Student union investigation

steddyeddy

Does anyone have any details about a possible student union investigation taking place? A friend of mine said that the student union received an email asking them to provide a list of expenses for the last few years. I have also been made aware that a student newspaper will be looking into the allegations of corruption.y Has anyone any details on this because this is something Im extremely excited about. Some students are struggling to survive on their grants in college and its sickening that the union could lose/skim a million away.

WoollyRedHat

I hope they carry out a througough investigation. Incompetence doesn't cover it, and won't wash... Ents will surely be at the forefront of any mysterious expernditure, considering the shambles that was our old Student Bar.

Interesting development.

steddyeddy

WoollyRedHat wrote: »

I hope they carry out a througough investigation. Incompetence doesn't cover it, and won't wash... Ents will surely be at the forefront of any mysterious expernditure, considering the shambles that was our old Student Bar.

Interesting development.

Indeed. You would have to be a fool to buy incompetence over corruption. I am involved in a certain society and I was approached by a student union officer looking get involved with the society in order to further his own career. Corrupt baxtards.

errlloyd

steddyeddy wrote: »

I have also been made aware that a student newspaper will be looking into the allegations of corruption.

The student newspapers are always looking into allegations of corruption, literally always. That is the very reason the University Observer exists and is constitutionally protected by the SU - and the very reason the College Tribune exists is because it was thought that UO was too close to the SU.

Not even the students union knows how the students union lost all that money, I don't quite know what exactly they are aiming to achieve by requesting paperwork the current officers have access to, I presume anything relevant or helpful is gone now.

There is surprisingly little continuity between SU officers, and the idea that 5 generations of 5 officers could all be in on a conspiracy is pretty fanciful. That said, I welcome an investigation if there is any evidence.

steddyeddy

errlloyd wrote: »

The student newspapers are always looking into allegations of corruption, literally always. That is the very reason the University Observer exists and is constitutionally protected by the SU - and the very reason the College Tribune exists is because it was thought that UO was too close to the SU.

Not even the students union knows how the students union lost all that money, I don't quite know what exactly they are aiming to achieve by requesting paperwork the current officers have access to, I presume anything relevant or helpful is gone now.

There is surprisingly little continuity between SU officers, and the idea that 5 generations of 5 officers could all be in on a conspiracy is pretty fanciful. That said, I welcome an investigation if there is any evidence.

It's not the current officers being investigated as far as I know. As far as why the money is missing there are people in UCD who know what went on.

qmzp

SU should be opt-in. There's no reason students should be forced to fund this circus.

Riamfada

What a year to come back to UCD!

ZeroThreat

qmzp wrote: »

SU should be opt-in. There's no reason students should be forced to fund this circus.

Nowadays students have to pay subs to a students union?

Sierra Oscar

Meh, seems to be some investigation or another every year.

qmzp

ZeroThreat wrote: »

Nowadays students have to pay subs to a students union?

No. Students are obliged to join at registration and pay through their university fees.

WoollyRedHat

errlloyd wrote: »

The student newspapers are always looking into allegations of corruption, literally always. That is the very reason the University Observer exists and is constitutionally protected by the SU - and the very reason the College Tribune exists is because it was thought that UO was too close to the SU.

Not even the students union knows how the students union lost all that money, I don't quite know what exactly they are aiming to achieve by requesting paperwork the current officers have access to, I presume anything relevant or helpful is gone now.

There is surprisingly little continuity between SU officers, and the idea that 5 generations of 5 officers could all be in on a conspiracy is pretty fanciful. That said, I welcome an investigation if there is any evidence.

I think that says more about the SU than it does the newspaper tbh. You say it like it's a bad thing too.

You say that even the student union doesn't know how it lost that money... we're talking about a huge amount of money here... where was the oversight, where was the chain of command, and proper channels of communication. It didn't seem to exist.

Whatever about conspiracy, a narrative of succesive officers covering over the cracks to keep the boat floating does not seem fanciful at all, and that would be counted as corrupt.There is a thin line between incompetence and corruption.
If you chose to willfully ignore something, then it's just as bad.

Furthermore, the idea that there is such a gaping hole in expenditure, overseen by succesive officers, is alarming. The fact that the college had to bail us out is embarrassing and takes away the so called idependence of the SU by doing so. These people clearly shouldn't of been given positions of power to begin with. Anyway, I digress.

I'd like to add I'm not attacking the whole SU, there is some good in it... problem is, there is a lot of bad. Hopefully that is changing. I welcome the introduction of the privatatisation of Ents this year, let's see what happens.

steddyeddy

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

Meh, seems to be some investigation or another every year.

