Union funds on bus to camp

panda100

Blush_01 wrote:

Well our local municipal dump was supposed to close down almost a decade ago. It's polluting our area and the smell of methane in the air, especially on frosty mornings like this morning, is almost vomit inducing.

I want a cheap trip home, anyone else fancy picketing the dump before I make tea and scones for all in Tipperary? SU sponsored, of course.

Give us all a break.

Ditto for us in Rathkeale.There putting up this mobile mast in Croagh which is meant to be serioulsy health risky. But I would never have the audacity to use students money to help the croagh campaign,even though Im heading down for the protest this Saturday Il pay for my own 35 euro train ticket.

Chinafoot

Vainglory wrote:

In relation to Peachypants' question, I have posted extensively both on boards.ie and on ucdsu.net before on my reasons for thinking that the Union should get involved in student issues, student issues being issues that students care about enough to get active on. If you look at my previous posts or search for my name on the ucdsu.net newswire you will find these posts.

See now that statement seems to suggest that because a group of people involved in the union seem to think its a "student issue" because they have a personal interest, it's ok to voice your protest under a banner that represents
~20,000 other students who are never consulted on the issue. (Yeah, yeah "emergency motion", we know.)

vainglory wrote:

To be honest I am really, really busy with college and have no desire to repeat myself on threads like this ad nauseum when I have outlined my views on this and similar matters many times before to people who will never change their minds on the topic (as I never will either) no matter what I say.

My question was in relation to this specific issue. The fact that you have had to repeat yourself in relation to student disgust at situations like this should tell you something about the level of support from the average student. Like a true politician, you didn't answer my question. Not too busy for the sarcastic comments though.

Blush_01 wrote:

Give us all a break.

^ What she said.

John_C

I've not read through all of this thread so sorry if this is not an original suggestion.

Why not let the students decide? Someone should put forward a referendum with 3 choices:

1. The SU should not involve itself in non student issues.
2. For the SU to get involved in a non student issue should take a 75% majority vote in council.
3. Continue with the current set-up.

We would need a reasonable definition of what a non student issue is.

I would vote for option 2 because it would leave the SU free to get involved in issues like fair trade, where there is concensus but not in other areas where opinion is split.

cast_iron

Vainglory wrote:

Just to clarify on a quick point..

3 non-UCD students were on the bus to Rossport. Everyone else was a UCD student.

1. If non-UCD students had not been able to avail of the three remaining places then UCD students would have had to pay for the empty seats, thus bringing the price up for them.

2. Each of the three non-UCD students paid more than the UCD students. They paid 30 euro while UCD students paid 20.

3. The fact that we did not entirely fill the bus does not mean there is no interest in the issue in UCD. We had very little time to publicise it. In addition to this, people had lectures/labs/tutorials on Friday that they couldn't miss. And as was shown in the case of the poor attendance at the car parking meeting, numbers do not always indicate support.

In relation to Peachypants' question, I have posted extensively both on boards.ie and on ucdsu.net before on my reasons for thinking that the Union should get involved in student issues, student issues being issues that students care about enough to get active on. If you look at my previous posts or search for my name on the ucdsu.net newswire you will find these posts. To be honest I am really, really busy with college and have no desire to repeat myself on threads like this ad nauseum when I have outlined my views on this and similar matters many times before to people who will never change their minds on the topic (as I never will either) no matter what I say.

Seeing as you appear to represent the SU, i ask these simple questions of you:

1. Who proposed the mandate to support the "Shell to Sea" Campaign?
2. What were the reasons behind this (if you know)?
3. How many people went? (from UCD, and how many were not SU people)
4. What was paid for what? (ie. what was the 20/30 euro charge spent on)
5. What did you vote on the mandate in question? (just curious myself, and to clarify your position)
6. You claim that because the bus wasn't full didn't mean there was lack of interest in the matter. Fine. So outside the SU, who came to the SU as part of the general student population and claimed this was an issue thet thought the SU should be representing for them?

Now if you can't answer these fairly simple factual questions (all 6 of them), then please don't waste the time of the people here on this forum by giving answers on isuues that we don't want to know about (ie. personally, i couldn't give a toss what you posted in previous years or on ucdsu.net - i've read neither, so quite where the relevance is here, i'm not sure)

tintinr35

i think the fair trade vs the shell to sea campaigns is a bit of an unfair comparison, the fair trade thing was this not lobbied for with a view to bringing down prices of tea/coffee in ucd aside from the bigger picture. whereas the shell to sea campagin has NOTHING to do with students of ucd!! i dunno maybe im wrong again.....there is a pattern emerging here:)

panda100

John_C wrote:

I've not read through all of this thread so sorry if this is not an original suggestion.

