SU Council Motions, Mon 27th November 2006

singingstranger

The next meeting of UCDSU Council takes place on Monday 27th November at 6:15pm, in a venue TBC by Services. Either myself or abelard will post here with the venue once it's confirmed. It'll prob be somewhere between Theatres O and R as per usual.

Attendance is, as always, open to all and anyone is welcome to seek speaking rights to speak on a motion. Pop along to ucdsu.net/classreps and find out who your Councillor is, and get in touch telling them how you'd like them to vote.

As is now standard, users are asked to declare affilliation on the relevant thread (if they haven't done so already) before posting on this thread, which is now reserved for discussion on the motions.

The first two motions on notice are ones deferred from the last meeting...

Motion on creating a positive body image in Union publications wrote:

Council notes the steady increase in body image disorders in Irish society today.

Council notes with concern that eating disorders such as anorexia nervosa and bulimia are steadily increasing in both males and females in the 18-25 age group.

Council is aware that many of these problems stem from unrealistic role models used in advertising and in the media. Council acknowledges that these images generate a stereotypical conception of what men and women should look like.

Council notes that in recent weeks the union has used images that may generate a poor body image in both male and female students. Council realises that many alternative images can be used by the union.

Council therefore mandates that in all union publications the showings of male and female bodies are not to be used except in the promotion of health awareness. In such instances where images of unclothed males and females are used, Council further mandates that they are of a realistic nature and non stereotypical.

Proposed by: Elisa O'Donovan, 3rd medicine UCDSU representitive
Seconded by: Chris Bond, Arts and human sciences programme officer

Motion to ban Bebo from all Library computers wrote:

Council notes that due to the implementation of modularisation and semesterisation students’ workloads have been greatly increased.

Council also notes the lack of computers available for use by the student body.

Council is concerned about the amount of time spent by students on non-academic sites, such as Bebo, while others are forced to queue in order to do course related work.

Council therefore mandates the Student Union President to contact the Registrar and to discuss the introduction of a ban of Bebo sites from all library computers.

Proposed by: Linda Phelan, 3rd Science Class Rep
Seconded by: Jane Tiernan, Science Program Officer

...while THESE motions - all ten of them! - are newly submitted for the agenda.

Motion Calling for Provision of Free Beverage Tokens After Each Council wrote:

Withdrawn by Kev...

Motion to Mandate the President to Purchase Duct Tape wrote:

**edit: This motion has been withdrawn. GR

Motion Regarding the Refurbishment of the Trap wrote:

Council notes the important role socialising plays in university life.

Council also notes the invaluable service "the trap" provides as a non-alcohol venue for socialising and recreation on campus.

Council notes with regret that "the trap" has fallen into disrepair.

Council further notes the popularity of "the trap" amongst students, particularly amongst vampires who have nowhere else to go during daylight hours.

Council mandates that funds, as determined necessary by the finance officer, be made available to refurbish the trap.

This refurbishment is to include replacing broken cues and tables, repainting the hall and upgrading the juke box and any additional repairs and upgrades as deemed necessary by the finance officer.

Proposer Paddy Phelan, Centre Club management committee rep.
Seconded Paul Lynam, Arts & Human Sciences programme officer

Motion Regarding the Postering Regulations in UCD wrote:

Council notes the changes in University Postering Regulations this year.

Council notes that these changes have limited the space available for postering.

Council notes that this had had an adverse effect of societies ability to publicise events.

Council therefore mandates the SU President to work closely with the Societies Officer, arts services and the other relevant University authorities to seek to supply additional space for postering.

Council further notes the tendency for large societies to monopolise the postering space available. This is particularly damaging to small societies.

Council mandates the President to seek to introduce to the postering regulations that "No entity, organisation, person or event postering on campus may take up more than half the available space on pillars or no more than all the space on one in every two pillars".

