SU Hard to get in on

douglashyde

OK - I have to be very careful on what I say here, first, because a lot of people know who I am and the position I hold.

First, let me start by saying, that I think this year’s SU has done a very good job and that I think Alan Keegan and John Murphy have done a great job.

I am four years in DCU now and have been fairly active in some events and in particular one society. I was never or am clicky or close to anyone within the SU, SCC or SPC.

None the less I ran for an ordinary position within the SPC in my second year, there where two positions and five people ran. – not a word of a lie, my speech mentioned that the SPC, SU etc where very tight and clicky and as an outsider I would make a good addition. - I lost. I am not saying I deserved to win, however there was one guy there, who like me, was not well known to the SPC or the people voting, however in my opinion he had more experience than anyone there, he also lost…….. The person, who won was someone who had held a position on the SU, the second person who won was a committee member of a large society. – I am not suggesting these people where not experienced enough, I am however saying that there where people with equal or greater experience there that didn’t make the vote because they where not “clicky”


As it stands, I think the SPC, SCC and SU are fairly well run, however I feel there is an isolation of the common student, who might just want to want go to one or two events a year, or just participate with one society . . . . also, I feel that running of certain events are two tiered – with certain access/preference given to an elite few.

Ending this point on a good note, the SU have done an amazing job getting the bar up and running again, however somebody who is not given enough credit is Shea and the new Bar management, what they are managing to do is not easy after all.

markpb

I'm going to start by being pedantic. DCU is not like most other colleges in Ireland - the SPC and SCC are not part of the SU, they are independent bodies on an equal footing with the SU.

By virtue of it being an election, the people who get voted onto the SPC and SCC committees are going to be well known people. A few committee members won't know any of the candidates so they'll vote for people based on their speech but most people will vote for their friends or people they've worked with during the year. That's not corruption, cliques or anything else, it's just human nature. In a room full of people you don't know, you will naturally vote for your friend.

The counter to this is that is that it's relatively easy to get on a committee for a club or society. During the year, you should be (naturally) getting to know other committee members so they'll know you and vote for you at the end of the year. This has the advantage that the people getting elected have experience running a club or society and will be better equipped to sit on the SPC and SCC.

douglashyde wrote: »

feel there is an isolation of the common student, who might just want to want go to one or two events a year, or just participate with one society

Why do you think someone who doesn't involve themselves much in society life would be a good person to sit on the SPC and decide the financial fate of all the societies on campus? Wouldn't they lack the experience to be able to help and guide society committee members?

. . . . also, I feel that running of certain events are two tiered – with certain access/preference given to an elite few.

This is more worrying and definitely shouldn't happen. Can you give any examples?

douglashyde

When I said "people who participated in just one society where isolated", I didn’t mean that these people had not got a chance on getting onto the SPC or SU.

What I meant was that these people will make up the majority of the student body and their views are not represented - However I do realise that there is a paradox here. How can somebody’s views be represented when they don’t participate? - My answer would be, the SPC/SCC/SU should recognize this non-speaking bunch and actively try and get them involved. – I can from experience say that there are students part of societies I am involved with that love DCU and love the events they hold, but in no shape are form are these students being sought for after input by governing bodies.

I agree with you that it is human nature to vote for our friends, but surely if that is what is happening when people are being voted for on the SPC, then the voting system should be changed/improved?

Regarding the two tiered system, I can give examples, however I wont, due to my involvement within DCU I am in no position to give any sort of examples on this matter for now.

markpb

douglashyde wrote: »

I can from experience say that there are students part of societies I am involved with that love DCU and love the events they hold, but in no shape are form are these students being sought for after input by governing bodies.

I see where you're coming from but I think you misunderstand the aim of the SPC. They have two responsibilities - to divide the annual budget between all societies in a fair and transparent manner and to pick the winners at the end of year awards. Everything else is (rightly) in the hands of the societies.

If people think the type of events are wrong, they should join and influence an existing society or set up their own - SPC have no place in deciding the events. If not enough students are participating in society events, that is partly a fault of the societies and the SPC should step in to help but even then, apart from assisting or funding advertising, it's up to the societies to promote themselves.

