SDM and Moviment Liberali go head-to-head on campus

Both candidates spoke at length about their electoral manifestos and what they planned to do should they be elected to KSU during a three-hour-long debate organised by student newspaper Insite.

The debate was well attended and was characterised predominantly by SDM supporters who frequently clapped and showed strong approval following most of Balzan’s statements.

There were also frequent interjections from the floor as members of the outgoing KSU exec turned up to defend their tenure on points of contention such as the censorship issue, the freezing of EU Erasmus funds by the Commission, transparency in KSU’s financial records, and

Throughout the debates, both candidates emphasised their electoral thrusts. While Balzan expounded on SDM’s new campaign slogan ‘mieghek’ ('with you') and how SDM in KSU would be ‘closer’ to students, Camilleri emphasised the need for more efforts with regards to research funding and called for more maturity in student politics.

Camilleri reiterated claims that SDM lacks transparency in the way it handles its finances, insists on pandering to the mentality of “giving out money to students in exchange for their support” and also of not placing enough emphasis on making its voice heard on crucial issues.

During his own addresses, Balzan attacked the Moviment Liberali’s electoral manifesto, insisting that the proposals lacked credibility and were fraught with inconsistencies.

Among these, he said that proposals for an underground car park are already in hand by University administration, and that Camilleri was insisting on making various claims despite not having taken the trouble to inform himself on what is truly happening beforehand.

Asked by Insite’s moderator Philip Leone Ganado about campaign expense capping and whether the candidates felt comfortable disclosing their campaign budgets, Camilleri immediately said that ML budgeted for a campaign costing €500, and that he would be in favour of a cap.

Balzan however was reluctant to disclose SDM’s election campaign budget, saying only that a report could be issued by the Electoral Commission following the election breaking down the campaign expenses.

Balzan also disagreed with the idea of an election campaign expenditure cap, saying that parties should not be limited in the lengths they can go to in order to ensure that students are aware and informed of the issues relevant to the election.

Balzan however conceded that a cap would possibly make elections more balanced.

The debate was characterised by a heated exchange over claims that the Student Opportunity Fund was abused by certain students for the purposes of a trip abroad. Camilleri claimed that the rules pertaining to the fund were broken in two instances, while outgoing KSU president Karl Grech insisted this was not the case.

Asked what would be done about the claims by a member of the audience, Balzan said that there were but only unfounded claims, and emphasised that the same fund had helped many other students. “What is wrong with such a fund?” he asked, adding that he had full confidence in the board administering the fund.

In his own reaction, Camilleri said that the claims would be looked into, and the issue would be taken up before the appropriate board.

Balzan and Camileri also clashed on what electoral reforms are necessary to the KSU electoral system. While Balzan maintained that SDM is against any reform “that is done on the basis of “opportunism”. He maintained also that SDM supports the first-past-the-post system – which is currently in place.

Balzan however said that instead of changing the electoral system, structures could be established in the KSU structure, alongside the Social Policy Committee and the Education Committee, for students who want to make their vote heard.

Camilleri on the other hand insisted that ML supports a change to a proportional representation system, and dismissed Balzan’s proposals as “not concrete”.