UCD SU 2011-12: Who will leave a mark?

Duke Leonal Felmet

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

See this is what irks me about the current set-up. Who the hell are any of these people? They are only known to a few friends and classmates.

Chris Wong is the man? What does he stand for? Let me guess: higher levels of student say in matters relating to the college. Wow.

If someone gets rid of the 150 euros extra I'm being charged every year (for nothing) they would get a vote from me. In fact, I might start a campaign myself to have it removed next year.

Agreed. Such a waste of students money. They will always deny it, stating they represent the will of students, and yet, when asked whether there should be a vote on whether an SU should exist at all, you are met with excuses and handwaving.

parker kent

parker kent wrote: »

They pay it, so your point is null.



The bonus "fiasco" would not come anywhere near paying for the building work. I'm not sure you are aware how much it costs to build any of these buildings. How much do you think it costs to finance such infrastructure? Staff wages are not going to in any way account for the gap caused by the decreased funding available to universities.

This is not me defending high bonuses either, I'm just saying we should not be like Shylock and demand our pound of flesh. Could the budget be better spent? Yes. Is that entirely relevant? No.

I clearly didn't compare them on a like-for-like basis (it surely goes without saying that the library is more important than a gym in a university). However, the new student centre will house vital student services (health centre etc) and will also cater for extra-curricular activities which simply are vital to any University.

I'm sorry but your posts seem incredibly narrow minded and based entirely on your personal experiences (see your odd comments towards anybody from outside Dublin).

I think you're missing the original point which would be that the college doesn't need things like a cinema in the first place and that it is a huge waste of money. We should be creating an environment for students to develop into better, less ignorant people - Not fostering such attitudes.

I have no problem with people who come to UCD as thick as a plank, and then leave as thick as a plank but with a degree. Just don't ask me to finance their 'fun'.

We're not talking about a research facility here, it's an entertainment complex with a couple of crowd-pleasers thrown in (such as the health center).

AdamD

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

In a college awash with money (I refer you to the 'bonus' debacle), which rips students off on things like repeat exam fees, why am I being asked to cough up for such a facility? Where are the SU members campaigning for an end to college corruption and rip-off fees?

Lets be honest, many people may use it for something useful - the clubs and socs etc, but I would wager that more than half of the people who go through UCD will do very little more than step inside the place for a look. The fact that these people are being asked to subsidize another group based on a referendum held before they even entered into the college and in very different economic conditions is simply wrong.

And so they should.

AdamD

AdamD wrote: »

And so they should.

Why? 230euro is nothing to some people, to others it's a lot. Why punish poorer students with extortionate fees?

AdamD

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

Why? 230euro is nothing to some people, to others it's a lot. Why punish poorer students with extortionate fees?

Its not punishing poorer students, its punishing lazy students who can't pass their exams.

AdamD

AdamD wrote: »

Its not punishing poorer students, its punishing lazy students who can't pass their exams.

Surely based on your thinking: removing the repeats altogether would be a fairer solution that doesn't base your continued success on your current financial resources?

AdamD

You don't need to be wealthy to pass exams the first time around..

AdamD

AdamD wrote: »

You don't need to be wealthy to pass exams the first time around..

Well, to be frank, life ain't that peachy for everyone.

parker kent

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

I think you're missing the original point which would be that the college doesn't need things like a cinema in the first place and that it is a huge waste of money. We should be creating an environment for students to develop into better, less ignorant people - Not fostering such attitudes.

I'm not missing the point. I explicitly referred to it as important. Extra curricular activities are vital to a university. I 100% support improving those facilities. They did not build just a cinema, it is quite clearly a much larger building. But they had the opportunity to provide one. Those facilities are important to people on campus and will greatly aid student welfare as it provides an outlet for students (as anybody who has encountered lonely, struggling students will attest). I fail to see how a cinema, especially one committed to showing high quality world cinema (yes they will show commercial movies as well and so what?)will create ignorant people. Considering the University runs Film Studies degrees, it could be argued it is useful for academic purposes as well.

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

I have no problem with people who come to UCD as thick as a plank, and then leave as thick as a plank but with a degree. Just don't ask me to finance their 'fun'.

Ironic to call people thick as a plank when you clearly have not tried to understand people that are in any way different to your exact background. Your comments on grants highlight that issue.