I know the only way they're going to sort this is to report a crime to the gaurds.

steddyeddy

qmzp wrote: »

No. Students are obliged to join at registration and pay through their university fees.

I'd love to be out of this. The SU is just another form of youth politics. It's not something I like funding.

Raphael

steddyeddy wrote: »

Indeed. You would have to be a fool to buy incompetence over corruption. I am involved in a certain society and I was approached by a student union officer looking get involved with the society in order to further his own career. Corrupt baxtards.

At least 50% of SU officers and involved people are in it for career furthering. That doesn't make them corrupt - if anything it would make corruption less likely, as generating closet skeletons is bad for career furthering

WoollyRedHat wrote: »

I think that says more about the SU than it does the newspaper tbh. You say it like it's a bad thing too.

You say that even the student union doesn't know how it lost that money... we're talking about a huge amount of money here... where was the oversight, where was the chain of command, and proper channels of communication. It didn't seem to exist.

Whatever about conspiracy, a narrative of succesive officers covering over the cracks to keep the boat floating does not seem fanciful at all, and that would be counted as corrupt.There is a thin line between incompetence and corruption.
If you chose to willfully ignore something, then it's just as bad.

Furthermore, the idea that there is such a gaping hole in expenditure, overseen by succesive officers, is alarming. The fact that the college had to bail us out is embarrassing and takes away the so called idependence of the SU by doing so. These people clearly shouldn't of been given positions of power to begin with. Anyway, I digress.

I'd like to add I'm not attacking the whole SU, there is some good in it... problem is, there is a lot of bad. Hopefully that is changing. I welcome the introduction of the privatatisation of Ents this year, let's see what happens.

Under the old constitution, no SU officer was in charge of the money. That was the Union Administrators job, who was a permanent university employee. When Pat de Brun investigated the SU finances, and discovered how buggered the union was, the three preceeding SU presidents all denied knowledge of the situation. 2 of them (Lynam and Redmond) said they have been told that the finances were all grand.

I'm not denying that fault lies with the Union - if they were treating the accounts like a black box, as it seems, and never thinking to compare what they spent to what they brought in, that's extremely foolish and shortsighted. Also, there seem to have been some bad financial practices - lack of paper trail, some people being paid in cash, etc. that were certainly bad. And it's certainly possible there was some corruption in there, but I genuinely feel incompetence outweighs it. SU officers are, these day, the most popular kids on the corridoor - financial responsibility and knowledge isn't a part of how they get their job.

But with all that said, I think greater fault lies with the Union Adminsitrator. After all, if a soc turned out to be in the hole, I'd blame the treasurer and the senior treasurer. If it's your job to watch the books, and you let them end in the red year after year (only way I can see a debt that high building up) and don't even communicate that to people? That debt is more on you than anyone else.

steddyeddy

WoollyRedHat wrote: »

I think that says more about the SU than it does the newspaper tbh. You say it like it's a bad thing too.

You say that even the student union doesn't know how it lost that money... we're talking about a huge amount of money here... where was the oversight, where was the chain of command, and proper channels of communication. It didn't seem to exist.

Whatever about conspiracy, a narrative of succesive officers covering over the cracks to keep the boat floating does not seem fanciful at all, and that would be counted as corrupt.There is a thin line between incompetence and corruption.
If you chose to willfully ignore something, then it's just as bad.

Furthermore, the idea that there is such a gaping hole in expenditure, overseen by succesive officers, is alarming. The fact that the college had to bail us out is embarrassing and takes away the so called idependence of the SU by doing so. These people clearly shouldn't of been given positions of power to begin with. Anyway, I digress.

I'd like to add I'm not attacking the whole SU, there is some good in it... problem is, there is a lot of bad. Hopefully that is changing. I welcome the introduction of the privatatisation of Ents this year, let's see what happens.

Spoken like someone with an education. You hit the nail right on the head.

You say that even the student union doesn't know how it lost that money...
we're talking about a huge amount of money here... where was the oversight,
where was the chain of command, and proper channels of communication. It didn't
seem to exist.

Whatever about conspiracy, a narrative of succesive officers covering over the cracks to keep the boat floating does not seem fanciful at all, and that would be counted as corrupt.There is a thin line between incompetence and corruption.
If you chose to willfully ignore something, then it's just as bad.

I'm doing a post graduate in science so I have to look at this logically. The student union don't know where 1 million euro went. I'm not a stupid person so I don't find that credible. Saying that some former Su members are quite vocal about where large amounts of money went. Because of this loss bars closed and people lost their jobs.