Why not let the students decide? Someone should put forward a referendum with 3 choices:

1. The SU should not involve itself in non student issues.
2. For the SU to get involved in a non student issue should take a 75% majority vote in council.
3. Continue with the current set-up.

We would need a reasonable definition of what a non student issue is.

I would vote for option 2 because it would leave the SU free to get involved in issues like fair trade, where there is concensus but not in other areas where opinion is split.

Good idea john C but in reality this type of referendum wouldnt work. It is quite difficult to define 'non student' issues. It would be easy to defend the involvment of the SU in the 'shell to sea' campaign by saying that some students in the college are from Rossport and hence if it affects them it affects the union. Also for the Irish ferries protest it would be quite easy to say that it is a 'student' issue as we all will be working one day and hence its important to stick up for workers right.
As for your secomd option,I think we can all agree that union council is the main problem at the moment. While there are some very good,solid class reps there are many who are driven by their own political ideas and they will put this before their classes needs. Hence, having a 75% majority vote on campus still wont solve the problem.

Also does anyone know did Barry Colfer take the day off to go to the Rossport protest or was it in his capacity as welfare officer that he attended?

pigeonbutler

cast_iron wrote:

Seeing as you appear to represent the SU, i ask these simple questions of you:

1. Who proposed the mandate to support the "Shell to Sea" Campaign?
2. What were the reasons behind this (if you know)?
3. How many people went? (from UCD, and how many were not SU people)
4. What was paid for what? (ie. what was the 20/30 euro charge spent on)
5. What did you vote on the mandate in question? (just curious myself, and to clarify your position)
6. You claim that because the bus wasn't full didn't mean there was lack of interest in the matter. Fine. So outside the SU, who came to the SU as part of the general student population and claimed this was an issue thet thought the SU should be representing for them?

Now if you can't answer these fairly simple factual questions (all 6 of them), then please don't waste the time of the people here on this forum by giving answers on isuues that we don't want to know about (ie. personally, i couldn't give a toss what you posted in previous years or on ucdsu.net - i've read neither, so quite where the relevance is here, i'm not sure)

Firstly Vainglory represents one view on this within the SU. I (and many other boardsie SU heads) would have a different view. I can answer most of those questions though, because they are factual in nature. (If I'm incorrect on any please feel free to point it out folks)

1. The Original Rossport 5 anti-shell motion was passed Sept 2005. Proposed by Chris Bond (AngelOfFire) seconded by Niall Dolan. The motion about the bus (passed last week) was proposed by Enda Duffy, seconded by Paul Dillon.

2. Reasons.... That's where I'm lost. These lads all have a view that the SU should support nearly all anti-establishment social justice sort of campaigns. I don't think we should unless there's a clear interest from students in them.

3. It's been reported it was a full bus, with 4 former UCD students. The rest being current. I can't confirm that myself though.

4. The motion allocated 250 euro (max allowed for emergency motion). 250 euro wouldn't get you a bus to lucan though let alone Mayo. So the individuals paid extra money themselves. Once again, so I'm told.

5. I didn't look around to see her hand but I'll eat my hat if I'm told Jane didn't vote in favour of this!!

6. This is a funny question since the SU is all of us. But I know what you're trying to say. And I'd imagine the answer is no-one with the possible exception of party political allies of those who raised the issue at council.

Hope that's of some help. I'm more inclined towards the consensus view on here. (being a democrat and all. Some go so far as to call me Progressive too but I'm not that bad!!) Basically I'm going to propose that we stop supporting these causes. If you agree with me e-mail/phone/stop in street your class rep and tell them they're there to represent you and you think they should vote for my motion and against support for these campaigns which are being such an annoyance to people.

Vainglory

peachypants wrote:

See now that statement seems to suggest that because a group of people involved in the union seem to think its a "student issue" because they have a personal interest, it's ok to voice your protest under a banner that represents
~20,000 other students who are never consulted on the issue. (Yeah, yeah "emergency motion", we know.) .