Proposed Paddy Phelan, Centre club rep
Seconded Richard Mulrooney, Societies council rep

Motion Calling for the Introduction of Change Machines in the Library wrote:

Council notes the need of having coins in order to top up ones copiprint card for photocopying and printing.

Council notes the lack of a machine to provide change in the library.

Council further notes the inconvenience suffered by those who must leave the library to obtain change and of those who find themselves unable to find change once the shops around campus close.

Council therefore mandates the Deputy President to campaign for the provision of change machines in the library, daedalus building as a priority and other areas of campus where the service would be used.

Proposer Paddy Phelan, Centre Club Rep
Seconder Richard Mulrooney, Societies Council Rep

Motion calling for an on campus campaign to raise awareness and campaign against changes to curricula across the university wrote:

Council notes the intractable nature of the University administration in particular degree weighting and other changes to curricula as well as the manner in which changes have been executed.

Council notes with concern that the anger among the student population who have only recently been informed of this change.

Council notes that the students of UCD are looking to their Student's Union for action on this issue.

Council notes with great concern the detrimental affect these changes will have on student, sport and society life and general student morale.

Council notes that currently for this years second arts students 30% of their overall degree weighting comes from their top six modules.

Council notes that this change applies to this academic year only.

Council believes that it is does not go far enough, nor does it relieve the academic pressure from future second years which will be subject to the 50% degree weighting in penultimate year.

Council therefore demands that this system of benificial aggregation be applied for all subsequent years.

Council notes that changes to degree weighting do not only affect Arts students but those from other colleges and schools.

Council calls for a University wide protest to organise the student body to complain about these changes and put pressure on the University to be more malleable on the issue.

Council mandates the President, Deputy President, Welfare and Education Officers to organise this campaign, culminating in a protest in early Semester 2.

Proposer: Kevin J. Doyle Final Year School of History and Archives
Seconded: Isobel O'Connor, 2nd Physiotherapy Class Rep

Motion Regarding the collation of Council Mandates for the Last Three Years wrote:

Council notes the lack of knowledge of previous motions passed by this body.

Council further notes that it's role in ensuring the implementation of mandates is impeded by this.

Council mandates the Union President, or an appointee of his, to collate all mandates passed by Council from the inaugural Council of 2003 to the present Council and for the document to be provided to all Councillors by email. This document should be updated after every Council and be placed on the Union website.

Proposed by Colm Byrne, Health Sciences Programme Officer
Seconded by Isobel O'Connor, 2nd Physiotherapy

Motion Regarding the Erection of a Monument to Charlie Donnelly and Other Deceased Students of UCD wrote:

Council notes that 2006 is the 70th anniversary of the outbreak of the Spanish Civil War.

Council further notes that the 27th of February 2007 will be the 70th anniversary of the death of Charlie Donnelly, a UCD student who fought in the 15th International Brigade during the Spanish Civil War and died there while on service, aged 23.

Council further notes that the current president of UCDSU pledged in his election manifesto to erect a monument/ memorial to the deceased students of UCD.

With this in mind, Council mandates the president to erect a fitting monument to Charlie Donnelly in or on the grounds of the student centre and host a public ceremony to unveil it on the 27th of February 2007.

Council further mandates the president to investigate the possibility of erecting a monument somewhere on campus to remember all students who have died since the foundation of the university.

Council also asks that a committee be formed of not less than 3 and no more than 9 members of council to discuss on a weekly basis the fitting ways in which Charlie Donnelly can be remember and honoured this year and next, and also to liaise with the President and university on the construction of a monument as a memorial to all deceased students on an appropriate site on campus.

This committee should also investigate the fitting way the Students Union in particular can remember and honour those deceased students that have achieved merit and distinction serving the common good during their lifetime. This committee will be elected either at this council or the next council; the decision on when this election will take place should rest with the returning officer.

Proposed by: Enda Duffy, 3rd English and Drama.
Seconded by:Christopher Bond, Arts Programme Officer.

