USU Candidate Profile: Eitan Harris

Pulp interviewed all of the candidates running for USU board. We asked them about politics, their policies and of course the USU. 

Over the next week, we’ll be publishing their responses in the randomised order drawn by the Returning Officer. Next up is Eitan. 

Name: Eitan Harris

Faction: Independent

Studies: Arts (Anthropology and Archaeology)

Colour, campaign manager: Purple, managing his own campaign. 

Eitan’s Board run is motivated by his own experience as a student with a disability and a desire to improve accessibility for other students. Towards the beginning of his interview, he spoke about his desire to represent under-represented groups on campus, insisting that he was uninterested in political “ladder-climbing”. As a result, his policies centre on challenging discrimination and supporting marginalised groups of students. He appeared to have worked hard to develop these policies, which, while perhaps not radical, were certainly thoughtful and well-intentioned. 

Eitan’s three favourite policies were about improving disability access, mental health and fighting racism. He identified that the USU’s Disability Action Plan has fallen by the wayside and argued that it was important for disabled students to have a safe space to meet, rest and manage requirements of their disability. The desire for a space for disabled students, analogous to the already existing wom*n’s, POC and queer spaces, has been a longstanding goal of disabled students, and one which sadly has not received sufficient action to date. Having a candidate whose platform expressly prioritises disabled students could be productive in this regard. 

Eitan has diligently reached out to Chantel Bakac, a Youth Ambassador at headspace, for assistance with his mental health policy. He emphasised that mental health policy should focus on the “most disadvantaged” students who are most likely to experience poor mental health while studying, for instance female, queer and disabled students. He told us that while “every student” can face mental health challenges, it is important to acknowledge that some students face more of a risk. Despite his clear theoretical understanding of mental health problems, this part of Eitan’s policy was lacking practical solutions. Exactly how the USU could cater to the most vulnerable students was unclear. 

Regarding how the USU could counter racism, Eitan argued that a significant flaw in current anti-racist efforts lies in the “lack of effective definitions” which arise as a result of the rapid changes in offensive language driven by sites like “4chan”. His solution is to produce a list of racist terms to allow people to acknowledge - and therefore address - racism. Again, this policy lacked a practical dimension regarding how it would be implemented and how the USU could follow up creating the database with effective actions. 

In terms of how political the USU should be, Eitan argued that the USU’s politics should focus on issues which directly affect students. He suggested that “a statement made to benefit one section of the student body” should never “negatively affect another”. He was hesitant to name something specific that he would endorse political statements about, arguing that this would be resolved through USU meetings. Unlike many of the other candidates, he was able to clearly articulate when he thought the organisation should intervene in controversial clubs and societies. He told us that it should not be “a question of political beliefs” but “how they’re engaging with those beliefs publicly”, arguing that he would intervene in campaigns were directly harmful to students. 

Regarding the accountability of the USU, Eitan identified communication as a key flaw of the organisation during his time at university. He responded to our question about how the USU could take student feedback more effectively by saying that Board portfolios (e.g. Women’s and environment) should communicate better with the groups they represent. He suggested that having a more public route to communicate with relevant directors would also be helpful. Nonetheless, he told us he would not consider leaking information, suggesting he would prefer to consult checks and balances within the organisation. He would, however, push for more public meetings of the Board. 

In the Pulp quiz, Eitan scored 50%. This is somewhat lower than the bulk of the faction-aligned candidates, and does reflect some gaps in his knowledge regarding student life. The questions he got wrong were largely about programs like clubs and societies and debating. However, he broadly had a good knowledge of USU financial figures and the workings of the organisation - where he got these questions wrong, he was still very close. 

Overall, Eitan is representing some important issues which have not received enough attention in previous years. It is particularly good that he is bringing the USU’s lack of accessibility to light, and hopefully the other candidates will pay attention to these issues. However, his platform does lack some practical applicability and may not have broad popular appeal. 

View Eitan’s full interview here.

Note: Pulp editor Ellie Stephenson is a former member of Grassroots.