A Comically Honest Review of OAU Electoral Debate

Peter Oyebanji

Yesterday, the students' union electoral debate went down at Oduduwa hall and well, nothing unusual and unexpected happened. OAU students do what they do best - turn up, show consciousness, and not listen because who cares about what you have to say when we all have a pre-determined candidate. However, I actually listened - so you can trust the review. 

Office Of The Financial Secretary 

Three candidates are contesting for the office of the Financial Secretary - Perolexy, Yusolat, and Legbeti. For this position, only one candidate made his presence known in the debate. I don't know if it was the crowd factor or the accounting factor, but Legbeti dominated the debate. The disappointing thing here was that Legbeti did not dominate the debate because he was exceptional, the other candidates just didn't have a clue of what they were supposed to do and how they should have answered the questions. It was probably the second most one-sided contest in the debate, the first was the Vice President and that was an individual contest. 

Office of the Director of Social and Culture

Two candidates are contesting for this office - Bright and Omo Alhaji. To be candid, Bright was not bright and Omo Alhaji, em... kind of lived up to the stereotypical interpretation of such nicknames. It was shambolic and it did not appear like they had something to offer. In retrospect, maybe Rotimi Stephen should have been a bit more serious with academics - at least, faaji night was a brilliant campaign strategy, much much better than doing Formula One with cars.  

Office of The Director of Sports 

Sorry, Toheebah's dressing and citation got my attention. Next!

Office Of The Secretary-General

Two contestants contested for this office - Great Sam and Wonder. Wonder was not close to being as wonderful as wonderman and Great Sam was not absolutely great, but this contest was one of yesterday's best. It was competitive and substantive. In my own opinion, I felt Great Sam won this debate squarely but he had to earn it. Although, wonder had disappointing answers and his letter was awful, but he was competitive and had honest and thoughtful attempts. Great Sam, by the way, was spot on all night. And his letter was solid, just like his night. Great Sam won.

Office Of The PRO

The office has two contestants - Tao and Lugard. This contest was matching, not in a positive way tho. They were both on the same level all night - not energetic, not shiny... Probably not worth reviewing. 

Office Of The Assistant Secretary-General

The noise won. 

Office of The  Vice President

I want to use the medium to apologize to the vice president of Great Ife Students' Union, Salvation. Sorry for stressing you, we didn't mean to. And make sure you don't lose to void. Thanks 

PRESIDENCY

The most important office in Great Ife Students' Union has six contestants - Bukola, Reform, Flash, Efficiency, Statesman, and Complex. If you were not at the debate yesterday, you might wow at the number of contestants, which is pretty cool. But are they all worthy? No. About half should have been with the audience cheering. Flash and Complex had the same kind of night, not flashy. They disappeared after the citation and they did not do anything to steal attention. They were not really booed. They were not cheered. They were just there, a sad but normal thing in debate.

Now, to the other four: Efficiency came into the debate as a pro-management candidate and an alleged "chosen one." Efficiency left the debate as a proud pro-management candidate and maybe not-so-alleged "chosen one." Everything about Efficiency screams "I am pro-management so what are you gonna do about that?" He got a chance to maybe show some level of radicalism needed for this kind of position but he acknowledged the chance and screwed it intentionally. Let me tell you about pro-management candidates - they will always get the basic things done speedily and efficiently. But you see those things, those other fundamental but tough things, those things that the management is not willing to give up - say bye-bye to them. Apart from being a pro-management candidate, Efficiency also appears not to have the range and understanding of what Great Ife Students' Union means. One last thing, Efficiency is going to screw consciousness - heck! he already screwed it yesterday.

Reform and Bukola: Reform and Bukola are similar kinds of candidates. They seem like the balanced ones. Ones that use diplomacy and tact in dealing with union matters. How pro-student they get to depend on what happens in those senate rooms and how they will react to it. They seem like those kinds of union leaders who will acknowledge union matters and fundamental issues but whether they will act on it depends on how much they will be willing to give. They did not show so much radicality while answering the questions and in their delivery, but they also did not show anti-student tendencies. Not bad, really 

Statesman is a member of the Educational Rights Campaign (ERC) and a left-leaning candidate. Statesman was a member of the action committee and is someone who has shown so much radicality in the past. And all these characters showed in the debate. With left-leaning candidates, consciousness could go through the roof - which is always a good thing. However, occasional lack of diplomatic strategy could hinder success. With the true left, how things pan out is pretty simple: heavily pro-students, lots of agitation, results? can't say.

Did someone say Welfare? I zoned out