them on?

Well, yes. And this is why the manifestos and policies do matter. It needs to be more than a handful of random ideas, discussed with a couple of mates. If a candidate is going to be a good Sabb, they need to be able to be able to find out what students want, need and can achieve. If they cannot find out those things now, and put them in their manifesto, then they’re unlikely to be much better at representing us after they’ve been elected.

Liam Trim, Online Editor

Will you be voting in the Sabb Elections? Will you read the manifestos, or just vote for someone you know and trust? Leave a comment below or write to the Comment team at the Exeposé Comment Facebook Group or on Twitter @CommentExepose.

Format of 'Blurred Lines' vote changed

Robin Thicke
Image credits: Kia Clay

On 21 October a vote will commence to determine whether Robin Thicke’s popular, though highly controversial hit, ‘Blurred Lines’ will be banned around campus. Recent changes passed by the Democracy Committee will change the way in which this vote will now operate and may ultimately alter the outcome.

In previous votes, such as last year’s vote on The Sun, students had the option to vote either YES or NO. In the upcoming vote on ‘Blurred Lines’ and those that follow in the future students will have the option to vote in three different ways. Firstly there will be the option to Ban ‘Blurred Lines’ from being played in all Guild outlets and across the official student media, an action will which also incorporate an official condemnation of the song. The next option will be to Condemn the song – the current NO campaign – which will result in the release of a press statement from the Guild condemning the objectionable lyrics but not an implementation of a ban. Finally students can vote for No Change leaving ‘Blurred Lines’ available to be played around campus and with no condemnation of the song’s content. There is currently no campaign group for this option.

President of Labour Students Daniel Richards commented that: “I am annoyed that such changes were rushed through without any consultation with students outside the Guild. These changes will have an impact on how campaigning societies run our campaigns on campus and we were only informed after they had gone through.”

Prior to the recent alterations, a single member of the student body was able to put forward a motion, but each proposal will now have to be followed by 25 signatures in support of the suggested motion. A third year English student commented: “I find the removal of anonymity problematic. This may result in students choosing not to act upon an issue important to them for fear of sharing their views openly”.

Conversely, Harry Chamberlain, President of Conservative Future has defended the changes: “I am happy that The Guild are offering a third voting option for students, primarily because, in past motions, the call to ban things polarised much of the support for the issues surrounding the vote. The Guild has enabled students to have a proper discussion about the more salient issue of sexism and the portrayal of women in both the media and music industry, rather than letting people get bogged down in an argument about censorship.” Chamberlain has also described the need for 25 signatures as a “vast improvement” on the previous system.

Next Wednesday the exact terms of the motion will be released before the commencement of the campaigns and vote in Week 5 of term. The vote will operate on a first past the post system, which means that the option with the most votes will be the motion that is ultimately passed.

Emily Tanner, Deputy Editor

Follow @ExeposeNews on Twitter and like us here on Facebook.

 

#everydayrapeculture

Robin Thicke.
Image credits: cityyear

As the student vote on the use of Blurred Lines throughout the University is announced, Emily Tanner, Deputy Editor, takes a look at the wider issue of rape culture in our society.

“I know you want it, I know you want it. Because you’re a good girl,” is a refrain you must have undoubtedly heard in the bars and clubs over the summer. Not even disguised in metaphor or wrapped in layers of lyrical flair, Robin Thicke’s ‘Blurred Lines’ explicitly supports rape culture. Even in this modern age where sexism is supposedly dying away and the battles of the feminists and the egalitarians seem to many to have been concluded years ago, a culture in which rape is still accepted by some as funny, light hearted and something to be discussed over a couple of pints in the pub is shockingly evident.

