You’d be confused for mistaking this term’s Union election for the intraparty squabbles of Westminster in 2022. Facing off are the grey Labour technocrat, a Tory party split between its past and future and the long serving Lib Dem hoping to resurrect his party's former glory. Sound familiar?

The four candidates stack up, at least superficially, along party lines. Sam Carling, a self described “serial multitasker” and this term’s debates officer, has previously been chair of the Labour club (CULC) and serves as Labour councillor for West Chesterton. Past and present Union equalities officers James Appiah III and Ellie Breeze have both served on the Tory club committee (CUCA) as chairman and speakers officer respectively. Joshan Parmar, Union treasurer in Michaelmas last year, is the chair of the Liberal association (CULA).

Yet, as any Union insider would tell you, party standards are largely left outside the chamber. Candidates don’t represent their society like leaders do a party and sometimes pick up endorsements from supposedly rival clubs. Breeze for instance has collected the backing of members of CULC committee. The Union instead functions more like a party primary: candidates need to get the support behind the scenes from the various subcommittees before making their announcement.

Where political societies do matter is with their member lists. CULC, CUCA and CULA members tend to also be Union members. If those who are both can be identified their names can go on a spreadsheet and be persuaded to vote.

The parties that candidates come from also plays into the complexion of debate motions and invite lists. CULA and CUCA have long dominated Union elections and past presidents have given their term’s a distinctly yellow or blue tint. The number of Conservative MP’s invited in recent years for instance has ran parallel to a high number of CUCA members at the top of the Union.

CULC members are relative newcomers in Union elections but now look to be serious players. Next term’s president Chris George was treasurer of CULC in Easter while this term’s co-chair Nick Davies is running unopposed to be Easter’s debates officer. It's an open question whether their presence at the top will see a different kind of term card to previous years or whether the Union's tendency towards conservatism trumps any kind of left wing party affiliation. This election is unusual in seeing these three societies - and their membership lists - go head to head to head.

Since the electorate is so small – 205 voted at the last election in Easter – the individual candidates’ policies are not insignificant. Breeze for instance has proposed integrating the equalities committees while Appiah has suggested bringing in more entertainment to the chamber, like comedy shows and boxing matches. Such concerns might seem superficial to those who don’t frequent the debating society but they matter a lot to the regulars. As always it's a question of what's more important to those who watch the debate every Thursday: more of the same, a greater emphasis on member welfare, a risqué term card or more high minded motions.

More broadly there are three dividing lines in this election:

First of all there’s insiders versus outsiders. Some voters will want the Union to be run by those with experience in the top roles currently inside the tent, like Sam Carling and Ellie Breeze. Others will prefer those who are on the outside looking in like Appiah and Parmar. 

Then there’s where you stand on what’s referred to by Union hacks as the “clique”: a tightknit friendship group which includes Breeze and this term’s debates officer, Max Ghose, who is tipped to run for president next term. While friendship groups working together within the Union is hardly novel, some supporters of Breeze’s rivals are hoping to halt the “cliques” rise by blocking Breeze this term.

Finally, there’s the ongoing debate about how the Union should engage with the national “culture war.” This term’s committee has chosen to wade in, most notably with last week’s debate on offence that saw guest speaker Kathleen Stock criticised by students both in and outside the chamber for her views on trans rights. At one point a student speaker, who was meant to be defending the right to offend, dramatically turned on Stock, saying: “I believe the Union was wrong to invite Dr Stock”.

That debate was a high watermark of controversy in recent years, but some in the Union want to go further: long seen as the holy grail for many on the right in the Union is a debate on gender self-identification. While three of the candidates shy away from any reference to this term’s controversy, Parmar pointedly asked during the campaign why the Union “continues to re-heat stale culture war debates with the usual suspect speakers.”

Ranked voting means the winner will not be obvious in the first round. While Appiah and Breeze are expected to pick up strong support on the first count, Carling, seen as a steady pair of hands, will likely be a lot of voters’ second choice. Parmar, whose announcement was a surprise to many in the Union, is seen as the wildcard in the pack.

The election is getting heated: Appiah has received electoral complains from his rivals for a number of supposed offences, including allegedly buying followers on Instagram and bribing voters with club night tickets. Appiah has denied all allegations.

The unsaid dynamic of this election, as with any Union election, is that all the candidates have their eyes rested on an even higher seat than the one in the Union chamber: the leather benches of parliament. In this sense the red, blue and yellow colours of this term’s race gives it the air of a rehearsal for the main event.

If any of them make it that far.

This article has been updated since it was published in Varsity Issue 907.