the o’brien A dministr Ation

Travisty is taking the rare step of publishing an anonymous Op-Ed essay. We have done so at the request of the author, a senior official in the O’Brien administration whose identity is known to us and whose job would be jeopardised by its disclosure. We believe publishing this essay anonymously is the only way to deliver an important perspective to our readers. We’d love to invite you to submit a question about the essay or our vetting process, but we aren’t yet important enough to have our own website. You can try clicking here, but it probably won’t achieve much, especially if you’re reading this on paper.

President O’Brien is facing a test to her presidency unlike any faced by a modern Trinitarian leader.

It’s not just that the College Council looms large. Or that she’s actually trying to make changes in Trinity. Or even that she knows she won’t, in all likelihood, be President this time next year.

The dilemma—which she does not fully grasp—is that one of the senior officials in her own administration is working diligently from within to frustrate parts of her agenda and her worst inclinations.

I would know. I am the one.

To be clear, mine is not the unpopular “resistance” of some students. I want the administration to fail. Yes, many of its policies do continue to make Trinity safer and more welcoming, But I believe my first duty is to the students’ union, and the President continues to act in a manner that is detrimental to the future of our society (TCSU, that is, not our community).

Yes, it’s great that we’ve now got free laundry. And it’s even better that we’re now allowed to walk on the grass in New Court (provided we’re walking with the express purpose of sitting down on the benches and don’t plan on drinking anything alcoholic while we’re there).

But this ultimately sets a dangerous precedent. Presidents are supposed to do as close to the bare minimum as possible without getting impeached. TCSU was never designed as a way to implement change; it’s not “the voice of the students”. TCSU has, throughout its existence, had exactly two purposes. Its primary purpose? To give 15 students each year some extra CV points. Its secondary purpose is to give Travisty some more material to write about.

The first happens, yearon-year, almost entirely automatically. The second should be no different. Henley Smith gave Travisty plenty; from poop-gate to forcing people to choose between being awake and having enough money to live off, Travisty was never left short of material.

However, this year, Travisty is already falling behind on its TCSUbased humour. Instead of being charged for tea and coffee, we’re no longer being charged for laundry. Instead of scandals, we now have a leader who’ll stop at nothing to better Trinity for its students.

This presents an immediate concern: what happens in a year’s time? What happens when Molly’s moved on from the College and we’re left with a new President? The students will demand more changes; who will be there to provide them?

This isn’t the 2013 Tony Awards. We don’t need to aim to make everything bigger—we don’t need to inspire future generations. We just need to stick to our fundamental principles: giving students free CV points and giving Travisty more material.

Frankly, it was obvious that TCSU would go off the rails under President O’Brien from the hustings. O’Brien failed to respond adequately to the most trivial of ethical trolley dilemmas. From this moment I knew that, if elected, I would have to defend the very doctrines on which TCSU was founded.

It may be cold comfort in this chaotic era, but Trinitarians should know that there is an adult in the room. I fully recognise what is happening. And I am trying to do what’s right even when Molly O’Brien won’t.

The result is a two-track presidency.

I won’t bore readers with specifics—there are countless examples, and I simply don’t have the time to list them all while continuing to fight for our foundations—but without me continuing to resist these damaging changes, I fear that our students’ union will soon be left in a state beyond even the faintest hope of recovery.

We should consider this situation not as a failing of our system, but as a success. No system can prevent the election of someone who, left unchecked, would threaten to have a positive impact on the lives of those they are meant to leave unaffected. However, it should be considered encouraging that, even when burdened with a President whose amorality has been proved, there will always be a Committee member ready to protect our society.

Former Environmental and Domestic Officer Wicholas Nong put it best in his farewell letter. And while we may no longer have Mr Nong, we will always have his example—a lodestar for minimising change and maintaining the status quo. President O’Brien may fear such honourable people, but we should revere them.

There is a quiet resistance within the administration of me choosing to put our society first. But the real difference will be made by everyday students rising above their work, reaching across the bar table, and resolving to forgo action in favour of a stronger union.