I'm genuinely curious to know what suggestion a student would make to SPC (apart from changing the voting). I was on the SPC years ago so I'm obviously not the best person to judge things from an outsiders point of view.

john.needham

I know that your thoughts about the S.U being to tight nit over the years are one which are shared by members of the Union (me included, I'm eng/comp convenor). And thats something which we've tried to address this year, but its a tough task.

However if you want to get involved, feel free to call up to the S.U, I'v absolutely no doubt that Alan/John/Mel would love the offer of help. That sounds like Im taking the piss, but im really not. The S.U will certainly be needing as much help as we can get in rag week, so if you want to get involved, just say so (you dont have to be anyones friend, or part of any click ).

douglashyde

Thanks John and I know that the SU has made an effort to address this issue and infact I really do think that this years’ SU has by far been the best, however for real sustainable change I would think a massive restructuring of the SU would need to happen – and I don’t even know if this would be a feasible idea.

The more I think about this now, I think it comes down to human nature how these things end up being structured – and you cant change human nature.

Mark, as a student I would change the SPC and make its role a lot more known among regular students, publish the allocation grants in campus or on the website and vote for positions on the committee at the same time as the SU votes and allow regular students to vote.

My reason for posting this thread was because of an older thread getting closed, if all students HAVE TO pay the 38 euro reg, and this is how the SPC/SCC/SPC get their funding, then every single student is a stakeholder in these unions and committees and thus should have a view and say.

Or am I just rambling……….

robby^5

douglashyde wrote: »

I agree with you that it is human nature to vote for our friends, but surely if that is what is happening when people are being voted for on the SPC, then the voting system should be changed/improved?

How so? Each society gets one vote and the committee of that society decide who gets their vote, which is fair since they're the elected volunteers who will be dealing with these people on a day-to-day basis running their society. So obviously they'll choose the people they know the best.

In my experience it's not even about personally knowing the people or being their friends, it's more like "oh I know him, he does loads of stuff for society x" so they get the vote.

Also it's common practice for socs to send more than one committee member to vote and it's not always going to be the case where everyone on a certain committee is going to like candidate x so they have decide what would be best for their soc amongst themselves. (this has been the case every time I've voted with gamessoc, there'd be a few of us there)

Landa2

douglashyde wrote:

My reason for posting this thread was because of an older thread getting closed, if all students HAVE TO pay the 38 euro reg, and this is how the SPC/SCC/SPC get their funding, then every single student is a stakeholder in these unions and committees and thus should have a view and say.

Just on this point, every student does have a say in it, being a member of a club or society means you elect the people on that committee, including the treasurer who holds that societies vote when it comes to the elections to the SPC. This is in theory the same as the class rep system, where your class rep is your representitive on Union Council.

MonaghanPenguin

you don't seem to know the difference between the SPC and the SU and you're complaining that no one elected you to the SPC? Also in your opinion this other person was more qualified, in the opinions of others they weren't. That's democracy and all that jazz.

Landa2

robby^5 wrote: »

(this has been the case every time I've voted with gamessoc, there'd be a few of us there)

To vote with different societies i hope.. Article 2 of the SPC Constitution states that each society is only allowed one voting representitive at any meeting of the SPC..

Membership:

1. The treasurer of each recognised society is entitled to membership of the SPC.

2. Treasurers of provisionally recognised societies may attend as observers at 
general meetings.

3. Although members of the Executive may be treasurers of individual societies, 
they should be very conscious that they are not representing their society on the 
Executive. Their aim should be that of the SPC, that is, to allocate funds in an 
efficient, fair and democratic manner.

4. A society can nominate an officer other than the treasurer to represent them. 
This person is entitled to vote, but the society must notify the Executive Secretary 
in writing at least twenty-four hours before the AGM of such a position.

john.needham

douglashyde wrote: »

but in no shape are form are these students being sought for after input by governing bodies.

Landa2 wrote: »

This is in theory the same as the class rep system, where your class rep is your representitive on Union Council.

