The UMSU Election and the Scandal that has come with it

My two cents

I thought highly of Garry last year when I was on UMSU Council, I was happy to see him run for UMSU President. I would have supported him despite his past because I feel that everyone is redeemable and we all make mistakes, of course few of us make this bad of mistakes.
These mistakes show poor judgement in the past and it is something that Garry has to carry with him for the rest of his life.
What upsets me is that Garry did not disclose this information.
Why not?
I figure one of two reasons: he felt that UofM students would vote against him solely based on this information or he is ashamed of this.
I do not think Garry holds UofM students in such low regard as to assume they are unable to make a mature decision with all the facts available to them.
Which leaves shame. Garry has every reason to feel shame for his past actions but that will not change them. The best thing is to stand up and face his past by being honest about it.
His lack of forecoming has resulted in the situation we are in. UMSU has now been divided into two camps on this issue and is now distracted by scandal.
Garry's decision to not be forecoming with his criminal record and parolee status as resulted in this situation.
It shows poor judgement in this situation on his part.
If I was at UofM right now, I would be signing the recall petition and calling for another election. I would then sit down with Garry and decide if I would support him in that election.
Basically, UMSU members need the chance to make a informed decision with all the information on the table.

Re: My two cents

A reliable source as told me that this was disclosed during the first week of the campaign.
Yet other sources indicate that it was not common knowledge. I think it points to a problem with the shortness of the campaign period.
Hopefully something that will be looked at.
In terms of the recall petition, in light of this new information - I am not sure what I would do as I am not at UofM right now so I cannot make a completely informed decision. In terms of the issues, Garry was exactly where I wanted a candidate to be on Food Services. His opponent was way off and if elected would have made mistakes on this issue that would have enable Aramark to get renewed.

You know, the way I looked at it, if its not relivent to the election, why should he disclose it? We all have things in the past we are ashamed of - some are just more serious then others.

People can change, if he has changed, I don't care about his past - I care about what he can do for the student.

And before my statements are said to be sided - I didn't vote at all.

"While his fellow students were lining up at the bookstore last September, Garry Sran was behind bars.

Now out on parole -- after being given a three-year sentence for drug trafficking and failing to comply with an undertaking after being sentenced last May -- he's making a serious run at becoming the next president of the University of Manitoba Students' Union and may well hold that post when the election wraps up this Friday."

If you're given a three year sentence, don't you have to go to jail at some point? But he was on UMSU council last year AND graduated with an economics degree? I really don't get this entire thing (though I'm chalking it up to shitty reporting by the Sun).

It might be a three year probationary sentence.

In that case, he is free to be out and about, but is on a short leash. it's the police's way to keep tabs on him. if they jailed him for three years and then released him, they would have no grounds to restirct him. As it stands, he might have to serve some community service, or meet with a parole officer once in a while. since we don't have the specifics of the sentence, it's all up in the air.

personally, i'm all for the rotting in jail for 2/3 of the sentence, and 1 year on probation, but thats just me.

i guess that crim class actually rubbed of on me

that's pretty crazy

just prove that smart people make dumb mistakes.

oh man, garry was a wreck in high school

him and all his druggie friends

The campaign was short, I didn't even really get a chance to learn anything about the candidates... so I just read over the posters on the first and went from there. All seemed to have the same platform and was thinking about going Smith/Barnby until I read 'Lets put REAL students blah blah..." Ha Ha! I think not my friend; you use adversarial politics and now you lose. Lose my vote that is… but I digress… I do feel guilty for not being an informed voter though.

mr sran

As someone who worked very closely with smith/barnby slate all i can say is that the information was made available early on in the election. The smith/barnby camp attempted to make the information available but had to pass the information through the CRO since it was considered 'campaign material'. The CRO denied the use of the information because it was apparently considered slander.

slander
n.oral defamation, in which someone tells one or more persons an untruth about another, which untruth will harm the reputation of the person defamed.

When smith/barnby persisted with the material (because they felt it was their duty to let U of M students know about Mr. Srans dark past) they were denied again and eventually given a 24 hour campaigning penalty.

It is definatly a shame that Mr. Sran and his entire slate were not more honest with voters. It definatly was not a good way to convince U of M students that they are honest and trustworthy.