Motion Regarding Union Website wrote:

Council notes that its subordinate decision-making body, the Union Executive has granted, at a meeting of August 23rd, formal approval to the Communications and IT officer to merge the Newswire and the message boards into one forum.

Council hereby renounces that approval.

Council asserts its authority-subject to the provisions of the Union constitution-over both the Union Executive and the Union website and calls for new elections to the editorial board of the newswire and messageboards.

Council mandates the Communications and IT Officer to leave the newswire of the Union website intact and in fully functional existence.

Council further mandates the Union Communications and IT Officer to:


* Establish on the messageboards section of the website a forum where the Newswire editorial policy and list of members of the Newswire Editorial board shall be permanently displayed for the purposes of allowing discussion of editorial actions.


* The placing of all Class Representatives photographs and contact details on the relevant section of the University’s Blackboard system.


* The establishment of official Class Representative profiles on the Union website’s MessageBoards section for the purpose of accountable discussion Union policy


Council mandates the Union President to extend this instruction to the Union’s Design and Communications Officer.


Proposed by:Enda Duffy 3rd English and Drama
Seconded by:Jane Horgan-Jones Education officer 05/06

Motion Regarding the Students' Union Stance on the Corrib Gas Project wrote:

Council notes that when UCDSU takes a stance on an issue that it is speaking for the entire 22,000 strong membership. Furthermore, Council notes the frustration of many members at THEIR union taking a stance on divisive national political issues that are not directly related to students Day-to-Day lives.

Council reaffirms its belief that the Student Union movement can be a vital organ of social change but believes that the drivers of such change must come from a broad base of member interest and support, rather than the Union's elected representatives getting too far ahead of its members.

In the interests of making UCDSU more relevant, and in an attempt to stave off much of the cynicism currently existing among its members, Council wishes to overturn the following mandate from a previous year:

Motion from September 2005 criticising Shell gas pipeline and calling
for release of Rossport Five.

Furthermore Council mandates the Union President to do his utmost to seek possession of all UCDSU banners, and to only release them for use for official union activities. The banner should only be displayed at demonstrations that Council has approved, or in urgent cases where Union Executive has given its approval.

Proposed by: John Butler, 3rd Commerce
Seconded by: John Regan, 3rd Economics

There are also the two motions relating to Standing Orders which have been on notice for the last two weeks:

Motion to amend Standing Orders for the provision of a time limit for Motions passed By SU Council wrote:

That this Council amends the Standing Orders to insert a paragraph 7. of Order III that shall read as follows:

'Motions passed by Council shall be Policy for a period of no more than 3 years'

Proposed by Colm Byrne, Health Science Programme Officer
Seconded by Dave Curran, Deputy President

Motion to amend the procedure for proposing Procedural Motion IX (a) wrote:

That this Council amends the Standing Orders to insert the following paragraph into Order X:

Order IX (a) may only be proposed after an opposition speaker has spoken.

Proposed by Colm Byrne, Health Science Programme Officer
Seconded by Dave Curran, Deputy President

Finally, a new set of Standing Orders is on notice for the *next* meeting of Council, which will probably take place on Monday the 29th of January, which can be viewed here, and which will replace the current standing orders if passed.

Cheers,
Gav

**edited to remove the motion Colin published accidentally, and the two since withdrawn by their proposers.

pretty*monster

Oh for heavens sake, how many is that?

TheVan

Motion Calling for Provision of Free Beverage Tokens After Each Council wrote:

Council notes that UCDSU council is extremely stressful experience for all involved and that many councillors choose to attend one of the campus bars afterwards.

Council notes that councillors socialising together makes for a more cohiesive Union Council and the betterment of the student body as a whole.

Council notes with interest that the President provided free beverage tokens after the recent inaugural Council.

Council observes that "beverage" refers to any liquid intended for human consumption alcoholic or otherwise.

Council mandates the President to provide one free drink token per councillor per session of council.

