Between the 20th and 26th of May, students of Radboud University can vote for a new University Student Council (USC). Since the USC represents students’ interests within the university, it is important to make a well-informed decision. In the current turbulent times, as tensions rise, there is no shortage of topics for debate. ANS invited the leading figures of the four parties to discuss five relevant topics.
The four parties are represented by their party leaders: Lize van der Gulden (Green+), Noortje Smeenk (AKKU), Lóa Driessen (V.O.S.) and Omar Qaterge (ISEC). They will debate five statements about universal cooperation, budget cuts, the functioning of the executive board (college van bestuur, CvB), study trips and international students.
Debate 1: The current (provisional) decision of the executive board (CvB) to cut ties with some Israeli universities is the right decision at this time.
Smeenk (AKKU): This is clearly too little, too late. The university has, with their delay tactics, taken 18 months to find out what we have known for a long time. Once you see that human rights are being violated, it shouldn’t take you a long time to cut ties with Israel. As an academic institution, the CvB also has an important political responsibility, which they should have accounted for. Instead, it chose to ignore the democratic vote of many students who have stood up against these ties. Yes, some ties are being cut, but others still remain. It should be common sense that a university takes a stand against human rights violations.
Van der Gulden (Green+): The decision is in the right direction, cutting ties, but this is not enough. There are still ties with other universities in Israel, and there are still companies that we think should be cut off. It also should have been done way earlier. In contrast to AKKU, I think it was the right decision to appoint a committee to conduct research, but they should have done that way earlier. The CvB must be political, and has the responsibility to base their political opinion on research. The protests were a clear sign that they needed to urgently investigate these ties.
Driessen (V.O.S.): In all cases, we listened to the advice of the independent committee that was formed. We listened to the experts that have done objective research on this. However, we did think it took a long time, and we would have liked to see the advice from the committee sooner.
Foto: Ramon Tjan
Qaterge (ISEC): Our party calls their response cowardice dressed as consultation. When their own experts recommended cutting ties with Israeli institutions, they stalled out the final decision and stopped the dialogue with students, which is a problematic pattern of the CvB.
Debate 2: Given the budget cuts, every expenditure of the Radboud University must be reduced equally.
Qaterge (ISEC): Equality is not equity. Reducing everything equally would be the most simplistic answer trying to solve a complex problem. Expenditures of the RU could be reduced. For example, some art installment projects that would have cost a lot of money, something like €100,000. This money, with the current budget, can be spent in different ways, like trying to help social workers and making student psychologists more accessible.
Driessen (V.O.S.): Nobody likes budget cuts. However, some things can be reduced more than others. We need to make sure these decisions are financially sustainable and that there’s clear and open communication about them. We want to communicate openly, and we really want to provide input and work together at the same time to see what’s the best solution. About which areas should be cut back on first: I would need to see the budget for that.
Smeenk (AKKU): We need to try to provide resistance to the budget cuts. We have shown with the abolishment of the longstudy-fine that resistance can be very successful, if we make our voices heard collectively. However, if it’s unavoidable to cut money, then of course, the reduction of various expenditures of the university should also be decided democratically. There are programs, such as the Honours Academy, which are valuable, but only benefit a part of the students. I think that, instead, the basic education quality should be prioritized in the budget.
Van der Gulden (Green+): Here we agree with AKKU, in that the basic education that’s essential to you as a student should be central, as well as sustainable projects. We don’t want to cut projects on sustainability, as well as related research, because we believe that, even though these cuts are hopefully temporary, we need the research into sustainability for the whole future.
Driessen (V.O.S.): While the other parties argue that extra programs should perhaps get less funding, we disagree. Being an active student really contributes to your time here at the Radboud University. It adds real value, and I think it teaches you how to develop both personally and professionally
Debate 3: The CvB should resign, because of their handling of the recent protests.
Smeenk (AKKU): On the 7th of May, excessive police violence occurred on campus. The CvB doesn’t show any acknowledgement or condemnation of this police violence, which is honestly a big danger to the right to protest, which has been under pressure for a while now on our campus. And since the CvB is unable to provide a safe campus, they should resign.