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

We're not talking about a research facility here, it's an entertainment complex with a couple of crowd-pleasers thrown in (such as the health center).

Just to make this REALLY clear. Nobody said it was as vital as a research facility. However, a world class university caters to extra curricular activities. Well rounded graduates need more than just academic facilities. Plus given the location of campus and the lack of money available to so many, these facilities will ensure that a vast amount of people will lead healthier, happier periods in University.

If that makes me "thick as a plank", well call me thick.

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

Well, to be frank, life ain't that peachy for everyone.

Genuine extenuating circumstances are taken into account so nobody is unfairly punished with resit fees. You know the deal going into the exam, fail and you pay the resit/repeat fee.

parker kent

parker kent wrote: »

blah blah

I guess we're just going to have to disagree as to what makes a "world class college" I'm sure once the building is complete we'll fly up the rankings.

You can dress it up any way you like, I have yet to be convinced it is anything other than a massive waste of money and resources that could have gone into something that benefited the student body in a more productive way.

AdamD

Pouring money into getting papers published (to go higher up in the rankings) would help the student body much more? I'm not overly for or against the new building I'm just curious.

Its not really the SU's job to do that anyway?

Dublin_swimmer

I'm changing my front runner predictions:

President - Lacey
Ents - Darcy
Education - Chris Wong
Welfare - Michael Gallagher
C&C - Aisling Sheerin

Serious Contenders:

President - Brendan Lannoye
Ents - Jamie Rath / Eoin Heffernan / Darragh Kinsella
Education - Caoimhe Seoige
Welfare - Regina Brady
C&C - Aidan Conroy

Dark Horses:

President - Martin Lawless / Rachel Breslin
Ents - Michael C (Tripod guy) / Enda Conway
Education - Patrick Wolohan
Welfare - Aoife Nic Samhrain
C&C - Catherine Murnane

Darcy still attracts several strong challengers. Can't afford many more S Club / Five style "problems".
Michael G is apparently working his socks off as Arts Pro, as is Aisling. This puts them in the top level.
Considering how closely aligned Aoife / Regina are I can only see one running.
Caoimhe Seoige would be a breath of fresh air. Will she run though? Someone heard this?

errlloyd

I dunno about Regina, Ozzy or Lannoye there, its incredibly uncommon for someone to run after losing once. I ran for Lawsoc auditor and lost, and can tell you honestly I'd never put myself, my friends or my degree through it again. Knowing all of them personally I know they highly value their degrees. Brendan in particular probably isn't going to jeporadise it for another campaign.

Rachel has said many times she has no interest in president. I'd trust that, again knowing her quite well I know she sticks to her word on stuff like that.

As for Darcy doing a second term, it depends on how many years off his life organising the UCD ball costs. Ents is a poisoned chalice, takes a serious man to take two draughts of the poison.

As for abolishing the SU. Don't be bloody stupid, the value you get for the thing is incredible. Its like 27 euro for as many free condoms as you can shag with, inflate and throw away, great gigs, a good value bar (which would be a rip off privatised, guaranteed), a full time education officer who campaigns tirelessly to keep the standards up, a full time campaigns officer who played a significant role in the protest last year which probably kept your fees below three grand, not to mention every officer between president and class rep who give you parties, hoodies and trips.

And don't give me some stupid analysis on why you think the new building is a waste of cash, its not. Barely anyone uses the ag building, should be abolish that? Apart from a cinema it will have a state of the art gym, free for students, an olympic swimming pool, free for us too, a cinema (not just for blockbusters but for film students, ctn screenings ect), a debating chamber, an orchestra chamber, all the societies offices and a re-built reformed forum bar.

Even if you never set foot in the damn thing, it raises our college's standing and prestige and increases the value of your degree. Not that you won't set foot in it, everything from top notch stand up comedy to hollywood films to olympic standard swimming will be in there FOR FREE. The benefit to campus life for those on and off campus is huge. If these new facilities and events do anything to decrease drinking and anti-social behavior, epic win.

Stop complaining please.

Rant over.

LifesaverNiall

Realy hope i get to get some use out of this new building.. from 6th class in primary school until 6th year we were promised that we'd get the use out of a new sports hall for my local secondary school.. didnt and still hasnt happened yet

Dublin_swimmer

Some good analysis there Lloyd. Although I would add that the most determined, run again. Eg. Scott Ahern (welfare), Paul Lynam (education), both ran again after initial defeats.