Proposer: Kevin J. Doyle Final Year School of History and Archives
Seconder: Hugh Doddy 1st School of Sociology

Please tell me that's a joke? You were elected as a political representative of your student constituency, not as the the drinking representative?

Jonny Arson

TheVan wrote:

Please tell me that's a joke? You were elected as a political representative of your student constituency, not as the the drinking representative?

If that's not a joke and is passed, I'm running for UCDSU president next year in protest!

Byrno

It's scant consolation but just to let people know that "Motion Calling for a Protest Against the Changes to Degree Weighting" has been withdrawn. Only leaves 14 motions! That is including the joke motion calling for duct tape to be bought to shut Pierce up. And hopefully the drink token one is a joke motion too. So that only leaves 12!

pretty*monster

12 bloody motions. Mmm... I can hear the sound of essay deadlines whizzing by.

I am reasonably certain that the free drink motion is a joke.

Scraggs

TheVan wrote:

Please tell me that's a joke?

and what a joke!! They can have frickin tap water...

Vainglory

12 motions is ridiculous.

I'm blue in the face saying it, but most of these don't need to be motions at all. And to be honest I have better things to do in final year on a Monday evening than debating "joke" motions.

pretty*monster

/agrees with Vainglory


"Council notes that when UCDSU takes a stance on an issue that it is speaking for the entire 22,000 strong membership. Furthermore, Council notes the frustration of many members at THEIR union taking a stance on divisive national political issues that are not directly related to students Day-to-Day lives...
In the interests of making UCDSU more relevant, and in an attempt to stave off much of the cynicism currently existing among its members, Council wishes to overturn the following mandate from a previous year:
Motion from September 2005 criticising Shell gas pipeline and calling
for release of Rossport Five....."


This motion makes me feel very cynical indeed

abelard

yeah regarding the first of the new motions - "Motion Calling for a Protest Against the Changes to Degree Weighting", I shouldnt have published it at all, it was replaced by the other one - "Motion calling for an on campus campaign to raise awareness and campaign against changes to curricula across the university". It was just a bit of a boo-boo on my part due to being tired after the day of college etc etc.

And regarding the free drinks one, be it a joke or not, I have a firm feeling that it will not pass at Council, though one can never know......

TheVan

Scragga wrote:

They can have frickin tap water...

poisoned tap water??....

Stepherunie

Having spoken to Kev about it before he was fairly serious about his motion - this was a while back though - not a hope of it passing though - there'd be uproar.

Very unimpressed with Enda and Chris' motion on the Monument for deceased students - no objection to a general monument but I find there idea elitest and exclusionary - every deceased student of this college should be valued not just those who died and made an impact - and judging by there decision to name the student they named it would appear to show political leanings from the outset. T

Also there is already a book of rememberance in the admin building for students who died whilst studying in UCD as well as current academics and other staff at the time. There is also a number of memorial plaques in Blackrock for Smurfit students who passed away whilst studying there.

GusherING

Council notes that when UCDSU takes a stance on an issue that it is speaking for the entire 22,000 strong membership. Furthermore, Council notes the frustration of many members at THEIR union taking a stance on divisive national political issues that are not directly related to students Day-to-Day lives.

Council reaffirms its belief that the Student Union movement can be a vital organ of social change but believes that the drivers of such change must come from a broad base of member interest and support, rather than the Union's elected representatives getting too far ahead of its members.

In the interests of making UCDSU more relevant, and in an attempt to stave off much of the cynicism currently existing among its members, Council wishes to overturn the following mandate from a previous year:

Motion from September 2005 criticising Shell gas pipeline and calling
for release of Rossport Five.

Furthermore Council mandates the Union President to do his utmost to seek possession of all UCDSU banners, and to only release them for use for official union activities. The banner should only be displayed at demonstrations that Council has approved, or in urgent cases where Union Executive has given its approval.

