Oracle Online

In any other incoming HUSC administration, candidates with no HUSC experience have been given strict scrutiny. It appears that scrutiny was not applied in this case. Of the current proposed board members, only one has HUSC experience. None of them have served on the congress’s executive board.

To add to the complications, the board was not complete as of late Thursday night, and the three most important positions on the executive board remained unfilled: the Political Affairs Committee (PAC) chair, the Economic Affairs Committee (EAC) chair and the Treasurer.

The PAC chair acts as a neutral moderator for by-law and constitutional conflicts. This position has traditionally been filled by a junior or senior who has a solid grasp of Robert’s Rules of Parliamentary Procedure in addition to HUSC’s constitution and by-laws.

The next two vacancies, the EAC chair and the Treasurer are particularly troubling. These two positions serve to maintain HUSC’s financial integrity and uphold the congress’s strict financial policies. This year, they have been filled by more than competent people. These two positions require persons who can be detached from the respective requests and focus on the objective numbers of the various requests.

Traditionally, the EAC chair and treasurer come from with EAC. It looks like this is not the case. And thus, all of the respect current treasurer Pete Winiecki and EAC chair Ian Johnson have built for the positions stand at the edge of a cliff. These two men have done an exceptional job of maintaining consistent and fair policies where HUSC’s finances are involved. These two positions are the cornerstone of HUSC’s day-to-day operations.

All three positions demand experienced appointees, and HUSC should firmly demand that such experience be present.

There is something to be said about bringing in new voices. It naturally provides new voices and experience into the congress.But the overwhelming inexperience of this proposed board is ridiculous.

HUSC should not approve the proposed board. It should vote against the board as a whole to send a message to Elliot and Elfmann that they need to consider candidates with experience and those who have rightfully garnered the respect of the congress.