On the S.U side, Union Council is us seeking input from the student body. While class reps are the only people who can vote (when thats necessary, its usually a discussion), anyone can go and give their opinion. We encourage as many people to attend as we can. The S.U does a better job when students give it feed back and say what they need, and thats the ideal forum to do just that.

douglashyde

Guys, as mentioned, i have no real problems at the moment with the SU and SPC, but it can't be denied that the student body could play a greater role in the running, I appreciate however, this is an extremely difficult task esp when so many students wont engage. - but maybe it should be looked at, why students wont engage?

markpb

douglashyde wrote: »

Guys, as mentioned, i have no real problems at the moment with the SU and SPC, but it can't be denied that the student body could play a greater role in the running, I appreciate however, this is an extremely difficult task esp when so many students wont engage. - but maybe it should be looked at, why students wont engage?

Assuming you're still talking about the SPC, maybe it's because the financial split of student capitation funds between societies doesn't interest your average student. Why would it?

irlande

I really disagree with what youre saying about it being a clique. When I ran for the SPC I was involved in realistically only one society running against a non-sabbatical union officer who also sat on something like 3 committees for societies.

I was by all means a complete nobody and an outsider in the eyes of all those voting and yet, I was elected.

The SPC voting system is a fair and democratic system, allowing every society a vote. As has been said above this is the same general principle of union council, which is the same principle of Dail Eireann and pretty much every elected legislature in the world (even the french).

As John said earlier, it does sound like a cliche but the Union, this year especially, are constantly open for involvement.

Choc123

I will start off by saying that I think the three sabattical officers are very nice people.
However, not necessarily through their fault, the SU is a massive clique. The whole college knows it and anyone who disagrees, does so because they are in the clique.

How many people turned up to the UGM last week?Around 30 I do believe. 30 students out a student body of over 10,000?

How many people would turn up to the class rep meetings if there wasn't the promise of free food?

Name one thing the SU has done since the start of semester one (bar the opening of the NuBar) Are they planning on riding that wave all year long?

Sadly, it will be members of the cliques that run for and get sabbatical positions next semester. These candidates will promise to change things and make the union seem more accessible, and probably will fail.

There is no Union voice in this college whatsoever. Not going off topic but if the whole campus magazine error of judgement had happened anywhere else in the country, the editor's resignation would have been sought.

I'm not saying he should have resigned but it wouldn't matter if he had published anything whatsoever, the student movement hasn't the balls to do anything.
Shame on the class reps who claim to represent their peers. The majority of them only run so as to get into the Union.

Thats my two cents and it is an opinion, nothing else.

gizmo

There are several points worth mentioning thus far so I'll try and hit each of them in order...

douglashyde wrote: »

None the less I ran for an ordinary position within the SPC in my second year, there where two positions and five people ran. – not a word of a lie, my speech mentioned that the SPC, SU etc where very tight and clicky and as an outsider I would make a good addition. - I lost.

To be quite honest, on that basis alone I would not have vote for you purely as that statement demonstrated a fundamental misunderstanding of the structure of the organisation. More on that later though...

I believe Mark has sufficiently dealt with the issue of cliquishness vs. familiarity with regards the voting so I won't touch on that again. Needless to say I completely agree with him and feel the need to reiterate that this cannot be changed.

Regarding the two tier system with regards Societies this is something I do have experience in so I'd like to comment. Upon joining GamesSoc back in 2004 we were quite a small society. We had an extremely modest Grant App and a small but dedicated group of members. Over the following years, however, the society saw rapid expansion. We began running far bigger and more high profile events for not only our members but the general student populace, we made ties with other societies and helped them out at their events and we made a concentrated effort to increase our membership size.

With this expansion of course, we required a bigger grant app and so as we worked our arses off on the above we also put in a lot of time to our new application for funding and what do you know, we got nearly everything we asked for. Thus I put this to you, people should stop looking at what other societies are getting and ask themselves, as a committee, are we not getting what we need and why? Other societies get what they do because they've made a strong case for it and have a proven track record when it comes to delivering on their promises. If you don't have this then do something about it, there is nothing stopping you and the rewards as have been shown by the countless societies which have grown over the years, are well worth the effort.

douglashyde wrote: »

My reason for posting this thread was because of an older thread getting closed, if all students HAVE TO pay the 38 euro reg, and this is how the SPC/SCC/SPC get their funding, then every single student is a stakeholder in these unions and committees and thus should have a view and say.

