News

Equal Opportunities and Welfare Candidate Question Time

An Equal Opportunities and Welfare question time took place on Friday, giving candidates the opportunity to expand on their manifesto points and answer specific questions posed by students. The questions covered a variety of topics, from raising awareness of mental health services to ways to provide services for postgraduate students and students based on campuses other than University Park.

Six of the seven candidates running for the position were present – Tom Roberts, Aqeelah Malek, Alison Ratcliffe, Sarah Pickup, Kelly Clarke and Rob Clewlow. Adda Pinzariu did not attend.

Candidates began the session answering three pre-prepared questions, the first of which addressed the plans each candidate had for mental health services.

Tom Roberts cited long waiting lists for meetings with counsellors as one of the principal problems with the University’s mental health services.

Kelly Clarke emphasised the need for an email system between a student and their personal tutor, so anyone worried about seeking help could talk to “someone they have a connection with already”.

He highlighted the importance of “investing money and obtaining enough counsellors to see people”, alongside “getting personal tutors, welfare reps and hall tutors involved in referring people”.

Kelly Clarke emphasised the need for an email system between a student and their personal tutor, so anyone worried about seeking help could talk to “someone they have a connection with already”.

The second question asked how the candidates would ensure the consistency of SU welfare training.

Sarah Pickup suggested that training needs to be “more interactive”, focusing on any issues “arising during the year or visible in the media”.

Rob Clewlow highlighted the need for specialised training “created for and by networks”.

He also recognised the need for convenient training times, not “during the exam or deadline periods, or during summer”, but “staggered throughout the year”.

Sarah Pickup suggested that training needs to be “more interactive”, focusing on any issues “arising during the year or visible in the media”.

She described the role as “taking welfare to people, rather than them having to make the first step in order to get sustained training”.

Aqeelah Malek suggested that education was key because “people discriminate when they have a lack of knowledge”.

The final question asked how candidates would support students who have faced discrimination.

Aqeelah Malek suggested that education was key because “people discriminate when they have a lack of knowledge”.

She also said it helps to know “what backgrounds people come from and what they have left behind” in order to help represent students from “all over the world”.

“It’s important that people aren’t being passed around and made into a token case of ‘look how well we’ve done for them’, instead it’s about them being supported”

The importance of facilitating meetings between students and “anyone they want to talk to” was raised by Alison Ratcliffe, who recognised that the role of the Equal Opportunities and Welfare Officer is to “signpost students”.

She told those present: “It’s important that people aren’t being passed around and made into a token case of ‘look how well we’ve done for them’, instead it’s about them being supported”.

The second half of the event opened questions to the floor. Candidates were asked how other campuses such as the Derby campus would be incorporated into any plans candidates had.

“It is more realistic to talk to students and work with people who are already there [at Derby], finding out where they need the support”

Rob Clewlow emphasised that it is “very easy to say you’ll bring a hub to Derby campus”, but it is “not realistic”.

He told audience members: “It is more realistic to talk to students and work with people who are already there, finding out where they need the support”.

Kelly Clarke also highlighted that improvements were unlikely to happen overnight, “as much as we all want them to”.

She described the importance of having individual focus groups who work on finding out what the specific problems are, ensuring “requests for funding are specified”.

Tom Roberts said he did not believe focus groups were the best option and instead explained that services should be “open for longer” to make them “more available for students”.

The candidates were then asked what they planned to do for postgraduate students who might not have time to attend focus groups.

Tom Roberts said he did not believe focus groups were the best option and instead explained that services should be “open for longer” to make them “more available for students”.

Alison Ratcliffe highlighted that this issue was mentioned in her manifesto, emphasising the need for an “awareness of services available outside of undergraduate term time, utilising postgraduate spaces with drop-in sessions, and undergraduate locations when undergraduate students are away”.

Aqeelah Malek also emphasised the need for stronger integration between undergraduate and postgraduate students so that postgraduate students feel “more welcome”.

Candidates were then asked if they were aware that many of their manifesto points had been recycled from previous manifestos.

Ideas are repeated “because a year isn’t long enough” and many manifesto points are part of “multiple year programmes”

Sarah Pickup responded that points were repeated because “we go out and speak to the students and they’re raising these ideas”.

She explained: “Just because they haven’t been done already doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be raised again”.

Tom Roberts agreed, stating that ideas are repeated “because a year isn’t long enough” and many manifesto points are part of “multiple year programmes”.

Lastly, students were asked by Impact if they agreed with the SU statement that Week One chants were part of a cultural problem, and if so, if they thought the problem only occurred during Freshers’ Week.

Alison Ratcliffe responded: “If you ban it all, it’ll happen anyway, they just won’t tell anyone”.

She highlighted the need to “give Week One reps alternative ways to engage buses full of students and still have fun, with alternatives to chants”, but conceded that the “cultural problem couldn’t be changed overnight”.

Tamsin Parnell

Click here for all our coverage of the 2015 SU Elections or follow Impact News on Twitter and our SU Election 2015 Facebook.

Categories
NewsSU Elections
2 Comments on this post.
  • Laura Bealin-Kelly
    8 March 2015 at 19:19
    Leave a Reply

    This is not a fair reflection of the core issues brought up for debate. Several of the candidates suggested “embracing” those from cultural, religious and ethnic minorities, which was perceived by many in the room as highly patronising.

    Another of the candidates, when asked how she would deal with opposing views from the Jewish and Palestinian societies, appeared to have no idea about the fifty year conflict.

    Furthermore, only one of the seven candidates had contacted the coordinators of Nottingham Nightline and was able to talk about their plans for involving them. Given that the student-run service is an integral part of the welfare system within the University, this really indicated a lack of understanding of what the Equal Opps and Welfare role entails.

  • Anon
    8 March 2015 at 23:26
    Leave a Reply

    This isn’t a true representation of the question time. Will the recorded video be published?

  • Leave a Reply