No, nobody just decided they were interested in something and then grabbed the banner. People were interested in something, organised on campus on it, asked the Union (twice) by democratic means to support them, were granted that support, and then used the banner. Bit different. Perhaps you should direct your anger at those who (you think) wrongly voted for the motions rather than those who are exercising their democratic rights to propose them.

peachypants wrote:

My question was in relation to this specific issue. The fact that you have had to repeat yourself in relation to student disgust at situations like this should tell you something about the level of support from the average student. Like a true politician, you didn't answer my question. Not too busy for the sarcastic comments though.

My answer in relation to this specific issue would be the exact same answer as I have always given when asked about Union involvement in anti-war actions, anti-deportation campaigns, worker’s rights, and environmental issues like Shell to Sea. These answers have been consistently given to a group of people on boards that includes you when these issues have arisen. It tells me quite a lot about your opinions on the matter, which I think I know quite well at this stage, but not about anyone else’s. The comments I did post on this thread weren’t repetitious of ones I have posted previously, and as they only took me about two minutes each there was no problem with that.

cast_iron wrote:

Seeing as you appear to represent the SU, i ask these simple questions of you:

I don’t represent the SU. I am not an officer. I would ask that people would remember that my role has changed this year; as an individual I am not personally accountable or recallable to anyone on these boards or in UCD in general.

In relation to your questions, I think pigeonbutler has answered most of the factual ones quite well. I’ll answer some myself though, to add things.


3. How many people went? (from UCD, and how many were not SU people)
-27 from UCD, 3 alumni of UCD.

4. What was paid for what? (ie. what was the 20/30 euro charge spent on)
-Just the bus.

5. What did you vote on the mandate in question? (just curious myself, and to clarify your position)
-I voted yes.

6. You claim that because the bus wasn't full didn't mean there was lack of interest in the matter. Fine. So outside the SU, who came to the SU as part of the general student population and claimed this was an issue thet thought the SU should be representing for them?
-Don’t really understand this question. Nobody came from outside the SU and claimed it was an issue that the SU should be representing for them. The motions were proposed by class reps off their own bat as a result of theirs and others interest in the campaign.

cast_iron wrote:

Now if you can't answer these fairly simple factual questions (all 6 of them), then please don't waste the time of the people here on this forum by giving answers on isuues that we don't want to know about (ie. personally, i couldn't give a toss what you posted in previous years or on ucdsu.net - i've read neither, so quite where the relevance is here, i'm not sure)

This is a bit needlessly aggressive, to be honest. The relevance of my mentioning previous posts on ucdsu.net and boards is that those previous posts directly answer questions I am being asked NOW so I don’t see the point of retyping them when 1) I have four essays due in the next three weeks and 2) Nothing I say is going to change the questioner’s minds.

Do people really expect that for an SU to be representative they have to agree with everything they do? I don’t agree with 20,000 being pissed away on one night of a UCD ball but it doesn’t mean I’m going to oppose any UCD ball being held in the future, because I know it’s important to some members of the Union and I wouldn’t try to do that. Some people seem to think that we should live in a wonderland utopia where everything the Union does is agreed on by every member. Impossible.

John_C

panda100 wrote:

Good idea john C but in reality this type of referendum wouldnt work. It is quite difficult to define 'non student' issues. It would be easy to defend the involvment of the SU in the 'shell to sea' campaign by saying that some students in the college are from Rossport and hence if it affects them it affects the union. Also for the Irish ferries protest it would be quite easy to say that it is a 'student' issue as we all will be working one day and hence its important to stick up for workers right.
As for your secomd option,I think we can all agree that union council is the main problem at the moment. While there are some very good,solid class reps there are many who are driven by their own political ideas and they will put this before their classes needs. Hence, having a 75% majority vote on campus still wont solve the problem.

Also does anyone know did Barry Colfer take the day off to go to the Rossport protest or was it in his capacity as welfare officer that he attended?

Thank you Panda for your reply,
I know that there are people on these boards with more experience than I have, I was only a class rep for one year about 4 years ago. But here's my opinion nontheless.

It's actually my opinion that all votes in council should take a 75% (or even higher) majority. When I was a rep, the vast bulk of 'on campus' votes were passes unanimously and with little debate where as the vast bulk of time was taken up by (often viscious) debate on 'off campus' issues.