As has been pointed out, they do have their say. SU via the main elections and SPC/SCC via the individual clubs and societies. Opening up the latter to elections similar to the SU would, in my opinion, be an extremely bad idea as, as Mark said above...

markpb wrote: »

Why do you think someone who doesn't involve themselves much in society life would be a good person to sit on the SPC and decide the financial fate of all the societies on campus? Wouldn't they lack the experience to be able to help and guide society committee members?

...something I think really needs to be remembered.

douglashyde wrote: »

I can from experience say that there are students part of societies I am involved with that love DCU and love the events they hold, but in no shape are form are these students being sought for after input by governing bodies.

How much seeking can the governing bodies do though? All they can do is extend the offer to provide feedback but they can't literally go out and MAKE people give input. At the moment students may drop-in to their offices, give them a phone call or send an email - the only thing left to do would be possibly put up some questionnaires on the portal pages for people to fill in.

douglashyde wrote: »

Guys, as mentioned, i have no real problems at the moment with the SU and SPC, but it can't be denied that the student body could play a greater role in the running, I appreciate however, this is an extremely difficult task esp when so many students wont engage. - but maybe it should be looked at, why students wont engage?

Because they don't want to, simple as that. The vast VAST majority of students who don't get involved in college life do so because they're just not bothered. They come to college, go to their lectures and then leave - that's all they're there for. They either do not recognise, or perhaps don't care about, the benefits attached to getting involved in extra curricular activities. So what can be done to attract these people? Unfortuantely, from what I can tell, very little. You can fight for lower prices on campus and they won't care, you can run information campaigns on getting to know your Union and they won't care and you can setup a new website designed to bring together the SU/SPC/SCC and have all of the info readily available for them at the touch of a button and they still won't care. Does that mean we should stop trying? Hell no, but at the same time you need to realise that this problem is one which will probably never be fully solved.

Of course the SU is tight, then again, those people put in a lot of work and are generally everywhere around campus...

I could also give a guess as to who the future SU is by just watching who does be walking around the place

gizmo

Replying to this one separately as it revolves around a pretty self-contained issue...and my last post was long enough.

Choc123 wrote: »

However, not necessarily through their fault, the SU is a massive clique. The whole college knows it and anyone who disagrees, does so because they are in the clique.

Are you in a clique because...

you chose to get involved in extra curricular activities?
you make a bunch of new friends through these activities?
over time, you begin to learn how the various bodies work?
with this new knowledge you come to realise certain things need to be done to improve them and form some good ideas on how to do it?

If you've answered yes to any of the above then we have a problem because that is not the same as being in a clique.

Choc123 wrote: »

How many people turned up to the UGM last week?Around 30 I do believe. 30 students out a student body of over 10,000?

So are these 30 people in a clique? No, these 30 people evidently are about how the SU runs and are interesting on see how it may be improved. It's the other students who don't attend who should be looked at instead imo.

Choc123 wrote: »

How many people would turn up to the class rep meetings if there wasn't the promise of free food?

Probably 99% of them as, the fact that they even go shows they care about the role which they've been assigned. Again, it should be those that don't turn up who should be scrutinised.

Choc123 wrote: »

Name one thing the SU has done since the start of semester one (bar the opening of the NuBar) Are they planning on riding that wave all year long?

Not currently there so I won't comment however, as I indicated in another post, people really do have no idea what goes on beyond the big events the SU run. Countless students every year receive help from various SU officers that they couldn't get elsewhere and in many cases don't want anyone else to know about. There are also the slew of University meetings which they attend and ensure that, to the best of their abilities, students don't end up getting screwed over - either in general terms or their individual classes. Anyway, my point is, the SU isn't all about big gestures that people will always remember. It's about doing the basic things right and, when the time comes since people care so much, running successful events.

Choc123 wrote: »

Sadly, it will be members of the cliques that run for and get sabbatical positions next semester. These candidates will promise to change things and make the union seem more accessible, and probably will fail.

The first comment is completely incorrect. I, along with countless others, am proof of this. The year I ran I was great friends with the existing SU team and plenty of other C&S people, was Chair of a society which out of nowhere had been tipped for Best Soc, sat on Union Council and ran a pretty damn good election campaign. Did I win? Nope.