Proposed by: John Butler, 3rd Commerce
Seconded by: John Regan, 3rd Economics

I dislike this motion for several reasons, most of which have nothing to with the actual stance on the Corrib Gas project whatsoever. Its personally insulting to many members of SU Council and wreaks of arrogance, belittles students and is extremely paternalistic. Obviously, these two self-righteous proposers know whats right for the SU. I just think it could be styled better and be much less derogatory to get its point across. I have no doubt Council will pass it, however.

The_Minister

GusherING wrote:

I dislike this motion for several reasons, most of which have nothing to with the actual stance on the Corrib Gas project whatsoever. Its personally insulting to many members of SU Council and wreaks of arrogance, belittles students and is extremely paternalistic. Obviously, these two self-righteous proposers know whats right for the SU. I just think it could be styled better and be much less derogatory to get its point across. I have no doubt Council will pass it, however.

I don't see hoe this motion is arrogant?
~It stops people high-jacking council for political gain.
~Withdraws a highly unclear motion regarding the jailing of Rossport five
~Stops people using the UCDSU banner (effectively stating that the majority of people agree with them) without council approval.



EDIT:
The other motion, asking for a monument to a specific person, is disgraceful. Here, stolen from Wikipedi is a few other UCD alumni. Not all deserve monuments, but many do.

Literary
James Joyce
Flann O'Brien
Marina Carr
Austin Clarke
Conor McPherson
John McGahern
Frank McGuinness
Kate O'Brien
Gerard Manley Hopkins
Emma Donoghue
Mary Lavin
Desmond Hogan
Ulick O'Connor
Trevor Joyce
Roddy Doyle
William Wall
Brian Coffey
Keith Ridgway
Denis Devlin
Thomas Kilroy
Colm Tóibín
Eamon Delaney
Sean O'Faolain
Maeve Binchy
Emily O'Reilly
Brian Cleeve

Journalism
Kevin Myers
Fintan O'Toole
Vincent Browne


Business
Peter Sutherland
Niall FitzGerald
Tony O'Reilly
Denis O'Brien

Politics and government
Douglas Hyde (1st President of Ireland)
Éamon de Valera (3rd President of Ireland, 1st Taoiseach of Ireland)
Cearbhall Ó Dálaigh (5th president of Ireland)
Patrick Hillery (6th President of Ireland)
John A. Costello (2nd Taoiseach of Ireland)
Charles Haughey (6th Taoiseach of Ireland)
Garret FitzGerald (7th Taoiseach of Ireland)
John Bruton (9th Taoiseach of Ireland)
V V Giri (4th President of India)
Charlie McCreevy
Brian Lenihan
Kevin O'Higgins
James Ryan
Éamon Ó Cuív
Síle de Valera
Séamus Brennan
Mary Coughlan
Dermot Ahern
Brian Cowen
Michael McDowell
David Andrews
Michael Woods
Michael Noonan
Noel Dempsey
Nora Owen
Michael Kitt
Richard Bruton
Alan Dukes
Mary O'Rourke
Francis Skeffington
Mella Carroll
John L. Murray
Hugh Kennedy
Thomas MacDonagh
Patrick Pearse
Kevin Barry
Catherine Day (Secretary-General of the European Commission)

Academic
Eoin MacNeill (Irish scholar)
Thomas Preston (physicist)
J.A. McClelland (physicist)
William McFadden Orr (physicist)
Arthur W. Conway (physicist)
Thomas Kettle (economist)

Arts
Kevin Roche (architect)
Neil Jordan
Jim Sheridan
Gabriel Byrne
Cyril Cusack
Brendan Gleeson

Clergy
Desmond Connell (Cardinal, Archbishop of Dublin)
John Henry Newman (Cardinal, educator, writer)
Diarmuid Martin (Archbishop of Dublin)
Tomás Ó Fiaich (Cardinal, Archbishop of Armagh)

Sport
Brian O'Driscoll
Jason Sherlock
Michelle Smith
Derval O'Rourke
Denis Hickie

Chakar

Stephen I don't agree with the monument motion but you might want to revise your list because I don't think people who are alive get to have monuments generally speaking though Charles Haughey the former Taoiseach and leader of Fianna Fail got one when he was alive.

pretty*monster

Joyce already has a monument in ucd.
Is it 'disgraceful' that he does when others don't? Was it 'disgraceful' of whatever comittee or whatever to single Joyce out for a monumment?
Things aren't 'disgraceful' just because you disagree with them.

