Salient: Victoria University Students' Paper. Vol. 30, No. 5. 1967.
The genius who originated the idea of disrupting the presidential elections by confusing the voters with dozens of insincere candidates should feel satisfied with himself. The voter will not.
The democratic processes of the Students Association like other institutions are designed to permit any member to hold any office on the executive. However, for a democracy to function successfully there must be "responsible participation" by its members.
The actions of Mr. Rashbrooke (Sports Officer) and his disciples cannot be termed by any stretch of the imagination "responsible participation."
Anarchist candidates cannot be viewed as irresponsible as they are acting in accord with principles. However, the majority of candidates are not anarchists and are acting without concern for the welfare of the Association.
The returning officer, whose function was never minor, will now be faced with a massive task. The preferential system of voting will mean hours, possibly days, spent in counting second and third preferences.
The Students Association will be put to additional expense in producing an extra large ballot form and also for a massive election supplement. It has been estimated the supplement in the past has cost £5 per candidate.
The claim that greater interest in student affairs will result from this "stunt" has no validity. More likely the reverse is true. Instead of simplifying matters students will become more confused and abstain from voting, or perhaps pick a name at random.
As it is not the function of this paper to suggest certain candidates are preferable to others we can only suggest the confused voter make some attempt to cast an informed vote.