If we got to a situation where these topics were never going to pass a vote, hopefully people would stop proposing them. The reason the standard of council is so bad is because very few people without a political motivation are going to sit through a two hour long meeting the way it is now. If the 'off topic' content was removed from council you'd get more non-policical people running for rep and attending the meetings.

panda100

singingstranger wrote:

**EDIT - this, again, was an emergency motion, and so it's naturally difficult for any liaising with constituents, but this was a motion that was publicised days in advance of the meeting. My apologies for flying off on it when it's clearly not something that in this case can be helped, but my brain was fried after the meeting anyway - have a look at the minutes and see why. http://www.ucdsu.net/attachments/jul2006/20060419.htm **
.

I was just reading through Gavs excellent post there again and I realised one thing that shouldnt be allowed in Union council meetings...emergency motions! Just looking at gavs minutes there seems to be a huge correlation between wasteful union expenditure and emergency motions.Theres an emergency motion in those minutes paying fines for an anti-war protestor .This motion was passed and the protestor's fines were paid for.Yet again the class reps did not get time to consult their class on wether it is right for the union to pay for someone elses anti-social beahaviour.

This emergency motion is funny:)
Council notes the disgraceful behaviour of Conor McGowan and he has been asked to be quiet five or six times.
Council mandates that Conor McGowan leaves Council immediately.
Proposed by James Carroll, Union President
Seconded by Anthony Kelly, Entertainments Vice-President

beanyb

tintinr35 wrote:

i think the fair trade vs the shell to sea campaigns is a bit of an unfair comparison, the fair trade thing was this not lobbied for with a view to bringing down prices of tea/coffee in ucd aside from the bigger picture. whereas the shell to sea campagin has NOTHING to do with students of ucd!! i dunno maybe im wrong again.....there is a pattern emerging here:)

I agree with you that it's an unfair comparison but for totally different reasons. Though I am kind of biased since I'm involved in World Aid Soc.

There was an SU campaign to bring down the price of coffee and tea last year, but it nothing to do with World Aid and our Fair Trade campaign. We have tried to reduce the price of Fair Trade coffee on campus but this was just to encourage its consumption rather than to get a better deal for students. The reasoning behind our campaign in for the bigger picture - getting farmers a better deal for their produce etc. We're a society based on developing world issues - that's what we do!

However, the important thing is that it's OUR campaign. Fair Trade is not an SU campaign, they just offer support. We're a very small society and Dave Curran's help in particular basically just publicises the work that we've done. It hasnt really cost much money, but what does cost money is paid for out of the WAS (very, very small) budget. It's that which is the main difference.

Vainglory

beanyb wrote:

I agree with you that it's an unfair comparison but for totally different reasons. Though I am kind of biased since I'm involved in World Aid Soc.

There was an SU campaign to bring down the price of coffee and tea last year, but it nothing to do with World Aid and our Fair Trade campaign. We have tried to reduce the price of Fair Trade coffee on campus but this was just to encourage its consumption rather than to get a better deal for students. The reasoning behind our campaign in for the bigger picture - getting farmers a better deal for their produce etc. We're a society based on developing world issues - that's what we do!

However, the important thing is that it's OUR campaign. Fair Trade is not an SU campaign, they just offer support. We're a very small society and Dave Curran's help in particular basically just publicises the work that we've done. It hasnt really cost much money, but what does cost money is paid for out of the WAS (very, very small) budget. It's that which is the main difference.

In fairness, every time I argue that 250 euro is not a lot of money I'm told by people who oppose these issues being worked on by the SU that it's "the principle, not the money." As far as I know, posters for Fair Trade stuff were photocopied by the Union and obviously Dave Curran's time while he's working = money as he is being paid.

Don't get me wrong, I agree that the Fair Trade campaign is an important one and should be supported by the SU, but I just think it's a bit hypocritical of people to support a "non-student issue" (sic) and then not support another one because they don't think non-student issues should be worked on or even just supported by the SU.

Stabshauptmann

panda100 wrote:

In no way on these boards did I want to infer that the 'event' in Rossport was a party If you feel I am playing a stupid game by asking for student opinions on this thread then please tell me how?

