How would you vote on the boycott?

The_Minister

As you know, the issue of Coke has raised its head again in UCD, and rumours abound of another referendum. If a referendum occured tomorrow, how would you vote? Would you let Coke and Nestle back into UCD?

DirkVoodoo

Nope. Whats the nestle one about though?

The_Minister

DirkVoodoo wrote:

Nope. Whats the nestle one about though?

I believe the Nestlé one is older then the Coke boycott, and I think that there is actual evidence unlike the Coke one. Basically Nestlé sold breast milk substitute cheaply to 3rd world countries, and women made it up using dirty water and their babies died. Apparently Nestlé had held a campaign to convince the women to switch to the substitute and thus, were held responsible. (Thats my recollection anyway, like the reasons behind Coke the crimes and evidence shifts with the teller).

humbert

people can make their choice when they go into the shop, it's not for the minority of opinionated muppets to choose for them:mad:

delta_bravo

the nestle story (i think) is that they have agressive marketing campaigns for the sale of formula for babies in developing countries and tell mothers that it is more beneficial than breast milk. However the mothers obviously dont have access to clean water so they must use dirty water and this causes illness and death amongst children

Garret

the nestle thing is to do with their powdered milk thing. they promote it amongst mothers in africa as a substitue for breast milk and when there isnt clean water around its not a good idea.

apparently

id let em both in

EDIT: wow i was late with that post

delta_bravo

6 votes already and no one has decided to boycott both. this could be interesting

Riamfada

Id have to agree with Humbert. Let people make the decision for themselves when they are at the shelf. Banning the products make a nice statement but have no real effect on the companies. As H said, inform the people, let them make the choice.

dajaffa

I support both bans as I think it both are important statements to make + help to raise awareness of both issues.

My opinion is that u can still get the products on campus, just not in SU shops so if u are anti-ban it's not that much of an inconvenience, though as a ban supporter I'd prefer if the products weren't availible in the restaurant, bars etc...

Though I do support both bans I'd have no problem if the reffurenda are run again, the students are the union + have a right to make their voices heard, + it'd end the argument that those who don't support the ban of "sure twas 3 years ago" etc. I think if the refurenda are run again the students of UCD are intelligent enough to make whatever decision that they feel is right.

humbert

dajaffa wrote:

I support both bans as I think it both are important statements to make + help to raise awareness of both issues.

My opinion is that u can still get the products on campus, just not in SU shops so if u are anti-ban it's not that much of an inconvenience, though as a ban supporter I'd prefer if the products weren't availible in the restaurant, bars etc...

Though I do support both bans I'd have no problem if the reffurenda are run again, the students are the union + have a right to make their voices heard, + it'd end the argument that those who don't support the ban of "sure twas 3 years ago" etc. I think if the refurenda are run again the students of UCD are intelligent enough to make whatever decision that they feel is right.

In practice the union often doesn't represent the opinions of the majority of students and only requiring a 30%* turnout for a referendum encourages this.

*it's quite possible my figures are wrong

valor

definitely allow both

Dave!

Allow both

singingstranger

I'm with dajaffa. I think the decision is made with the knowledge that both are available elsewhere on campus and that the students can therefore register their discontent with the practices of either company but still have the choice, if they wish, to purchase the products.

On top of that, the students of UCD made UCDSU the first institution in the world to instigate a Coke boycott and must be mindful of the fact that such a high-profile about-turn would do the pro-Coke lobby no end of good. While obviously an anti-boycott result would be in support of such a lobby, people who are voting yes just for the sake of it should take into account that the say of UCD holds far more sway worldwide than anyone elses.

gubbie

About the Nestle thing, when the mothers stop breast feeding, their milk dries up and so they have to continue buying the Nestle products.

There's a piece on it in the freshers guide (good work to who ever did it) thats all about it

panda100

Im undecided really but I do think ultimatly at the end of the day students should have the choice to buy whatever they want in the su shops. If people think that nestle and coke should be boycotted then they should do in their own capacity.
However, I do think its important for students to stick up for human rights and what Nestle did in developing countries was just horrific.(that picture in the freshers guide was just harrowing to say the least). Therefore in my own personaly capacity I stay clear of Nestle and coke.That is my own descision and I feel that its other right to buy coke from the su shops if they want to.
I do feel that the coke ban was people inflicting their own views onto the student body. I dont think referendums in UCD are fair. In the second coke referendum these were the results:2,501 (57%) to 1,928 (43%) Hardly representative of 22,000 students ,a pitiful 2500.

BKtje

i'd heard of the coke ban before (only on here) but never heard of the nestle ban.
I still don't know what coke did.
Personally i'd agree with let the punters decide. Perhaps put a sign up so uninformed people can make an informed choice wether or not to purchase it?

singingstranger

For the benefit of those unclear on the *alleged* (because it's gotta be done) of Coca-Cola or Nestle in the cases in question:...

www.babymilkaction.org
www.killercoke.org

Just so all can make their own minds up. I'll also point to the excellent bit on the Coke referendum written by (I think) Colin Gleeson in the first edition of the College Tribune.

Slash/ED

humbert wrote:

people can make their choice when they go into the shop, it's not for the minority of opinionated muppets to choose for them:mad:

Spot on.

