SU Sabbatical Elections

pretty*monster

humbert wrote:

Ok, I'm no expert on hustings, as a matter of fact I really even dislike the word, hustings, but I can't imagine it being anything other than a big(small) hackfest.

TBH yeah, it usually is a hackfest, but it's open to all (no-one can make non-hacks attend if they aren't bothered). And hack I may be, I'm still undecided in at least one race and hack though I may be I'm still an ordinary student and (student)card carrying member of the electorate and I want a hustings dammit.

/pouting

Also I like the word hustings.

Byrno

TBH I too wanted a hustings as I haven't made my mind up in a couple of races and I also want to grill people! It doesn't matter what the candidates want, the electorate deserve at least one occasion to grill the candidates. In fact I think there should've been a couple of hustings around campus in the different buildings. Not to have at least one though is just poor form.

gliondar

Shelley believes his job is one and a half days work a year. Im totally puzzled how that man became returning officer when he clearly has no interest in a healthy functioning electoral system. Apparently there was a load of problems because of him this year and the fact he didn't want to commit his time or effort to various things.

Morgan Shelley

If you'd like to make any specific criticisms or give me any feedback, please feel free to do so, so that I can have an opportunity to respond.

The email address is returningoffice@gmail.com


Morgan Shelley

humbert

It looks to me like you're after choosing not to take a perfectly good opportunity to respond :rolleyes:

elmyra

Yes. Responding to generalised comments and insults on an online forum would clearly be the professional way to go.... :rolleyes:

panda100

Byrno wrote:

TBH I too wanted a hustings as I haven't made my mind up in a couple of races and I also want to grill people! It doesn't matter what the candidates want, the electorate deserve at least one occasion to grill the candidates. In fact I think there should've been a couple of hustings around campus in the different buildings. Not to have at least one though is just poor form.

Ok these elctions have gone past a joke now and I am voting RON for everyone to show my absolute disgust for the way elections are held in UCD.

Hustings are the only way I can judge wether someone will be a good candidate or not.You just cant tell by a manifesto thats written by someone else and a carefully prepared lecture address. I had serious questions I wanted to ask Carol Anne and Barry Colfer.

By all right specific election debates should be held in each school so we can probe the candidtes instead of just getting hassled by their canvassers on election days.

I encourage everyone to vote RON against these farce of elections. If we are not going to do them properly then we might as well not do them at all. I would rather see mine and my international friends fee's going into buildings/books/better facilities then filling the pockets of returning officers/sabbats that cant do their job properly.

Returning officer or no returning officer we should have those hustings today and if any of the candidates were half decent they would insist on it.

humbert

I just don't have a lot of faith in anything happening as a result of emails sent privately.

elmyra

humbert wrote:

I just don't have a lot of faith in anything happening as a result of emails sent privately.

And I don't think anything that needs to happen is through the fault of the returning officer. It's Morgan's job to run a fair election, if the candidates are half assed and don't want to do hustings then it's up to you to RON them, not up to Morgan to make them. They chose to run, they shouldn't need to be coaxed into doing so properly. I am of course assuming that's what you meant....:p

dajaffa

panda100 wrote:

if any of the candidates were half decent they would insist on it.

Not all the candidates were against hustings, I know Paul Lynam wanted them, I know some (not all) candidates didn't want them, some did but those who didn't outweighed those that did. Constitutionally the Returning Officer has to convene the hustings, so we can't go ahead and organise them ourselves.

elmyra

panda100 wrote:

I had serious questions I wanted to ask Carol Anne and Barry Colfer.

Ok, I'm actually not even being facetious...why don't you just walk up and ask them?

It's probably not as worthwile as in front of a large chunk of the electorate, but hey, you'll get your answers....

elmyra

elmyra wrote:

And I don't think anything that needs to happen is through the fault of the returning officer. It's Morgan's job to run a fair election, if the candidates are half assed and don't want to do hustings then it's up to you to RON them, not up to Morgan to make them. They chose to run, they shouldn't need to be coaxed into doing so properly. I am of course assuming that's what you meant....:p

I'm a little confused. Could the returning officer just organise them, give plenty of notice, and if people don't want the hustings (candidates) then they just can not turn up? Politically, of course, it's idiotic not turning up but they're old enough to make up their own minds.

beanyb

I dont think that the candidates should have any say in whether the hustings are held or not. The opportunity for debate among the candidates should be one of the most important parts of a democratic election. Not holding the hustings because the candidates didnt want to have it totally undermines the whole process.

