Elected student representatives, who campaign on platforms built on openness and accountability, must understand that transparency is a two-way street.
The few students who do run for student government, whether that be the AMS, SGPS, or Faculty Societies, often promise to be the voice of the student body, pledging to listen, act on feedback, and remain accessible.
Yet, this pledge is hollow when they respond to criticism with defensiveness rather than engagement.
Last year, after the second AMS Special Assembly in which this year’s AMS executive was elected, The Journal published an editorial titled “AMS Assembly should be ashamed.” Here, The Journal called out the AMS for its blatant disregard for governmental due process, and their lack of clear communication and professionalism during the election process.
The editorial also raised concerns about the AMS’s insularity and cliquey nature.
Rather than addressing these issues or taking accountability, team KMV—the first all-female Executive team—responded defensively to the critique about the AMS being cliquey, framing the feedback as unwarranted, and chalking it up to harmful gender stereotypes instead of using it as an opportunity for constructive dialogue.
Blaming this critique on gender stereotypes rather than engaging with the substance of the concerns undermines the opportunity available for genuine improvement. Such responses do not contribute to meaningful reform or better governance, they only serve to dismiss and deflect from the real issues at hand.
When student leaders are more focused on evading criticism than addressing it, they risk alienating the very people they are supposed to represent.
True transparency and accountability require more than a superficial openness, they demand a commitment to engage with and address criticism with honesty and constructiveness.
Without these qualities, student governments cannot effectively fulfill their roles or earn the trust and respect of the student body they were elected by and are paid to serve.
If this defensive attitude continues into this year’s executive team, it will only perpetuate the cycle of disengagement and trust that already plagues student governance at Queen’s.
As students, we deserve leaders who aren’t only willing to listen but also willing to act on feedback. Anything less undermines the very principles of transparency and accountability that led them to be elected in the first place—that is if you’re even elected.
Allie is a fourth-year Political Studies student and one of The Journal’s Editors in Chief.
Tags
AMS, student government, transparency
All final editorial decisions are made by the Editor(s) in Chief and/or the Managing Editor. Authors should not be contacted, targeted, or harassed under any circumstances. If you have any grievances with this article, please direct your comments to journal_editors@ams.queensu.ca.