Slogans such as “Nice girlfriend. What breed is she?” from Topman and “I’m feeling rapey,” and “Sometimes no means yes,” from eBay have been covering the chests men across the world this summer. The fact that a popular manufacturer such as Topman or the biggest online sales site eBay feel it is still acceptable to sell t-shirts with such slogans pasted across the front for the world to see, proves that many do not give the matter the respect nor treat it with the severity it deserves. With 85,000 women estimated to be victims of rape in England and Wales each year, 400,000 women sexually assaulted annually and one in five women aged between 16 and 59 suffering some experience of sexual violence in their life from the age of 16, it is clear that rape is still a serious subject in society.  Moreover 28 per cent of women who are victims of the most serious offenses never tell anyone – arguably due in part to the trivialisation of the matter in wider society – and only 15 per cent will report the offense to the police.

‘Blurred Lines’ is possibly the smash hit anthem of the summer which maintained its place at number one for a number of weeks and is probably played daily on most national and local radio stations. It would be wrong to say that everyone who listens to the song, everyone who mindlessly waves their arms around to it in a club on a Saturday night, even everyone who likes the song is in support of rape culture. It is a catchy pop record which many, in one way or another, will enjoy, regardless of the lyrics. Yet the issue here is surely this lack of regard for the lyrics, not just on the part of the listeners or the clubbers who scream “I’ll give you something big enough to tear your ass in two,” but the fact that a song with such awful lyrics has been accepted into society and culture with few questions as to why or how. We thankfully exist in a culture which may see problems with songs like this and the T-shirts sold by Topman and eBay and may resent the fact that ‘Blurred Lines’ has become so successful but in which many individuals are willing to either support or turn a blind eye to the trivialisation of rape culture.

Here in Exeter the matter is still as evident as it is in popular culture and the wider society. Were someone to direct you towards Hoopern Lane most students may shrug their shoulders and look baffled at the whereabouts of this location. Were someone to instead direct you towards the colloquially named ‘Rape Alley’ most could tell you exactly where this was. Students barely realise that in naming this lane as they do they are trivialising the matter of rape culture in a way which is admittedly far from the trivialisation of ‘Blurred Lines’ and Topman’s t-shirts, but nonetheless willing to accept matters of rape into an everyday language which decontextualizes the real issues at stake. We are accepting the use of language involved in a culture of rape into our everyday speech without fully understanding the consequences.

Image credits: avhell

Challenges to this blind acceptance of rape culture and the language we use surrounding the matter was, however, taken on at this year’s Edinburgh Fringe Festival by Fosters Comedy Award Winner Adrienne Truscott whose show Asking For It won the Award’s Panel Prize this year. Dressed only from the waist up, Truscott tackled the issues surrounding the acceptance, an acceptance which is now thankfully waning significantly, of rape jokes in modern, popular comedy in a small, insignificant bookshop in Edinburgh and went on to win one of the biggest arts awards of the year. Evidently challenges to rape culture are not going unnoticed – although it should be noted in this instance that these challenges are not going unnoticed at the world’s biggest gathering of liberal, left-wing arts fans – as society begins to accept the prevalent attitude as a serious problem and not a matter to be taken lightly.

‘Blurred Lines’ will never become unpopular, Topman may once again make and sell inappropriate T-Shirts without seeing where the problem is and Exeter students may never learn where Hoopern Lane is, but it seems that battles against an acceptance of the casual, colloquial culture and language surrounding rape are at least surfacing in our society.

Emily Tanner, Deputy Editor

What is your favourite fictional land?

In anticipation of our upcoming travel week, we’ve got another question to put to you. Which author has created your favourite fictional land? Are you an ardent defender of all things Middle-earth, or do you prefer the unexpected and fantastical inhabitants of Alice’s Wonderland? Or are you a classicist at heart with an abiding love for the gods of Mount Olympus? Vote and defend the fictional creation of your favourite author!

[poll id=”36″]

Banning The Sun: Nothing Short of Censorship

Harry Chamberlain argues why you should vote NO to banning The Sun from Guild Shops in this week’s Guild referendum.

Banning The Sun from being sold in the Guild Shop, and campaigning for its ban in the Marketplace – regardless of however many students vote for it – is nothing short of an attempt at censorship. A free press is a prerequisite of a democracy rather than a subject to be voted on, and such a motion ignores the very reason we need this freedom: to act as a counterweight to the majority, and protect the rights of the few.