Last year someone from the Su was asked do the SU have a bar tab this year after a tab of 100,000 was ran up the previous year. They're response was "I don't know".

I wonder will we see the student union in the new bar much this year?

steddyeddy

Raphael wrote: »

At least 50% of SU officers and involved people are in it for career furthering. That doesn't make them corrupt - if anything it would make corruption less likely, as generating closet skeletons is bad for career furthering


Under the old constitution, no SU officer was in charge of the money. That was the Union Administrators job, who was a permanent university employee. When Pat de Brun investigated the SU finances, and discovered how buggered the union was, the three preceeding SU presidents all denied knowledge of the situation. 2 of them (Lynam and Redmond) said they have been told that the finances were all grand.

I'm not denying that fault lies with the Union - if they were treating the accounts like a black box, as it seems, and never thinking to compare what they spent to what they brought in, that's extremely foolish and shortsighted. Also, there seem to have been some bad financial practices - lack of paper trail, some people being paid in cash, etc. that were certainly bad. And it's certainly possible there was some corruption in there, but I genuinely feel incompetence outweighs it. SU officers are, these day, the most popular kids on the corridoor - financial responsibility and knowledge isn't a part of how they get their job.

But with all that said, I think greater fault lies with the Union Adminsitrator. After all, if a soc turned out to be in the hole, I'd blame the treasurer and the senior treasurer. If it's your job to watch the books, and you let them end in the red year after year (only way I can see a debt that high building up) and don't even communicate that to people? That debt is more on you than anyone else.

I don't find them corrupt for furthering their careers I find them corrupt for losing 1 million.

I really don't find it credible a large degree of corruption wasn't involved. Ever stay at the same hotel as the SU during an event? I can tell you this much. There was more people using expenses and skimming money than was mentioned in the papers.

steddyeddy

Bottom line is they work for us. What in the name of god do they think they're doing running up a bar tab of 100,000?

steddyeddy

Without syaing which one I was involved heavily in a society (auditor) and I don't see how if the money isn't being vouched for or expenses declared it's the admins fault.

ZeroThreat

qmzp wrote: »

No. Students are obliged to join at registration and pay through their university fees.

It's all a little hazy now to me tbh, when I last registered in a 3rd lvl institution, it was back in the latter half of the 90's

Raphael

It's at least partly the admins fault if money isn't being vouched, because they should have some level of financial control. When I was auditor of a society, if I didn't provide a receipt, my treasurer didn't release funds.

And where it's really their fault is that this debt didn't happen overnight, and they never told an incoming executive "Hey, we're a few grand in the hole right now, so we need to cut costs this year." They just kept letting successive officers spend more money than they took in.

Personally, I find it easier to believe that several years worth of SU officers were financially irresponsible than corrupt. Especially when they supposedly had someone managing their finances and saying "Yeah, you're grand" when asked about it. But I guess that just makes me a stupid person who shouldn't be doing a postgrad in science.

Fad

Raphael wrote: »

Personally, I find it easier to believe that several years worth of SU officers were financially irresponsible than corrupt. Especially when they supposedly had someone managing their finances and saying "Yeah, you're grand" when asked about it. But I guess that just makes me a stupid person who shouldn't be doing a postgrad in science.

This basically. There were a couple of officers who in the past few years spent insane amounts of money on events and campaigns which were totally excessive, and while part of the blame lies with them, the larger share of the blame lies with the person who was in charge of accounts, in as far as I understand it.

There's lots I dont like about the SU, but I dont really think any of them would ever be smart enough to skim a million off the top.

matTNT

Why aren't the students union shut down? Why are we paying money to get an organisation out of debt?

Fad

matTNT wrote: »

Why aren't the students union shut down? Why are we paying money to get an organisation out of debt?

It's easier than making a new one? The college likes how limited the current one is?

In fairness, it's not just student subscriptions clearing the debt, the union does generate money.

Raphael

A) Momentum. They exist, and have done for ages, and everywhere has one.
Service Provision. Say what you will about the Union, they do provide some good services in the shops, the trap, and accommodation support/advice. Plus everything the welfare office does. And I've been informed Ents isn't entirely worthless.
C) The University likes having an SU, because it means they have a representative of the student body to consult, so they can say they did.

errlloyd

The Universities Act is often misquoted as saying students need to be part of a union (which they don't)

But it does say that Universities need to provide a union. So there will always be a union of one shape or another.