Yes, Ents must be really hard. But having been at the Cheesefest, I can tell you a lot of people were not happy about the S Club / Five debacle.

Agreed that the SU is good value for money. We'll all be saying the new Student Centre is the greatest thing in the world after it's completed. Looking forward to it being open.

Mardy Bum

errlloyd wrote: »

And don't give me some stupid analysis on why you think the new building is a waste of cash, its not. Barely anyone uses the ag building, should be abolish that? Apart from a cinema it will have a state of the art gym, free for students, an olympic swimming pool, free for us too, a cinema (not just for blockbusters but for film students, ctn screenings ect), a debating chamber, an orchestra chamber, all the societies offices and a re-built reformed forum bar.

Even if you never set foot in the damn thing, it raises our college's standing and prestige and increases the value of your degree. Not that you won't set foot in it, everything from top notch stand up comedy to hollywood films to olympic standard swimming will be in there FOR FREE. The benefit to campus life for those on and off campus is huge. If these new facilities and events do anything to decrease drinking and anti-social behavior, epic win.

Stop complaining please.

Rant over.

Nothing in life is free. Depending on how long you have been to UCD you have definitely paid enough to avail of free use of the pool. Don't believe either that one day the extra charge on the reg fee will disappear because it won't there will be a yearly charge like there is in trinity for the gym which will probably cover the gym and pool. Students won't be getting anything for free apart from education (for the minute) funnily enough.

Btw I'm not slagging off the building of the centre.

seXmym0nkey

errlloyd wrote: »

... a good value bar (which would be a rip off privatised, guaranteed), ...

I disagree! The drinks at the bar are not what I would consider good value. Maybe it is cheap for Dublin, I don't know, but to me €4.15 for a Guinness is unreasonable!

beardedmaster

Mr. Monkey, I feel your pain. That's why I swapped to €3 Beamish!

errlloyd

Dublin_swimmer wrote: »

Some good analysis there Lloyd. Although I would add that the most determined, run again. Eg. Scott Ahern (welfare), Paul Lynam (education), both ran again after initial defeats.

Yes, Ents must be really hard. But having been at the Cheesefest, I can tell you a lot of people were not happy about the S Club / Five debacle.

Agreed that the SU is good value for money. We'll all be saying the new Student Centre is the greatest thing in the world after it's completed. Looking forward to it being open.

And there is no denying how much Lynam struggled uncontested in 2010. Scotty if I am correct only lost a PRO election, I just don't think its as public or as damaging. Average PRO election team is like 10 people, average sabbat team for a big election sits in around 30 or 40.

Tbh though the rest of your predictions are interesting enough, surprised Mark Stokes and Stephen McCahill haven't popped in. Stokes has lost back to back Pro and Mature students officer elections (one public and one in council) which has shot his momentum somewhat, but McCahill for arts, watch that space.

You'll be able to tell a lot from Welfare from who is active in welfare crew, winning welfare crew is a large part of winning that election.

Dublin_swimmer

Scott definitely ran for Welfare but lost to Conor Fingleton in 08/09. Lynam originally lost for UCD education, and then went to USI and became USI Education Officer. He then returned to UCD and became UCD Education Officer in 08/09. It's a weird route. Following this he went on to be President of UCDSU.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_College_Dublin_Students%27_Union

Mark Stokes is a smart operator, but doesn't have a base. He ran Edel's Ents campaign, and even she is gone. Not helped that he is an FFer? I considered sticking him down as a dark horse, but for what? There's very little room for him. Although I think he's got an older brother, who got elected to Exec.

I'm going to keep an eye on Paddy Guiney also. He could be a mover and shaker, but needs a base urgently. Anyone looking to get in on the action will struggle to get past Wong (education) and Sheerin (C&C). 2 certs.

Can't see McCahill getting much further than Arts Soc. I hear there are several rows internally. But it's way too early to call it. Several new leaders could emerge after the Sabbat races.

Mark Stokes

As I've had my name mentioned, may as well clarify a few inaccuracies.

I'll start with the easiest first, Wolohan or Caoimhe for Education. Just no, they're either not interested in that position or even a sabbatical one. Aoife Nic running for Education or Welfare, HA. Not a hope. She is on placement for Semester 2, and if she was going to run, it'd be for the top job, she wouldn't add on another year to Medicine for anything less. Lawless isn't going for anything, in his own words "it just wouldn't pay me to do that!"