“The motion submitted definitely does not attempt to address the place of sexualisation in a newspaper correctly, instead unacceptably infringing on students’ rights.”
Photo Credit: the|G|™ via Compfight cc

I would like to make it completely clear: I am not here to defend The Sun. I do not buy the paper, nor do I believe that bare-breasted women should be blazoned across a national newspaper.

There are numerous good reasons that the YES campaign raises as to why this issue should be addressed – in the appropriate way. However, the motion submitted definitely does not attempt to address the place of sexualisation in a newspaper correctly, instead unacceptably infringing on students’ rights.

Many have suggested that this motion is a boycott. This is misleading; a boycott involves freely deciding not to buy The Sun on moral grounds. This motion advocates a ban, and would mean nobody could buy The Sun on campus, whether they bought it to read Redknapp’s punditry, look at Page 3 – or just to catch up on the news.

Similarly, they argue it is not censorship because it is still available elsewhere. It is not a total censorship, but it is censorship nonetheless, just as a library censors books by refusing to stock them, even if they’re available at a bookstore down the road.

The underlying message that the NO campaign wishes to send is that should students object to a publication’s contents, they do not then have the right to impose their beliefs on others by restricting their access to it. How is Britain meant to set an example for developing democracies in terms of ensuring important minority rights are maintained, if we reject freedom of speech and freedom of press?

What message does it send as a university, an institution that thrives on disagreement and dissensus, if we do not confront and debate questionable media but just deny others access to it? We are not denying that Page 3 may be questionable, and that we need to address society’s wider attitudes towards women – and I would happily support a voluntary boycott of Page 3 in order to raise awareness of the issue and affect change.

I do not believe that the aim of this motion was to infringe upon freedom of speech, but rather to raise awareness for their worthy cause. Nonetheless, it has been found wanting. A poorly-worded motion has led to a profound disagreement over what there could otherwise be near-unanimous agreement on. Therefore, I call on Virginia Walsh and the organisers of the YES campaign to withdraw their motion to try and ban The Sun from being sold on campus.

In its place, I would like to propose the following motion: “Should the Student’s Guild condemn The Sun for its attitudes towards women, publicly come out in support of the No More Page 3 campaign, and call for a voluntary boycott of the newspaper until the editors remove the bare boobs from Page 3?”

All of us at the NO campaign would have no qualms about supporting such a motion.

Harry Chamberlain

Click here to vote NO in the Guild Referendum. For the view from the opposition, read Virginia Walsh’s Banning The Sun: Boobs Aren’t News. Did you vote? If so, which way? If not, why not? Leave a comment below or write to the Comment team at the Exeposé Comment Facebook Group or on Twitter @CommentExepose.

Why can’t students be bothered to vote?

After a staggeringly low voter turnout in the recent county council elections, Comment editor Dave Reynolds wonders why it is that students consistently waive their right to have their voices heard, even at the expense of their own welfare.

With voter turnout in the recent county council elections in the heavily student populated area of St David’s and St James down at an appalling 22.5%, young people only have themselves to blame when they find themselves on the wrong end of political decisions. Young people not voting is a trend, not solely in Exeter, but nationwide. In the 2010 General Election, turnout among 18-24 year olds was just 44%, well below the average of 65%.

“In the 2010 General Election, turnout among 18-24 year olds was just 44%, well below the average of 65%.”
Photo Credit: Alan Cleaver via Compfight cc

While the coalition government looks to cut public spending, targeting young people seems to be the easy option, as you won’t be punished at the ballot box because students can’t be bothered to take 10 minutes out of their day and take part in a democracy that many people have died in the name of. In November 2010, we saw tuition fees almost trebling from £3,290 year to £9,000. With more and more people being priced out of higher education, applications have dropped nationally by 8% in the last two years (although the University of Exeter has seen applications rise by 25% this year). Education Maintenance Allowance (EMA) has also been scrapped, leaving many 16-19 year olds students undecided on whether they should carry on their education or find a low skilled job and lower their career prospects in the long run. On the other hand, pensioners, who turn up to vote en masse (76% at the last general election) get to keep their winter fuel payments, free bus passes and TV licenses and a whole host of other perks.