The word "event" has popular conoctations which a reader infers. The writer who uses the word implies.
Judging from your rant on the SU newswire Im fairly sure you deliberatly choose this word because of the popular inference

Another example of a stupid game is "where did I say that on boards" [sic]
And Btw, I was a bit freaked out to get comments on my posts via text from someone I dont remember giving my phone number to.
[edit]I did give panda my number apparently and just forgot/never heard from her. Sorry, my bad[/edit]

I dont think I am.I suppose I see campaigns in very black and white. Those that affect UCD and UCD students and those that do not.
....
as peachy said [free trade] gave the student better coffee and tea and more fair trade snacks to choose from. How does the shell to sea campiagn help/affect UCD students?

Honestly Im not well up on student activism or campaigns but I thought that the fair trade campaign was about the likes of the arts cafe only stocking free tradae tea and coffee and thats why there was such uproar about having to specifically ask for free trade at the counter.
If there is only free trade tea and coffee available then diversity has not been achieved.
The Nestle and coca cola boycotts definitly dont improve diversity and choice.

How does Shell to Sea benifit UCD students? I have met about 30 ppl from rossport studying in UCD. But presumably you meant, in their capacity as students.
But like I said, many SU campaigns havev nothing to do with student life, many I couldnt care less about, but I dont have a problem with those who do campaigning ab about them.

The fair trade 'campaign' really cant be compared to it in any way as I dont remember any union motion dictating that valuble students money be used for it. The fair trade campaign was always a campaign run by world aid soc with union support to publicise it.

Valuable student money.
Im not going to debate whether 250e is a lot or a little, but human resources cant just be ignored. Its not just money spent that should be measured, Im far more concerned how union officers time and energy is being spent. Not all costs are fiscal.

Did he?I think you maybe confusing the end the rip of campaign with our successes in making UCD fair trade university.

Probably am, all I remember was him at a stand selling tea.

Fair play to ya paddy.More variety in the bar has to be a good thing

As for variety Im also trying to get a system like the pav where cans can be sold and consumed in the bar. Hope it works.

cast_iron

Vainglory wrote:

but I just think it's a bit hypocritical of people to support a "non-student issue" (sic) and then not support another one because they don't think non-student issues should be worked on or even just supported by the SU.

To me, the Fair Trade and Shell to Sea don't really compare when classing them as "student issues".
How can you say the fair trade is not a student issue - it involves them selling these products to the students on the UCD campus. How can this be called a "non-student issue"?
Equally, seeing as you supported this issue how can you class the "Shell to Sea" campaign as a "student issue" and therefore justify the SU spending money on this. Point out the direct/indirect student relation here. And i don't mean 30 people come from that area, so...
AngelofFire could do with answering these questions too.

Also, you use another bad analogy in the spending of money on the UCD Ball. This is irrelevant in the context of this thread. The UCD Ball is quite clearly a student issue so you are in no way comparing like with like.

Kaptain Redeye wrote:

But like I said, many SU campaigns havev nothing to do with student life, many I couldnt care less about, but I dont have a problem with those who do campaigning ab about them.

Well i ask the question "Why do the SU get involved with issues that have nothing to do with student life?" I think some people in the SU seem to forget what they are there for - to represent the STUDENTS.

Kaptain Redeye wrote:

As for variety Im also trying to get a system like the pav where cans can be sold and consumed in the bar. Hope it works.

Now that's a student issue i think we would all be in favour of. Best of luck with it.

Chakar

Kaptain Redeye wrote:

As for variety Im also trying to get a system like the pav where cans can be sold and consumed in the bar. Hope it works.

Thats a difficult one alright, I will be trying to get it done over at the Student Bar and so we should try and coordinate whats going on in both committees.

Its a legal issue as well as a public order issue I think anyway I should be familarising myself with the problems surrounding it soon enough anyway.

Vainglory

I think you deliberately misunderstand my posts.

cast_iron wrote:

To me, the Fair Trade and Shell to Sea don't really compare when classing them as "student issues".
How can you say the fair trade is not a student issue - it involves them selling these products to the students on the UCD campus..

The Fair Trade campaign as supported by the SU was not, as far as my recollection goes, simply about introducing these products into the shops so students would have more choice of products. The awareness week, run by Dave Curran on Union time and using posters produced with Union money, was also about creating awareness of the reasons behind the Fair Trade campaign which are undoubtedly not "student issues". They aren't even really Irish issues.

cast_iron wrote:

Point out the direct/indirect student relation here. And i don't mean 30 people come from that area, so.....