Stephen Stokes is not my brother btw, just to clarify.....

Also, as for your pronouncements on who's leading the field and who's unbeatable or working the hardest now, I know that much of that is inaccurate as I've seen first hand how certain people are doing, and how certain people just aren't doing.

Oh, and ArtsSoc, eh, as Treasurer, I'd hope that I'd know about internal disagreements, and the committee get along great actually, McCahill as Auditor has things moving well and I don't know of anything that could be classed as a row, especially any sort of disagreements that would bring the committee or the society into disrepute. So, we're grand, thanks for asking.

As for the elections, they'll come down to one thing (and I only fully grasped this lesson when I lost the Arts PRO race), it's not about how well known you are or what you've done or the experience in your manifesto or how you look etc etc etc, it's boots on the ground and how many canvassers you have from all the different faculties. And if you train your canvassers so they know how to approach people and get them to vote for your guy or girl, you'll win. Most people voting don't know the names of most candidates, let alone all the competing policies, it comes down to who pushed you into the polling booth.

I should also mention, I'm pretty hopeful that I'll be on a Stagé (EU internship) next year, so I'd not be hopeful about my chances of running..... Oh, as for the FFer point, yep, I'm in FF and the KBC, as are a hell of a lot of people, the KBC membership list is a very interesting read, especially if you go back over previous years. Though KBC don't run candidates, if people from it decide to run and the people in the Cumann think they're good, they'll support and canvass for them, simple as that. It's, I'd think, what friends do.

Mark Stokes

Oh, also, I did NOT run Edel's campaign. I was on her team, but not her campaign manager.

errlloyd

Ah Stokes, the friendly banter that was going on here, you had to come in and ruin it all. If you'd given me a week in this thread you'd have won the C&C election...

brownlad

sorry bit of a noob in ucd...what does welfare do apart from give me condoms?

thanks

parker kent

Dublin_swimmer wrote: »

He could be a mover and shaker, but needs a base urgently.

This line made me laugh! You'd think you were talking about Barack Obama before the Democratic Presidential nominations. I'm not sure if anybody at any stage in the SU's history could be deemed a mover and shaker!

errlloyd

brownlad wrote: »

sorry bit of a noob in ucd...what does welfare do apart from give me condoms?

thanks

Welfare runs awareness weeks, provides counselling, manages the ewelfar fund sits on uni boards to stpp funding being taken aaay from key areasand generaly does all it can.

frankiesayrelax

Sorry I just had to respond to this thread. Just a bit of background on who I am. I graduated last year after 4 years in UCD and am now doing a masters in UCD. I was never involved in the SU as a class rep or anything but always took an interest and was on a few campaign teams over the years. Was not on any campaign last year but knew half of the candidates.

Anyway, it's a bit early to start talking about elections, we're only in OCTOBER!!! But since you started I might as well give my 2 cents.

This thread was clearly started by one of the prospective candidates or someone who has a vested interest. Anyway, I'll talk about each race as I see it although it is very early and bear in mind, this time last year nobody would have envisaged Breslin or Geoghegan running, let alone winning.

I think Lacey has President in the bag to be honest, he's almost untouchable. Lawless won't run, neither will Lannoye and if he does, everyone will know how to beat him. I've heard Breslin might challenge him and although that would be intriguing having two VPs against each other for the top job, Breslin has been struggling to cope recently. She's by far the hardest worker I hear but she's almost burned out and I've heard she ain't interested. Lacey has been gearing up for this since he came to UCD. And it's all been handed to him on a silver plate: he gets elected class rep with no hassle due to Ents giving him free booze to give to his class the night before the election, he runs Logue's failed campaign but polls a respectable 41% after coming from nowhere. He gets elected Sports Officer when Lynam decided to create a position. Then his opposition last spring for C&C was poor. I don't know Suzanne Lee but she was never getting elected. Emma Fortune is lovely but she had no chance. And now, he looks like he'll be following the De Brún path of C&C and then President. Lacey has had an unspectacular year but crucially he hasn't ****ed up yet and I doubt he will now that the Freshers Guide, Orientation Week and Class Rep Recruitment are over; he only has one more obstacle to overcome: this USI march. I doubt he gets 5,000 UCD students again but if he gets 3,000 he'll have passed the test in my opinion. The main reason why Lacey is untouchable however is the fact that he has **** all to do because C&C is a pointless position. He can't **** up because there is nothing for him to **** up. Knowing the type of character he is, I'm sure all the reps are in love with him and will form the basis of his campaign team along with the Roebuck/KBC brigade.