The_Minister

Chakar wrote:

Stephen I don't agree with the monument motion but you might want to revise your list because I don't think people who are alive get to have monuments generally speaking though Charles Haughey the former Taoiseach and leader of Fianna Fail got one when he was alive.

I just took it to show that there are more famous and worthy people from UCD. Dying does not make you a hero (IMO).

And Kate, a University, while we may disagree on the definition of one, should honour its academics, scholers and literary masters. Not its soldiers.

GusherING

The_Minister wrote:

I don't see hoe this motion is arrogant?
~It stops people high-jacking council for political gain.
~Withdraws a highly unclear motion regarding the jailing of Rossport five
~Stops people using the UCDSU banner (effectively stating that the majority of people agree with them) without council approval.

'Hijacking for political gain' is rather partisan, no? In fairness, many in the SU use it for political gain of some sort. I think its a bit of a facade to claim that the SU is totally apolitical. Like Kate said with regard to the monument proposal, just because you don't agree with it doesn't make it disgraceful.

Withdrawing an unclear motion is fine. Just why the need for words like: high-jack, cynicism, too far head of its members, stave off? These are as political as you can get. I find it ironic how you try to portray the Union as a nonpartisan forum when the proposers own use of language is entirely partisan!

pretty*monster

The_Minister wrote:

I just took it to show that there are more famous and worthy people from UCD. Dying does not make you a hero (IMO).

And Kate, a University, while we may disagree on the definition of one, should honour its academics, scholers and literary masters. Not its soldiers.

(I can hear the patronising tone in your voice you know)

The motion isn't about what the University does, only what the Union does. (And, oh my, I think UCD 's committment to academic excellence faces bigger prolems than who it puts up a statue to).

Personally I don't give a flying f*ck about a monument to Who-y Mcwhatnow, but you have yet to explain to me why it is disgraceful.
I suspect it's because you disagree with what Who-y Mcwhatnow fought and died for. This is a fair enough position to take, but it would bother me greatly if you were trying to hide it behind something else.

Stepherunie

Here's one reason why i think it's disgraceful: it's overly politicising the notion of commerating people who were current students of the college at the time of their death. Note the named party in the motion.

passive

Yay for the Bebo motion anyway... i spent 30 minutes queuing for one (in the library... Though my complaint is as valid if it's anywhere.) At the front of the queue the entire time . i eventually went up to the girl who'd been blatantly surfing bebo for 20 of those minutes and told her I had an essay due in two hours and could she please stop playing on the computer and let the queue of people have a turn. She protested that other people were doing it too and why wasn't I giving out to them. and said she was doing an essay, which she clicked onto.

Actually screw that motion.. people should be allowed on Bebo but, in situations like the above, they should be beaten to death severely and their corpses burned.

Council notes with concern that Bebo is very popular among students.

Council also notes that assholes with no consideration for others are using bebo primarily in an abusive and resource wasting manner.

Council further notes that Alan Doyle, 2nd Arts failed Class Rep Candidate, has recently purchased a fire axe.

Council mandates that Alan Doyle be given legal and diplomatic immunity to use the fire axe as he sees fit, at his own discretion, to better the lives and well being of considerate and non bebo-surfing-when-there's-a-****ing-queue students.

Council further mandates that Alan Doyle be compensated for this service in a quantity of ice cream directly proportional to confirmed axe murders."