I know most people won't care that it wasnt on. I wouldnt have gone or anything, it's just the principle of the thing more than anything. The Union are well aware of the bad image that most students have of it and this, imo, only makes it's image so much worse.

I'm now so much more determined to make the effort to vote so that the lovely RON can get all my votes.

panda100

dajaffa wrote:

Not all the candidates were against hustings, I know Paul Lynam wanted them, I know some (not all) candidates didn't want them, some did but those who didn't outweighed those that did. Constitutionally the Returning Officer has to convene the hustings, so we can't go ahead and organise them ourselves.

Yeah I know that Lynam in particular was up for the hustings and Im not suprised cos It really does seperate the weak candidtes from the strong candidates.

elmyra wrote:

Ok, I'm actually not even being facetious...why don't you just walk up and ask them?
It's probably not as worthwile as in front of a large chunk of the electorate, but hey, you'll get your answers...

Two points to this. Firstly Im not on campus all the time and so dont have the luxury of running around from building to building to find where Barry and Carol anne are canvassing.Its a big campus,they could be anywhere. A confined specific place and time where we can see all the candidates makes a lot more sense.

Secondly, its important to see how candidates react on the spot with a big crowd around them. They will be doing this daily on committees with the college authorities so Its good to see them in a questioning environment that will cause them to think on their feet with people waiting for them to answer.

I know your not a spokesperson for L and H elmyra but If you could shed any light into why the society did not choose to hold hustings this year I would be intrested? Dont L and H usually hold the hustings?

Jonny Arson

I agree with everything panda says.

dajaffa wrote:

Not all the candidates were against hustings, I know Paul Lynam wanted them, I know some (not all) candidates didn't want them, some did but those who didn't outweighed those that did. Constitutionally the Returning Officer has to convene the hustings, so we can't go ahead and organise them ourselves.

Without naming names (for your sake!) what were the reasons for candidates not wanting to take part in the hustings? (apart from the blinding obvious reason they don't have a F'N clue what they're running for!) If candidates don't have the balls to participate, debate why they should be elected and interact with the membership then they're not fit to be sabbatical officers end of.

Oooh I can't wait to unleash all my RON votes tomorrow!

Blush_01

Myth wrote:

I'm a little confused. Could the returning officer just organise them, give plenty of notice, and if people don't want the hustings (candidates) then they just can not turn up? Politically, of course, it's idiotic not turning up but they're old enough to make up their own minds.

I made this exact same point earlier. All Morgan has to do is tell the candidates when and where Hustings are, turn up himself, and if nobody else does, off he goes home. Any of the cop outs being offered are just that. Now, to repeat what I have just said in an e-mail to returningoffice@gmail.com, so he can professionally not respond or talk around the matter.

dajaffa

Jonny Arson wrote:

Without naming names (for your sake!) what were the reasons for candidates not wanting to take part in the hustings? (apart from the blinding obvious reason they don't have a F'N clue what they're running for!) If candidates don't have the balls to participate, debate why they should be elected and interact with the membership then they're not fit to be sabbatical officers end of.

Well a scarce few actually wanted them, the rest basically had the attitude that only hacks go to it (which in fairness was true last year, but it was hardly advertised at all last year), I'd be pretty sure a couple felt they wouldn't come accross well in a debate.

Scraggs

I'm probably going to vote RON for Pres. and Deputy Pres.
Welfare VP- Rath.
Ents VP- haven't decided because I only actually like Greene but I'm not sure if she'll do as good a job as Quinlivan would but I really detest some of his campaign practices which I won't go into and I just hadn't heard of Mallon til two weeks ago [well not in any Ents/union related capacity] although that might be a good thing in another way what the whole union staleness and all. I might end up RONing this as well. [oh how I ramble on..]
Education VP- Lynham no. 1 for obvious reasons, I still haven't decided who is going to get no. 2.

panda100

Gor a reply from Morgan. In fairness to him he replys promptly to my emails:Morgans reply is as thus:

'There is no requirement for the Union to host a hustings.
Indeed there was none organised by the Union last year.
From past experience, they were invariably poorly attended by anyone other
than the campaign teams, and candidates felt frustrated by the loss of
two sets of lecture addresses and an hour's canvassing.
I was, nevertheless, happy to organise a hustings if that was the
preference of the candidates.
On another note, for the first time ever this year both Belfield FM
and CTN interviewed the candidates, which is indeed a welcome
development.
If you have any queries for any of the candidates, I am sure they
would welcome your questions directly.'