Some say that because students move so frequently between different areas of the county, the decisions they make at the ballot box don’t really affect them in years to come. While this is no doubt true, it only goes some way to answering why students can’t be bothered to vote. Is it because they don’t know enough about politics? I find this unlikely. With students spending most of their time trying to avoid doing any work and rolling news on the TV, most young people should have a fair idea of what is going on in the world.

It seems that the only way for students to get a better deal from the political parties is to go out and vote more. If they see turnout among people of student age at 70%+, politicians may be more inclined to try to incentivise young people.  If more students voted in the 2010 election, Nick Clegg may have been more likely to keep his promise and not put up tuition fees. Similarly, if young people voted more, politicians may even attempt to deal with the current youth unemployment crisis. 993,000 people under 25 are currently out of work, yet nothing is being done about it. We can’t be treated like this by our politicians. Go out and vote and maybe they’ll do something for us! At the very least, can we please get the wealthier pensioners to give back their free bus passes and TV license fees?

Dave Reynolds, Comment Editor

Is poor young voter turnout at least partly to blame for the government’s decisions regarding tuition fees and youth unemployment? Do students leave themselves poorly represented by choosing not to vote?  Leave a comment below or write to the Comment team at the Exeposé Comment Facebook Group or on Twitter @CommentExepose.

Exeposé Screen grills the Guild Presidential Candidates

Exeposé Screen got in touch with all of the Presidential Candidates in the Guild Elections to find out their film and TV preferences. You can read their answers to our questions below, in no particular order. 

 

Image Credit: BBC

Unfortunately, Stuart Still didn’t respond to our questions in time for publication…

 

 

 

1. What is your favourite film and why?

Kathryn Jarvis: Les Mis has probably shot up to the top spot for me. It is one of my all time favourite musicals and I think they have done the film brilliantly. It has captured the different story lines effectively and hasn’t lost any of its impact.

Hugh Blackstaffe: My favourite film is Drive because it is a phenomenal example of simple, stylish filmmaking executed to perfection…and an awesome soundtrack…but really it’s because it has Ryan Gosling…my manly man crush…

Hannah Barton: I couldn’t choose one single favourite! I love going to the cinema but I’m not a massive film buff. I really like Inglourious Basterds, Anchorman and the ever cringy Love Actually.

Bella Berngart: Don’t have a favourite movie, because I’m not a big fan of films.

Nic Craig:  Inglorious Basterds. Although I usually doze off in anything over two hours, there’s something about this one that keeps me coming back for more.

 

 

2. Who is the on-screen President you most identify with?

Hugh Blackstaffe:  President Merkin Muffley (Peter Sellers) because nobody likes fighting in The War Room…or the Sabb Office. We have to remain professional regardless of the situation.

Hannah Barton:  Zach Galifianakis in The Campaign. I’m joking, I’ve not even seen the whole film but I know he has two pugs and I love pugs so we’ve got one thing in common.

Bella Berngart: Do not identify myself with any.

Nic Craig: Harrison Ford, Air Force One!

Kathryn Jarvis: I probably dont identify with him as I have never had to deal with the earth being attacked by aliens. However, ‘Thomas J. Whitmore’ played by Bill Pulman in Independence Day is pretty inspirational. He was decisive and motivational and gives a blooming great speech!

 

 

 

3. If your manifesto was a movie title, what would it be?

Bella Berngart: Seeking Justice.

Nic Craig: For Your Eyes Only.

Hannah Barton: Stand and Deliver.

Kathryn Jarvis: Gosh … I suppose the ‘Bucket List,’ as they would be the things I would want to achieve before I left Exeter for good!

Hugh Blackstaffe: Cool Hand Luke, because when it comes to the University and its Student Community, what we have here is a failure to communicate.

 

 

 

4. What television show or movie are you secretly a fan of?

Hannah Barton: I watched a lot of the early Jersey Shore episodes during first year, that’s definitely a guilty pleasure.