But, assuming that motion won't pass, How much effort could it take for one member of computer services to wander around occasionally and temporarily ban the accounts of people caught on bebo (or any other site like that) for an extended period of time while there's a visible and frustrated queue? even if they only caught a couple of people a day word would get around and people would be a little less blatant and thoughtless about staring blankly at profile after profile...

pretty*monster

Stepherunie wrote:

Here's one reason why i think it's disgraceful: it's overly politicising the notion of commerating people who were current students of the college at the time of their death. Note the named party in the motion.

The motion specifically says that the monument to Who-y Mcwhatnow should be seperate to the monument commerating people who were current students of the college at the time of their death.

cast_iron

Motions wrote:

Motion Calling for Provision of Free Beverage Tokens After Each Council

I don't doubt for 1 second this is meant as a joke. While there may be logical reasoning behind it, it shows how deluded the proposers are.
They sure as hell need a reality check - and realise who they are, what for and why they are there.

Self important fools:
Kevin J. Doyle Final Year School of History and Archives (The J says it all)
Hugh Doddy 1st School of Sociology

Motions wrote:

Motion to Mandate the President to Purchase Duct Tape these days!

And I suppose the SU (ie. me and you) will pay for this too...Do you know the price of good duct tape?

Motions wrote:

Motion Regarding the Postering Regulations in UCD

Em, excuse me, but both myself and aprox 7,500 Sports Club members of 58 Sports Clubs may take offence to this. Yes, there are that many. And yes, they do orgainse and advertise events.
I know there is a general disdain in Hackville towards Clubs, but at least try and look out for ALL that use posters. (Many would consider the motion an insult because of said wording, - it is - but I don't think any offence was intended.)

Motions wrote:

Motion Regarding the Erection of a Monument to Charlie Donnelly and Other Deceased Students of UCD

While it may be well intentioned, it is almost criminal in it's bias.

Stepherunie

Tbh, that's not the point - why do we need a politically motivated monument to a person, I'm guessing, a large number of people have never heard of. Why this guy and not Kevin Barry for instance (not saying we should have that btw)??

I don't think UCDSU has anything to gain by going down this route.

I've made this point on a number of occasions to various people and I'll make it again: John Henry Newman founded UCD to introduce equality in Ireland so that Catholics would no longer suffer under an educational aparthid. His belief was that everyone was equal and that all deserved the right to be educated.

So why is this one person who died whilst a student in UCD more equal than others thus deserving of a monument to himself?

I'm all for a monument for all students who have passed away, i'd like to see it be extended to all staff and academics too - put that motion forward and I'll more than happily, with the consent of my class vote for it, I would personally be strongly in favour.

pretty*monster

Stepherunie wrote:

Tbh, that's not the point - why do we need a politically motivated monument to a person, I'm guessing, a large number of people have never heard of. Why this guy and not Kevin Barry for instance (not saying we should have that btw)??.....

If you don't agree with who has been singled out for a monument then by all means vote, or instruct your rep to vote, against it.

But there's absolutly nothing wrong with the principle of singling some out for special mention.

As for the issue of no one ever having heard of him, perhaps the thinking is that he diserves to have been heard of and his profile should be raised so to speak.

The_Minister

GusherING wrote:

These are as political as you can get. I find it ironic how you try to portray the Union as a nonpartisan forum when the proposers own use of language is entirely partisan!

No. I think that the Union should be non-partisan.
And, Kate, I don't know what I think of this guy, his wiki is only about three sentences.

EDIT: He wasn't even in UCD when he died, and I'd bet lots more Irishmen (and probably UCD students) died in the Spanish Civil war, and certainly braver men died in WWII, fighting a more just cause.
Basically he was a socialist who went to another country, and died. Oh, and he was also a mediocre poet.

2nd EDIT: I don't think that he even graduated.

3rd EDIT: I know that I called him a mediocre poet, but this isn't too bad:

The Flowering Bars

After sharp words from the fine mind,
protest in Court,
the intimate high head constrained,
strait lines of prison, empty walls,
a subtle beauty in a simple place.