The indirect student relation is precisely the same as the indirect student relation in the the Fair Trade campaign. It is a campaign based on outside issues, which students in UCD have taken an interest in, and asked their union to support them in their initiative in pretty much equal measures; I'm sure the posters for the Fair Trade awareness week and the time Dave Curran spent helping on it amounted to more than 250 euro. Previous to the bus motion, the only support given to the Shell to Sea campaign had been nominal, and a few A3 posters photocopied in the Union. Let's not blow things completely out of proportion here.

cast_iron wrote:

Also, you use another bad analogy in the spending of money on the UCD Ball. This is irrelevant in the context of this thread. The UCD Ball is quite clearly a student issue so you are in no way comparing like with like..

You are misunderstanding again. If you re-read my post, you will see that I used the UCD ball example not to argue that it wasn't a student issue, but to point out that while not everyone agrees with it as something UCDSU should spend money on, nobody tries to stop it going ahead as it is agreed that members of the union do care about it and we don't live in a situation where everyone is going to agree with everything the Union does.

GusherING

I think this thread is really just going round in circles.

Red Alert

There's a big difference:

Fairtrade products are of relevance to us, because we're the customers.

The student body as a whole does not have any connection to shell E&P ireland.

Vainglory

GusherING wrote:

I think this thread is really just going round in circles.

Concur.

As I said, we have had all these arguments in the past.

Vainglory

Red Alert wrote:

There's a big difference:

Fairtrade products are of relevance to us, because we're the customers.

The student body as a whole does not have any connection to shell E&P ireland.

Products maybe, but how about awareness talks on Fair Trade in general and the reasons behind the campaign?

beanyb

The fair trade campaign is all about introducing products to the shops. We're trying to make UCD officially a Fair Trade University which basically involves having a certain amount of restaurants and shops offering fair trade products and the Governing Authority agreeing to serve fair trade products at any meetings, graduations etc. It goes along with the Fair Trade towns initiative. Maynooth are a Fair Trade University and Trinity are pretty close to recognition.

It isnt about telling people what Fair Trade is. Any awareness campaigns are to let students know that the products are available if they want to buy them.

Vainglory

Just some extract's from Dave's reports over the last year to illustrate my point..My comments in brackets, his in quotes.

"2. Make Poverty history Week

We held a make poverty History Week with SUAS Society and the World Aid Society. The week constisted of a discussion/ debate about the MPH campaign (the title was whether the campaign was worthwhile or misguided), a table quiz fundraiser in the bar, fair Trade Day on the wednesday with fair trade samples given out, twister, a treasure hunt and loads more;"

(Make Poverty History..Student issue? No. Yet nobody gives out about THAT.)

"Quake Aid

The union helped out in the Quake Aid campaign, with many class reps getting involved. my involvement was in a supporting role, such as lecture addresses, flyer drops and the like. Also i got pied in the face along with the other union officers (note: that's pied not peed)."

(Ditto, not a student issue, but a worthy cause..)

"Doing some events to raise money for tackling AIDS in Africa"

(As above)

Seeing as a lot of people have been firing questions at me and expecting me to drop everything and answer, here's a few of my own.

1. Why are these issues consistently ignored by people who choose to argue against the Union getting involved in "non-student issues"?
2. Why is it only the issues that people may fundamentally disagree with, e.g. Shell to Sea, that get this attention from the "no non-student issues" brigade?
3. Do we need to ask ourselves whether these people are really concerned with the union only spending time on "student issues" if they are so selective in their criticisms?
4. Can't we all just get along?


Meh.

beanyb

Development week last year had very little to do with Fair Trade. It was more just an SU run week to highlight developing world issues just like they run women's week and a week to do with the environment and all the rest. There was one day called Fair Trade Day, but that was a totally WAS organised thing. The only thing the SU did was include that it was happening on their posters for development week as a whole.

This year though, development week is turning out to be a bit of a fair trade week thing since our events are spread over a few days and there doesnt seem to be anything else really organised. The SU are putting up posters for it since technically it is their development week, but very little time has been put into it on Dave's part.

Het-Field

Vainglory wrote:

I think you deliberately misunderstand my posts.




The Fair Trade campaign as supported by the SU was not, as far as my recollection goes, simply about introducing these products into the shops so students would have more choice of products. The awareness week, run by Dave Curran on Union time and using posters produced with Union money, was also about creating awareness of the reasons behind the Fair Trade campaign which are undoubtedly not "student issues". They aren't even really Irish issues.