Kathryn Jarvis: My guilty pleasure would have to be Friends. I think I have watched every one at least 3 times!

Hugh Blackstaffe: Movie: Mean Girls…and I am unashamed of that…it’s phenomenal. TV: New Girl…because of Zooey Deschanel and her sheer loveliness.

Bella Berngart:  If I say, it won’t be a secret anymore, right?

Nic Craig: Made In Chelsea (even I don’t know why I watch it)

 

 

 

5. If you had a TV show, what would be your theme tune?

Nic Craig: Niggas in Paris.

Bella Berngart:  Polkadot Cadaver – A Wolf in Jesus Skin.

Hugh Blackstaffe: The theme from Band of Brothers, which is my all time favourite piece of television. It’s majestic and emotive and powerful. Gives me goosebumps every time I hear it.

Hannah Barton: Wannabe – Spice Girls

Kathryn Jarvis: Hmm… thats a tricky one. It would depend on what the show was about but I suppose ‘Rome wasnt Built in a Day’ by Morcheeba. I love the trumpets in it and it’s really uplifting and fun.

 

 

 

6. Lastly… what are your thoughts on the West Wing and how awesome is Jed Bartlet?

Kathryn Jarvis: So I have to admit I have never watched West Wing… is that bad? Although I have been told that Jed Barlet once had a better approval rating than George Bush, which for a fictional character is pretty impressive!

Hannah Barton: I’d love to say I knew who he was but I’ve got no idea and I’ve never seen West Wing! I like Green Wing though.

Hugh Blackstaffe: The West Wing was my introduction into how smart, subtle and smooth television could be. The scripting is unique, the acting superb and Martin Sheen makes a brilliant President, a President I’d like to emulate.

Bella Berngart:  Don’t think of the West Wings [sic] at all. Let’s say Jed Bartlet is super awesome.

Nic Craig: What I have watched of it I’ve enjoyed but I’m no addict, but I’ve seen enough to appreciate his charms…

 

 

 

So, there you have it! Everything you need to know about your possible Guild Presidents. It’s up to you now to decide which one is for you. You can vote here. There’s still some time left! 

 

 

 

 

Liam Trim and Olivia Luder, Screen Editors.

 

 

 

 

No freebies, no voties?

Photo credits to Sean MacEntee

Oh dear. It’s that time of year again, and picture this; it’s a lovely sunny day, the birds are singing and I have a 9am lecture. Laden with books, I plod up to campus with the sleep still in my eyes. The hustle and bustle of campus can be heard as I walk down the hill. But it’s not the usual set of noises. Nope, there’s chanting and music and now I look a little more closely, I can see banners and colourful t-shirts. My heart sinks.

It’s Sabb campaign week and by habit, I immediately get my grump on and march straight past the campaigners. Every year, a handful of students are given £50 to spend on their campaigns to become the Guild’s sabbatical team, and the rest is up to them. We’ve seen flash mobs, videos and freebies year after year from hopeful candidates as they try and win our votes.

Okay, maybe I’m being a little bit harsh. I am definitely going to vote but I certainly won’t be basing my decision on who gives me the most freebies, who is the biggest of the BNOCs or who does the most impressive publicity stunt. I might get egged for saying this, but campaign week seems to me to be a license to act like an idiot for a week. That said, it was quite entertaining to watch a certain someone freezing on a rock outside Peter Chalk last year and painting himself in silver car paint.

Sometimes I feel like there is too much emphasis on a sort of popularity contest, and not enough on the changes these people could bring to our University. With any luck, I’ll be graduating this year, but I will still vote because my time at Exeter has been incredible and I’d hope that future students would continue to benefit from positive changes.

What I want to know however, is what happens to the hundreds of flyers that are dished out during campaign week? So far, I’ve managed to escape with just one and a free pen. They actually came in very handy since I’d forgotten any writing material for a lecture yesterday. Have a little go on the polls below. There are probably many other ways in which you use your flyers so if I haven’t covered your niche, then comment instead!

