YUSU’s election campaigning rules have come under criticism following a number of complaints over the conduct of this year’s presidential candidates.
14 separate complaints were made across the board, with seven of these being directed towards presidential hopefuls. One complaint is now being dealt with by the University itself.
YUSU’s rules about online campaigning have been most heavily criticised due to the open nature of social networking websites such as Facebook and the inability of candidates to prevent their supporters from inadvertedly breaking the rules on such social media outlets – an offence for which the candidate is liable.
James Carney, who had his right to campaign online completely removed by YUSU’s Returning Officers, was especially critical of the rules YUSU currently have in place:
“The accountability of candidates and those related to them is something which needs to be looked at within electoral rules, as is setting out clear guidelines to online campaigning. Currently, they are just not clear enough,” he told Vision.
YUSU President-elect Kallum Taylor, who had his campaign Facebook page taken down for 24 hours on the Friday before elections, also spoke to Vision about the difficulties he countered with the online regulations:
“What happened was a third-party Facebook group backed me by putting my page on their group – within five minutes this was deleted.
“All was done within five minutes but that was why I had to delete the Facebook page; because people were endorsing me who I didn’t know, in private groups that I didn’t know existed.”
“I can see why the rules are in place, but it’s tough to police the internet, I can understand some of the warnings, but at the same time I can only tell people I know not to promote me illegally. I think the rules need looking at, in a sense nothing stopping me from getting friends to promote another candidate and for them to get punished for it.”
YUSU President Tim Ellis commented on the current set of election rules, telling Vision: “Whilst there have been some issues with certain candidates breaking these rules, they were all made extremely clear at the candidates briefing and all candidates signed up to these. I do feel however, that a conversation should be had in time for next year’s elections regarding campaigning rules as I think there are potentially areas where rules could be relaxed as it is increasingly hard for Returning Officers to police what happens on social media.”
YUSU President-elect Kallum Taylor has come under scrutiny for his own campaign, with enquiries being issued to the Returning Officer regarding his expenses. Complaints were made against Taylor on Thursday afternoon and the Returning Officer has since ruled that his expenses are so unclear that Taylor will only be able to reclaim £5 of his £20 allowance.
The complaints made against Taylor suggest that his budget, although coming in under the £30 limit, was missing a number of items used during his campaign and was not presented with valid receipts.
A source, who wished to remain anonymous, told Vision of how a receipt for spray cans “was not itemised” and the invoice for his t-shirts was dated 01/03/12, when they had been used before this date. Additionally, the source spoke of how “the video used in his campaign was not included in the expenses form. Due to the use of editing software and good equipment we assume that a £5 charge would have been incurred.”
Despite the complaints, YUSU’s Returning Officers came to the decision that Kallum was a valid candidate in the election. The Deputy Returning Officer was keen to stress the importance of considering whether what the candidate has done warrants removing them as a choice for the electorate.
Taylor was quick to defend himself, saying; “I was called in on the Thursday afternoon and spoke with both the Deputy Returning Officer and the Returning Officer about these – who then spoke to the NUS to properly clear my form as fine. From this, they were happy with what I had supplied and I was given the go ahead to continue to stand in the elections. Since, it has been a non-issue for me and I’d rather not deal with baseless rumours and instead the more important issues such as the job itself.”
Nearly all candidates go slightly over on their expenses. It’s a known fact and really doesn’t make much of a difference.
Tim Ellis went way over his expenses last year, as did Ben McGladdery, and if you think back to some campaigns before there’s no way candidates who plastered campus (fruit and veg anyone) didn’t overspend…
I would be interested to know why you think I went over my expenses last year? I can assure you, as would the other presidential candidates last year, that none of us went over…
The only candidate this year to go over their expenses was Kallum. Also when Kallum was banned from facebook it was mainly due to him posting in a closed group, something clearly banned in the rules. The endorsements and unknown supporters were actually largely ignored as it was felt he had done all in his power to stop and remove them. His response to posting in the closed group was that the group used not to be closed and that he hadn’t realised, which wasn’t a very good reason, hence the (if somewhat pointless) ban.
Kallum overspent. Fine. He was never going to get disqualified. James Carney broke every rule he could throughout the campaign and even had a checklist of rules to break. He wasn’t disqualified. Kallum rightfully won. Get over it.