The elections have been in full swing this past week, with stalls offering food and beverages to voters and campaigners standing at every corner – it brings an unmistakable energy to campus. Students crowd around the toastie and matcha stalls, or the photo booth in the main building, all in exchange for proof of voting, or at least accompanied by strong encouragement to do so. Is this a literal tradeoff? A vote in exchange for a cookie offered by the nearest candidate: politically motivated instant gratification? Or is this an initiative to create a space for dialogue, enticement followed by communication – a perhaps flawed but well-meaning strategy?
Earlier this week, VU’s University Student Council (USR) announced giveaways for the election season on their Instagram page – requiring entrants to send proof of their votes for their FSR (faculty student council) and USR candidates, along with some engagement with the account. The prizes are substantial, with 26 in total, including major items like an air fryer, an iPad, and a Nintendo Switch. This giveaway post followed a series of posts about the current student elections, explaining how they work and what the USR and other student representative bodies do.
Low interest
The intention behind all this seems fairly straightforward: fostering voter participation in the ongoing elections. The impact is already visible on the platform itself. Currently sitting at 78 comments, the post shows a relatively high level of engagement for the Instagram account. With voting rates for the elections ranging between 17 and 22 percent in recent years (an increase from a previous rate of 10 percent), this appears to be one of several tactics that has helped draw more participation from the student body.
The approach does raise the question: is student involvement and interest in their own representation so low that it must be heavily incentivised just to encourage students to look at candidates, let alone actually cast the vote they are entitled to? Are the prospects of winning an iPad or receiving free items the only way to make students care about who represents them?
No easy fix
Andrea Iorga, the USR communications coordinator, offers a perspective from the organisational side: “That’s the main point – to incentivise students who normally would never consider this. We are trying to use these events as an open call to vote, and that’s really it.” She elaborates that these incentives create opportunities for interaction between voters and candidates, and provide a platform for USR and FSR members to explain the elections and their purpose. She also highlights a fundamental issue without a clear fix: “To make people feel a sense of involvement and participation is quite difficult if they don’t already have it at this age. Getting people to vote without this budget would require a much longer-term strategy.”
The budget comes from SOZ, or the Student & Educational Affairs department, allocated by the university for student elections. The funds are clearly hefty – being able to provide for campaign resources for the candidates but more substantially for events like a four-day photo booth rental, a bubble tea stand, a toastie stand and more. A student employee at SOZ who has asked to stay anonymous at the request of her department, likened this approach to national-level campaigning tactics, where political parties distribute pins and other paraphernalia to the public. Explaining that while the necessity of such methods can be debated, the funds are specifically allocated for student welfare, and in a way, their use can be seen as a way to give back to students.
Lack of visibility
Another perspective from student representatives points to a lack of visibility regarding the work and responsibilities of these roles. USR chair Marko Darabos expresses a similar view, emphasising the need for students to better understand what they are voting for. Student representatives largely agree that if students had a clearer sense of how their academic and campus lives can be shaped by these bodies, interest and participation in elections would likely improve.
There is a broader argument to be made about the lack of organic political participation on campus, and how this might be addressed beyond the election season. But where should that change come from? Is there a need for greater institutional support for student politics, or is there a lack of student enthusiasm that cannot easily be remedied? A change in the electoral atmosphere requires a shift on many fronts and one that likely requires engagement from every party involved – the administration, the representatives, and most importantly, the students.