Van der Gulden (Green+): We agree that the CvB should resign, but for many more reasons. Namely not listening to the USC, lack of transparency, and then indeed their response to the police violence. Over the past weeks and months they have shown that they are not capable of keeping peace on campus and involving students and the co-determination council in their policy. Therefore, we think they should resign.
Qaterge (ISEC): You can see the students’ engagement in the university’s democratic system, I think it might reflect the trust of the students in their voice to be heard by the board. Some students find it futile to be engaged in the decision-making of the RU because it seems like the board is not really listening to anyone. We do believe that the board should resign.
Driessen (V.O.S.): Of course it is very sad to see that an unsafe situation has arisen on campus. We think it’s very important that everybody feels safe here. As for the trust in the CvB, this is something our own faction members need to decide for themselves. I have not yet worked with the CvB so I cannot form my opinion yet. That’s also what the USC is for, to keep them on their toes and to hold them accountable. I think that’s the beauty of the USC and that’s the whole reason why we’re there, to make sure that they don’t fail at their job.
Smeenk (AKKU): Okay, so you’re saying your faction members should individually decide on these matters? Does that mean you don’t have a unified opinion on this and how much is an election program worth if people are free to decide for themselves?
Driessen (V.O.S.): Well, V.O.S. is here for the active students. We have ten specific points that we’re there for, however, we’re not specifically there for this statement.
Debate 4: Study trips that travel by plane should lose funding from the Radboud University entirely.
Driessen (V.O.S.): We’ve already worked together with Green+ on the Radboud Green Certificate. We are also trying to expand this Radboud Green Certificate to other associations as well. We’re trying to stimulate sustainable travel by giving them subsidies for train rides. For travelling consciously in general. Of course, they won’t get a subsidy if they travel by plane. I don’t say I agree with the statement, but I also don’t say I disagree.
Van der Gulden (Green+): What is your opinion? this lack of clarity makes it hard to argue. I think everyone expects me to say yes, but our point is a bit more nuanced. What is the definition of study trips? We do think there are exceptions to be made in some cases where funding should be provided for flying. For example, important research that is done overseas where you just can’t go sustainably. Or for people with a disability who cannot travel by train for such a long time.
We really appreciate our collaboration on the Radboud Green Certificate, but I do want to emphasize that Green+ is always the one coming up with sustainable measures in the council. We very much appreciate your support, but we are the initiative takers in this case.
Driessen (V.O.S.): V.O.S. is a very collaborative party. We take pride in really wanting to collaborate with others and wanting to think together. For example, with the Radboud Green Certificate, my predecessor actually thought of that and therefore took initiative on this. We think it’s very important to be able to work together with different parties on this.
Debate 5: The Radboud University should limit the amount of incoming international students.
Qaterge (ISEC): This is regressive. Radboud already has the lowest number of degree-seeking international students and the minimum of English taught bachelors. And the idea we are overrun is a false narrative. Reducing students based also on any cultural, national or financial background can never be a criteria for exclusion. Instead of limiting students who enrich our campus, we should invest in robust support. We need to reinstate the functional international office, improve housing and support funds and scholarships. The answer is support and inclusion, not exclusion.
Smeenk (AKKU): Universities shouldn’t actively recruit international students if they can’t offer housing for them. Housing is a big problem: many internationals start their studies without even having a room, which is heartbreaking and unfair. Internationals should not only feel at home, they should have a home. Universities used to have a room guarantee, but they stopped this. We think they should reintroduce this in an improved form.
Van der Gulden (Green+): I have one more reason why we need internationals. We have fourteen universities in the Netherlands, all with so many different studies. All of those small studies couldn’t exist if they only had Dutch students entering. Every study needs a certain base number of students to survive. So, basically, the international students provide the wide range of options Dutch students have.
Every Radboud student can vote from May 20 to 26. The results of the election will be announced on May 28 in the Cultuurcafé.
More information on how the student election works can be found in the previous article.
A Dutch translation will soon follow.