The indirect student relation is precisely the same as the indirect student relation in the the Fair Trade campaign. It is a campaign based on outside issues, which students in UCD have taken an interest in, and asked their union to support them in their initiative in pretty much equal measures; I'm sure the posters for the Fair Trade awareness week and the time Dave Curran spent helping on it amounted to more than 250 euro. Previous to the bus motion, the only support given to the Shell to Sea campaign had been nominal, and a few A3 posters photocopied in the Union. Let's not blow things completely out of proportion here.





You are misunderstanding again. If you re-read my post, you will see that I used the UCD ball example not to argue that it wasn't a student issue, but to point out that while not everyone agrees with it as something UCDSU should spend money on, nobody tries to stop it going ahead as it is agreed that members of the union do care about it and we don't live in a situation where everyone is going to agree with everything the Union does.

In all fairness though the Fair Trade issue is far less divisive issue than the Shell one. One must remember that very few people will be against better prices for third world producers. However, many will see the actions of the protestors as criminal, and the Rossport Five as deserving everything they got (im not for a second disclosing my opinions on the matter), but its a very different issue, so the comparison is really weak

hullaballoo

Oh god, my eyes are starting to bleed. Please stop! For the love of god stop!

tintinr35

ditto

Blush_01

Hetty, many people may not have issue with the legality or lack thereof of the behaviour surrounding the Rossport issue, but would rather take issue with SU funds being spent on organising/subsidising a trip to support it due to the fact that it is an issue people can deal with outside of college - without the union's involvement. If 27 people went, and the union provided €250, then if each of those people had paid €10 extra, they'd have had enough for the bus without the union, plus a €20 tip for the bus driver. It costs more than €20/€30 for lots of people to pay for a return trip home to wherever they live outside of Dublin. Let people so intent on protesting do so SOLELY on their own earnings, thank you very much.

Ditto for political activists or those indulging in anti-social behaviour who find themselves fined/imprisoned because of their behaviour. I feel that their punishment being paid for them by the SU neither hardens their resolve to prove their point nor serves them as a lesson learned, whichever path they find themselves on. If I smash a window with a hammer and claim I did it in the name of something politically fashionable at the moment (damn, female sufferage was already covered, /me shakes fists at all dead sufferagettes) and get caught, tough sh*t to me, I did it, not the SU, therefore it's my responsibility to deal with it. (Sorry for the oversimplification-ish-ness.)

cast_iron

GusherING wrote:

I think this thread is really just going round in circles.

I would say it's not really going anywhere is probably more accurate!

Vainglory wrote:

1. Why are these issues consistently ignored by people who choose to argue against the Union getting involved in "non-student issues"?
2. Why is it only the issues that people may fundamentally disagree with, e.g. Shell to Sea, that get this attention from the "no non-student issues" brigade?
3. Do we need to ask ourselves whether these people are really concerned with the union only spending time on "student issues" if they are so selective in their criticisms?
4. Can't we all just get along?

To answer to your questions...

1. Because, in fairness you the issues you list are very different to the "Shell to Sea" Campaign. Those 3 you listed are charity issues which most students (and general population) would have sympathy for. As you said, all worthy causes. Wether Shell to Sea is, is really for another debate.

2. You answered it in your question - some people fundamentally disagreee with it. Who here would not sympathise with charity. What kind of students would we be if we didn't support Aid to Africa and the like? Shell to Sea is far, far from a charity.

3. Similar to questions 1 and 2. It's Shell to Sea - not charity work.

4. Em, no. It's what makes life so interesting, and it's how the real world works.

Seeing as you can't understand me and you say i don't understand you - unless anything new can be added to this debate, i suggest we spare ourselves - and everyone - any more repetitive drivel.

AngelofFire

From what i understand the business cards with my name on them (which in my opinion we could perhaps do without) cost more money than the bus to rossport. also €250 is approximatley 0.025% of the union budget, thats hardly going to create a hole in the union finances.

cast_iron

AngelofFire wrote:

From what i understand the business cards with my name on them (which in my opinion we could perhaps do without) cost more money than the bus to rossport. also €250 is approximatley 0.025% of the union budget, thats hardly going to create a hole in the union finances.

Ah right, well that makes it all okay then.