Chris Wong is a tough one. Someone said he's a cert, he ain't. He's certainly the front-runner at the mo although it's early days. There isn't another candidate to run against him that I can think of although the KBC may run a candidate like they do for Education every year! Wong was very pro RON last year so I doubt he enjoys Geoghegan holding the Education job. Wong and Williamson were best buds last year and Williamson is Wong's idol. Wong wants to follow in Williamson's path from Science PRO in to Education but he's also interested in Welfare.

Wong is beatable 100%. Yes he polled 55% in a 5 candidate election for Science PRO but that was with the backing of the entire final year Science which he won't have again. He wouldn't have any other support outside of Science and the Welfare Crew (which were almost entirely Science students last year). I don't see him lecture addressing in a packed Theatre L and him getting a response. Whoever runs against him will romp home in Law, Eng, Quinn, Arts and Health Science. Wong isn't from the country so he won't even get the bogger vote in Ag. He'd be a tough candidate to beat but in a campus wide election, I think his base of support would be too narrowly focused.

He could also run for Welfare because the sabbat he loves this year is Breslin. Breslin, it seems has followed on from Scott Ahearn and has the Welfare Crew running. Gallagher will definitely run but he'd be stabbed in the back by his Science buddy if Wong chooses Welfare. Another spanner in the works would be if Evan Heritage ran for Welfare too. If the three of them ran for Welfare, they'd split the Welfare Crew (and Science for Heritage and Wong leaving Gallagher as the favourite) leading to the possibility that an outside candidate could sneak in the back door. Gallagher will definitely run for Welfare and I feel he is the only cert among the VP races. Wong will definitely run but for which race? Either way, the Welfare Crew will have two candidates running thus splitting Wong's team and further proof that he can be beaten if he ran for Education. Gallagher is a cert because there is nobody else, not that he's been impressive as Arts PRO thus far. His election last year was quite lazy I felt. It was like he knew he'd get elected and didn't give a **** and that arrogance could come back to haunt him. Bear in mind, I voted for himself and Stokes also due to the fact that Sheerin and the other guy were utterly useless. Gallagher is an awful speaker so he wouldn't instill any belief in anyone from the bottom of a lecture theatre. If he shows the same level of spirit and determination he demonstrated the first time he ran for Arts PRO, then he has it in the bag. The only other credible candidate would be Mark Stokes for Education and the KBC may run him since there isn't anyone else but he shot himself in the foot by running for Mature and losing. Someone unexpected will run for Education in the last few weeks as always happens.

Speaking of the Arts PROs, the C&C race is the one that everyone believes Sheerin has in the bag. She doesn't and I guarantee you she won't get elected. I have no idea how she even got elected Arts PRO but she's spread herself too thin this year among the SU and C&E and Arts Soc. She is getting on peoples nerves these days. I could only imagine what her input would be like on Exec. She is completely clueless. Somebody will emerge, Murnane or Conran would easily beat her but I'm not sure if they'd run. If it isn't them, it'll be someone else. Aisling Sheerin will never be a Sabbatical Officer in UCDSU.

As for Ents, why would Darcy run again? He'll be 26 come next election and is yet to complete his degree. He's had a decent year with acts but hasn't sold out one event if you exclude LMFAO. Heffo would have it in the bag I feel and this might be the last Ents election as Gary Redmond wants to remove Ents from the Constitution as he sits on the Review Group. Redmond almost always gets his way.

It's far too early to speak about elections, let's wait until February but Lacey will be the next President while Gallagher is heavy favourite for Welfare. Heffo I think will win Ents even if Darcy runs while a previous post suggest that Wong for Education and Sheerin for C&C are the only two certs, in my opinion those positions are the ones that are most up in the air.

beardedmaster

I've never been a Class Rep or been involved in SU either, but I also have had an active interest in its runnings and have been on campaign teams, albeit for not as long.

All I gotta say is, nice post!