There to strain thought through the tightened brain,
there weave
the slender chord of thought, in calm,
until routine in prospect bound
joy into security,
and among strictness sweetness grew,
mystery of flowering bars.

4th EDIT: There is really nothing clear on the web. Either he did nothing to speak of, or he did nothing that needed to be spoken

pretty*monster

Fair enough, I grow weary of Who-y Mcwhatnow anyway. My only issue was with the word 'disgraceful', which you don't seem to be withdrawing...

The Shell motion, now there's a pickle. I agree with GusherING

Phrases like
"Furthermore, Council notes the frustration of many members at THEIR union taking a stance on divisive national political issues that are not directly related to students Day-to-Day lives."
" the Union's elected representatives getting too far ahead of its members."
In the interests of making UCDSU more relevant, and in an attempt to stave off much of the cynicism currently"

Add nothing to motion and seem to be designed to annoy people. if they want the Corrib Gassline motion withdrawn then fine, say that. There is no earthly need for the other stuff other than being a patronising, partisan, annoyance.

The_Minister

pretty*monster wrote:

The Shell motion, now there's a pickle. I agree with GusherING

Phrases like
"Furthermore, Council notes the frustration of many members at THEIR union taking a stance on divisive national political issues that are not directly related to students Day-to-Day lives."
" the Union's elected representatives getting too far ahead of its members."
In the interests of making UCDSU more relevant, and in an attempt to stave off much of the cynicism currently"

Add nothing to motion and seem to be designed to annoy people. if they want the Corrib Gassline motion withdrawn then fine, say that. There is no earthly need for the other stuff other than being a patronising, partisan, annoyance.

The motion has several parts. The quotes except the last one do not refer to the Shell to Sea. This is only a small part of the motion.

GusherING

The_Minister wrote:

No. I think that the Union should be non-partisan.
And, Kate, I don't know what I think of this guy, his wiki is only about three sentences.

I'm not sure if you're one of the proposers or not so bear that in reference to my comments. I'll assume that you are, if you're not I direct them towards the proposers.


I too think ideally the SU should be non-partisan but in reality, for better or worse, it isn't. You're having a laugh if you think your choice of words does anything to dispel that notion.


This motion assumes and infers that the motion that should be withdrawn because it was wrong, because it was passed by a cabal of socialists who highjacked the SU council . Newsflash! I remember when this motion came up last year and believe me, there were a lot of reps who don't fit into this description who voted for it. whatever their reasons, I imagine few held the idea that it would help the revolution come, or whatever agenda you suspect the hijackers of holding. That was and is just the nature of the SU, reps supported it. Portraying the passing of this motion as a highjacking is portraying a falsehood and is disingenuous. In a democracy, the people are always right. This motion infers the reps who passed this motion last year were something they are not. I for one resent that.

The_Minister

Gusher_ing you are completely misinterpreting the reason for the motion.
The Rossport motion it refers to refers to the Jailing of the Rossport Five. That is grand, and over with. They are out.
The problem is that "lefties" are using one line of the motion to justify continued campaigns against Shell, even though the union rejected a motion to support Shell to Sea. This ambiguous line is the one that is causing the problem, as it is being used to create a non-existant (in my view and many others) mandate. This motion will put an end to that.
No-one is saying that lefties high-jaked the council, we are saying that they have deliberately interpreted this one line as validating ALL campaigns against Shell.

I am not a proposer of the motion.

pretty*monster

The_Minister wrote:

The motion has several parts. The quotes except the last one do not refer to the Shell to Sea. This is only a small part of the motion.

The motion as I see it has two substantial parts, 1) Boo to people saying Boo to Shell and 2) Keep those damn banners under lock and key.

Fair enough, I agree with 2, not with 1, but that's neither here nor there.

The lines I quoted have nothing to do with anything other than feeling smug and superior over people who disagree with the substantial parts of the motion. They are unnecesserily and intentionally divisive, which is highly amusing as well as very annoying.