I particularly point you to that which is in bold. I was at the hustings last year and they were packed so I dont know where the lack of attendance has stemmed from . I was with two of my mates who were not part of any election team or had any su involvement and I remember seeing a few uninvolved boardies there too.

Pythia

President - RON
Deputy - RON
Education - Lynam
Welfare - Rath
Ents - Quinlivan

princess-sprkle

Nothing would make me happier than a big RON win for them all, except perhaps Rath for welfare-he's genuinely the only candidate i feel is good enough for the job as far as i've seen.

i'd have loved hustings too, its not really on that candidates can just decide to opt out of something thats pretty much a part of the process, even if not officially

ENTS- i was voting Quinlivan, but he hasn't come across very well in lecture addresses, and i didn't realise he was so closely affiliated with Holly.

to sum up, not impressed with any of the candidate, the way the campaign was run...i vote RON on everything except welfare.

hullaballoo

What's wrong with being affiliated with Holly? The only reason Ents didn't live up to expectations was because her predecessor, Anto Kelly, did such a good job, and she had very little experience.

Quinlivan has loads of experience, and is genuinely a good man. Of course, being one of his friends might throw up a personal bias, but I wouldn't be one of his mates if he wasn't a good guy.

If he wins, he'll genuinely do a smashing job next year, and I'm sorry that this is my last year in UCD with regard to Ents.

Jonny Arson

dajaffa wrote:

Well a scarce few actually wanted them, the rest basically had the attitude that only hacks go to it (which in fairness was true last year, but it was hardly advertised at all last year), I'd be pretty sure a couple felt they wouldn't come accross well in a debate.

I'd be certain its more than a couple of people!

The reality is if you want to open up the union and do what you can to eradicate the whole enclosed circle-jerk image the union has amongst the union membership..... cancelling hustings is not the way to go about it! The ''only hacks go it so lets not bother!'' is a complete cop out. Congrats candidates on inflicting UCDSU PR disaster no. 1,347,298.....

Anyway I voted...

- Barry Colfer for President - genuine top bloke
- Ciara Brennan for Deputy - best manifesto of all candidates, realistic goals, good speaker, but I would have liked to see her tackle rip-off UCD in her manifesto as that's a big issue as far as I'm concerned
- RON for Ents - Quinlivan nearly had my vote but used too much ''bands like..... will play UCD!''. I don't like exaggeration in a manifesto. If The Strokes ever play UCD I'll eat my hat!
- RON for Education - Whoever is elected will do absolute sweet fcuk all. Here's to another year of UCD screwing over students!
- RON for Welfare - Both candidates very meh, Rushe thinks Brian Cowen is Minister for Education FFS :rolleyes:

mloc

Rumour has it Mallon might be in a bit of trouble... There has been talk of bribery and giving out free drink to people in an attempt to buy votes.

tywy

Jonny Arson wrote:

- RON for Ents - Quinlivan nearly had my vote but used too much ''bands like..... will play UCD!''. I don't like exaggeration in a manifesto. If The Strokes ever play UCD I'll eat my hat!

You obviously missed the point of the back of the flyer.

It said "bands I like". He didn't say anything about bringing any of those bands to UCD. He just wanted people to see that he has reasonably broad taste in music and would cater for more than the indie heads.

I voted for him because he looked to have the most experience. That was the only reason.

Garret

nah he did say he'd bring bands like the strokes, bloc party, fratellis to the ball


and would bring bands like mogwai etc to UCD

Feral Mutant

It's all over now.

Next year I get a sign saying "I've already voted. Leave me alone.".

princess-sprkle

when are the results announced?

delta_bravo

mloc wrote:

Rumour has it Mallon might be in a bit of trouble... There has been talk of bribery and giving out free drink to people in an attempt to buy votes.

Yeh he was giving out free drink ( not sure if it was him personally) but his campaigners were, saying vote mallon etc.. Outside the arts block around 11.30. got 3 bottles of alcohol free bavaria beer. I had given him 4th preference at that stage anyway:) Yeah I heard he is going to get into a lot of trouble for this

pretty*monster

Feral Mutant wrote:

It's all over now.

Next year I get a sign saying "I've already voted. Leave me alone.".

That's what the sticker is for.
I found canvassers to be very polite this year.