I know of one disgruntled student who proudly announced in our common room yesterday that she had torn up the flyer and relieved herself on it. And left it there.

Kate Townend

 

[poll id=”6″]

[poll id=”7″]

[poll id=”8″]

VP Welfare and Community Debate

Tonight’s debate saw Chris Rootkin, Ledys Sanjuan and Sam Sayce battle it out for the position of Vice President Welfare and Community, in the Alumni Auditorium in the Forum.

Photo credits to Cathy Thom

First to the floor was Chris, a Third Year Biology Student, who insisted his experience working on the Students’ Advice Unit and as the General Coordinator of Voice, had equipped him with the skills needed to support students. In his opening statement, Chris stressed the importance of student safety and creating “a better connection with the community”.

Next up, Ledys Sanjuan vowed to promote the interests of international students, who make up 1 in 4 of Exeter’s student body. Speaking of the “severe lack of representation” for students coming to Exeter from abroad, Ledys suggested that additional support was needed for those who “can’t just pop home for a weekend whenever they are sad.”

Last to speak was Sam Sayce, who asserted that “student safety has to be one of the most important issues” and referred to his manifesto point of manning student club-nights with ‘street angels’ to assist drunken students home.

Then the candidates faced a round of questions, which included queries on how they planned to deal with the mental health issues which face students. Sam suggested a bi-weekly drop in centre, where he could cater to the needs of individual students and “give them somewhere to go and somewhere to talk to.”

Chris said that better advertising would make students more familiar with the facilities already available on campus.

All the candidates stressed the need for better relations between the University and the wider Exeter community, with Chris proposing that a blog about his interaction with the community might enable this.

Ledys said that if elected, she would draw up a ‘cause list’ to inform students about the charities they might want to get involved with in the wider Devon area. Sam championed a closer relationship between the University and the tourist information centre.

In what seemed a pointed question, the candidates were grilled on whether their political allegiances would hinder their ability to forge much-needed links with the local council and local parties, on the Save Our Streetlights campaign. Ledys felt this point was aimed at her specifically, asking: “You mean me?” But went on to defend her position saying that issues of safety facing women and minority groups “are issues we need to tackle.”

Chris echoed this, explaining “you need to stick up for what students believe in” while Sam called the campaign “the hot issue at the moment.”

More controversy followed, as one audience member was blasted “stupid” by another for asking whether the University was racist, in light of debate following the SSB Tribal theme.

Chris stressed the need to break away from the “white middle class stereotype”, while Ledys answered more directly, asserting “there is racism in Exeter.” She went on to say that some international students she had spoken to, felt excluded from campus life and were unaware that they could vote in the Sabb elections. Sam said that better promotion of international societies on campus could help tackle this.

In response to a question posed by VP Academic Affairs Imogen Sanders, the candidates all pledged to work to support students to avoid incidents of plagiarism. They also aimed to improve the mitigation and extension processes, labelling the current system, “extremely stressful”.

The nominees also faced a thorough quizzing from Grace Hopper, current VP Welfare and Community, on how they intended to build on the projects carried out by Sabbs this year- particularly in regards to the housing fair. Each of the three suggested a landlord accreditation scheme would make it easier for students to find reliable housing.

Chris also proposed better promotion of the Student Advice Unit, which looks over student housing contracts at no cost, while Ledys suggested student mentors should become clued up on Exeter housing so that Freshers’ could find the advice and support they need more easily.

A website similar to that of Trip-Advisor, which would provide students with ratings of housing and landlords, was Sam’s idea.

The candidates were also challenged on the language and wording of their manifestos. Ledys explained that she used the word “demand” as she believes “a Sabb should be strong enough to say…this is what we need.”

In the closing statements, Sam reminded students to “vote for the manifesto and not just who you know.” Ledys echoed this point, urging international students to vote, while Chris said his “enthusiasm as well as approachability” made him right for the role.

Tomorrow’s debate for the role of AU President will take place from 6.30pm in the Alumni Auditorium.

Cathy Thom, News Editor