Mr.Nice Guy

DaveMcG wrote:

Allow both

Hear, hear.

Time to end this farcical censorship.

rainbow kirby

Allow both. They made an arse of the referendum for the Coke ban both times when they ran it, and reversed the wording the second time which confused quite a few people... it should never have been brought in in the first place.

Royale with Cheese

Why the hell was coke banned in the first place? Idiot students who thought they wanted to make a difference. Oh we're in college now, better protest against something. Who the hell gives them the right to make other people's mind up for them? Just seems like some moron activists with nothing better to do taking advantage of young impressionable students who thought they'd try and develop some morales and vote to ban it. If you want to boycott coke for whatever hazey reasons they gave us in the first place, do it on your time. If anything should be banned in UCD it should be referendums like this one.

The_Minister

singingstranger wrote:

For the benefit of those unclear on the *alleged* (because it's gotta be done) of Coca-Cola or Nestle in the cases in question:...

www.babymilkaction.org
www.killercoke.org

Just so all can make their own minds up. I'll also point to the excellent bit on the Coke referendum written by (I think) Colin Gleeson in the first edition of the College Tribune.

Justfor those who are unfamiliar with the storey, I will say that both those sites are biased and that everything that they say as fact is not proven.

Dave!

The_Minister wrote:

Justfor those who are unfamiliar with the storey, I will say that both those sites are biased and that everything that they say as fact is not proven.

yeah I was gonna suggest providing a more objective link, but then I remembered that I don't care enough about the subject to bother

Young Siward

The whole 'let the punters decide' argument doesn't work for me at all.

The problem lies with the fact that we, the student body, run 4 shops on campus - and if I was a shopkeeper that was offered milk from a supplier that killed to make it a little cheaper, there's no way in hell I'd go near it.

If you want Coke, it is available on campus, but it should not be in SU shops IMO. Let the bans stand.

Red Alert

Every shop in Ireland (as JHJ pointed out in her letter to the tribune) has the right to stock whatever products it wishes. So for example, Superquinn cannot be compelled to stock sex toys.

The SU shops are in the charge of the SU. The SU makes its decisions in a democratic fashion. If you don't like the result make sure you vote next time, and encourage others to do so.

The_Minister

Red Alert wrote:

Every shop in Ireland (as JHJ pointed out in her letter to the tribune) has the right to stock whatever products it wishes. So for example, Superquinn cannot be compelled to stock sex toys.

The SU shops are in the charge of the SU. The SU makes its decisions in a democratic fashion. If you don't like the result make sure you vote next time, and encourage others to do so.

The point is that we haven't voted at all. Only the final years have voted

generalmiaow

I honestly couldn't care less about the subject matter (that is to say the bans), and while I voted in the two coke referenda, it's such a huge waste of our money to hold another referendum. 5 thousand euro could better be spent on things within the student's union's actual remit.

Red Alert

I think the SU might be a lot more relevant if internet voting was looked into. People have lots of free time they spend on the net and might use it.

dajaffa

The_Minister wrote:

The point is that we haven't voted at all. Only the final years have voted

Exactly the reason that, though I support both, I have no objetion at all to the refurrenda being run again. If they are though I would want them to be run with some other reffurenda that need to be run this year (possibly new constitution and making erasmus students members of the union, which may or may not be the same question...) so we dont end up spending more than we need to this year on holding elections.

Royale with Cheese wrote:

Why the hell was coke banned in the first place? Idiot students who thought they wanted to make a difference. Oh we're in college now, better protest against something. Who the hell gives them the right to make other people's mind up for them? Just seems like some moron activists with nothing better to do taking advantage of young impressionable students who thought they'd try and develop some morales and vote to ban it. If you want to boycott coke for whatever hazey reasons they gave us in the first place, do it on your time. If anything should be banned in UCD it should be referendums like this one.

It was banned due to the lack of action taken by the Coca Cola Corporation after (the alleged) murders of some workers in Columbia due to their membership of a trade union. And nobody has the right to make up other people's minds for them, that's why we held reffurendums. The coke one was held twice with the ban supported both times.

Btw, worth pointing out that while percentages do look low in terms of turnout, there are many postgrads who are effectivley never on campus + virtually all of them wouldn't vote in any reffurenda/elections held, though they have the right to.

If people really feel strongly enough against the ban you can go get 800 signatures + get the reffurendum run, no need to be a class rep or whatever.

There is info about both bans in the Student Survival Guide this year. If you don't have one just ask in the SU corridor, there's loads there.

dajaffa

Red Alert wrote:

I think the SU might be a lot more relevant if internet voting was looked into. People have lots of free time they spend on the net and might use it.

It would be extremley difficult to prevent electoral fraud, sure we couldn't even get regular e-voting (remember that!) working in this country

generalmiaow

But would it be advisable to create the precedent that any time the SU made a policy decision by a referendum that every cohort of students has to vote on it when the three/four years are up? I suppose it makes sense in a way, but it's a very expensive way of going about things, even if you combine votes as dajaffa suggested (which is a good idea if we do have to vote about the coke ban again this year).

We voted on a student centre last year that we would not see during our time in college, surely that would go against the spirit of such a precedent.