Women’s Officer says foul play claims are sexist after SU’s election email ‘mistake’

The recently elected Women’s Officer has said accusations of foul play caused by an SU mistake are sexist and she has not received any favouritism.

Chloe Wynne won the position but after a meeting on Friday 22^nd January the Elections Adjudication Panel ruled that the election had been unfair due to a mistake by the Students’ Union. Just days later the Panel met again and instead ruled that the error did not have such an effect to change the outcome of the election and as such Chloe Wynne was announced as the new Women’s Officer.

This mistake was an email sent to all candidates asking them to prevent putting posters up. A few days later one candidate was contacted and told they could put posters up again, as proven by emails obtained by the Tab, whilst the other three candidates were not told. However, while an email from the SU clearly says that one candidate was emailed and allowed to put posters up again the candidates have all rejected that they received this email. Chloe Wynne, the eventual winner, was the only candidate to use posters after the original email telling candidates not to put up posters was sent.

An anonymous candidate suggested Chloe received special treatment, due to the fact she is the boyfriend on the President Isaac Leigh.

Lily Pickard, who also ran in the election, said: “In all the emails I got [the Students’ Union] apologised loads and say it must’ve disadvantaged candidates etc. I’m not sure what changed on Monday.”

Email sent to candidates to ask them to not put posters up

While the SU have promised to ensure this error isn’t repeated there has been no clarification what the mistake was or whom sat on the panel. Furthermore, the panel was too not made up of who it should be. The Democracy and Development Officer, Oliver Rice, was not present nor was the Returning Officer or another sabbatical officer. The normal staff member in charge of democracy and education was absent too.

We asked Ms.Wynne about the existence of the email saying posters could be put up again, as stated to have gone out by the SU.

Would it be possible to have a copy of the email sent to you to tell you to put posters up again?

Wynne: “If that email existed, but it doesn’t. That’s false information. The email sent to all candidates was regarding public areas over which estates have jurisdiction. The panel ruled that this didn’t cover halls, which I took the email to imply. Therefore the information you’ve been given is false.”

In the Boar article it says that only you were emailed to put posters up again – are you rejecting that as false?

Wynne: “Yes. As I’ve said, no candidate was told they could put up posters. That email simply does not exist.”

Email sent to candidates stating that an email allowing for the return of poster-ing was only sent to one candidate and that the panel had met and decided that the election was void due to the error

Among the confusion over posters, there has also been speculation over the possibility of favouritism within the SU due to Wynne’s personal relationship with Students’ Union president, Issac Leigh.

An anonymous candidate said that “I do think that accusations of foul play and favouritism could be made. Chloe and Isaac were literally in the Terrace Bar having a drink with members of the adjudication panel on the Friday night after the invalidation was announced, which made me personally feel uncomfortable. Also that the SU President’s girlfriend is the candidate at the heart of this; her being given privileges no one else was. It’s quite a disheartening realisation.”

However Wynne rejected this as an “unfair and faintly sexist accusation to assume that I have access because of my personal relationship”.

Another email supporting the fact that the email to allow posters to go up was only sent to one candidate