Originally published April 28th 2010

OUTGOING EUSA President Thomas Graham was called to account for his Labour party affiliations by Edinburgh South Liberal Democrat candidate Fred Mackintosh at the five party EUSA hosted election hustings in George Square on Monday evening.

Candidates for Edinburgh South are fighting for the Westminster seat recently vacated by Labour MP Nigel Griffiths. The seat is a Labour-Lib Dem marginal, with only 405 votes separating the two parties in the 2005’s vote. The Times has predicted a win for Mackintosh, a graduate of the University of Edinburgh.

The debate, which featured four candidates for the Edinburgh South Westminster seat and one for Edinburgh East, was chaired by University of Edinburgh politics lecturer Dr. Mark Aspinwall.

Ian Murray, who is an alumnus of the University, is standing for Labour in the constituency. Neil Hudson, a senior lecturer at Royal Dick, is standing for the Conservatives and Sandy Howat, another alumnus, for the SNP. Robin Harper, a former University of Edinburgh rector, is standing in Edinburgh East for the Greens.

The question and answer structure of the debate allowed audience members to directly challenge candidates on issues.

The verbal altercation between Mackintosh and Graham occurred after Graham asked whether each candidate would be willing to pledge to vote against any increase in student fees should they be elected to Westminster.

Murray pledged that he would, but added that the issue requires serious debate.

SNP candidate Howat proclaimed his support for the NUS and it’s work for students.

Mackintosh’s response was more combative:

“I have signed that pledge,” he said, “but I have a question for you Thomas, you’re a Labour party member, why have the NUS decided to ‘review’ the abolishment of tuition fees after the Labour government didn’t support it? Perhaps because half of NUS is made up of Labour party members! That is not non-partisan student representation! What kind of weird world do you live in?”

Hudson, for the Conservatives, also derided Graham during his response to the question: “I didn’t sign that fee pledge because I will not be a candidate who signs something to get elected; I believe it requires evidence-based decisions.”

He added: “I was under the impression that EUSA was apolitical, but you’ve used your position for political gain Thomas, and you’ve personally attacked me in the press for my position on this pledge, which was inappropriate.”

Graham responded by telling the candidates and the rather raucous crowd that he was standing up for students, and that “it was recognized [by NUS] that review [of the abolishment of tuition fees] was necessary.”

“Did you decide that before or after you started driving the Labour battle bus?” asked Mackintosh.

When asked by The Student whether he thought that students at the University had suffered as a result of partisan student government, Mackintosh said that EUSA does well in cooperation with the University and by campaigning for student grants and aid, but added that “Labour politics have dominated this year, though I suspect that will change next year.”

Other questions focused on a wide range of issues, including women’s rights, tax policy and the importance of higher education and its funding.

“Encouraging people to go to university while at the same time increasing fees and student debt doesn’t give anyone a broad spectrum of opportunities,” said Howat in regards to the top-up tuition fees that were recently introduced in England.

Hudson complimented the outreach available at the University, but said that higher education funding needs to be thoroughly reviewed.

In comments to The Student Graham said: “To be frank I think the comments that Fred Mackintosh made are a disgrace, it was complete hypocrisy. I have always stood up for students.”