Cid-Highwind

douglashyde wrote: »

Mark, as a student I would change the SPC and make its role a lot more known among regular students, publish the allocation grants in campus or on the website and vote for positions on the committee at the same time as the SU votes and allow regular students to vote.

Having more awareness of what the SPC/SCC does would of course be nice, and the issues with websites are beyond the scope of the thread, but it's safe to say that would be nice too. Allocations and minutes have often been posted online before, in my time there was no policy of not doing it, just not a well organised system to publish information in an easy to read format.

As for publishing things in CAMPUS, remember that it says DCUSU on the cover, and is paid for directly by the SU budget. Club/Society pieces are printed there at the discretion of the Students' Union.

Allowing the student body as a whole to vote for the SPC/SCC though is a pretty terrible idea. I say this because these groups have a far more specific role than the Students Union, which represents students both within the university and on a larger scale.

The point of the SPC (I was on the SPC, so I'll talk about that, but the SCC is fairly similar) is to represent the interests of societies.

First off, what is the SPC, because it's not what everyone thinks it is. The membership of the SPC is every society treasurer, and what is generally called the 'spc' is a subcommittee, the SPC executive committee. The SPC meets yearly to elect this committee to act on it's behalf for day to day matters, but the overall budget allocation (the main role of the SPC) is still deferred to the larger committee for approval.

So, what is the role of the SPC (executive)?

• Budget Allocation. This is really it's main role. It's given a percentage of the overall allocation for student activities, and it must ensure that this money is spread as widely as possible to benefit as many as possible. Obviously, compromises have to be made because the funds are limited, but we managed to support most things which were proposed in my time, so I'd say the SPC is fairly successsful in this area.
• Representation. Societies should for the most part, organise themselves. The autonomy involved is part of the fun, "as long as it doesn't break the rules, organise what you want", but as a mechanism for dealing with other university bodies it's pretty poor. The SPC is represented on the Office of Student Life, and the Hub management committee to address the concerns of societies (contrast this with the dozens of committees the SU has representation on)
• Support. Essentially, there's only 20-26 weeks a year where society activities happen. People need support - Formal, in terms of the training organised, and informal, in terms of the rep system where societies have an SPC contact to discuss things with. This is essential in getting started quickly and making the most of the time.

To do this in your spare time (remember, the SU executive it twice the size of the SPC executive and has three full time paid officers) requires people who have significant previous experience of societies that they can bring to the job.

The scope of the job is limited specifically to issues affecting societies, and has very little influence in comparison with the SU.

My point here is that being on the SPC requires a proven skillset to get a specific job done, rather than the more broad representation of the student body, and while the current system isn't perfect, it's better than any other alternative at achieving the required result.

My reason for posting this thread was because of an older thread getting closed, if all students HAVE TO pay the 38 euro reg, and this is how the SPC/SCC/SPC get their funding, then every single student is a stakeholder in these unions and committees and thus should have a view and say.

And I would argue that they do have their say, it's just not as transparent. Every society has an input into the election of the executive committee, and the decision on the budget. Societies vote to get the best for their membership. If you're not a member of a society (remember, it's very easy to start one if there isn't one for your hobby/interest) then there's no scope for the SPC to represent you.

Cid-Highwind

Choc123 wrote: »

I will start off by saying that I think the three sabattical officers are very nice people.
However, not necessarily through their fault, the SU is a massive clique. The whole college knows it and anyone who disagrees, does so because they are in the clique.

No offense, but I have a pretty big problem with this 'blame the clique' attitude.

wikipedia wrote:

A clique is an exclusive group of people who share interests, views, purposes, patterns of behavior, or ethnicity. A clique as a reference group can be either normative or comparative. Membership in a clique is often, but not necessarily, exclusive, and qualifications for membership may be social or essential to the nature of the clique. The term 'clique' may be used pejoratively.

I appreciate that it may seem that way 'from the outside', but rarely have I seen that peception to be based in fact, or the fault of those 'on the inside'

Certainly, some of the characteristics can be applied to the SU (and other DCU groups):

• Patterns of behavoiur: Most people involved in these things are interested, motvated, and enjoy working on projects with other people for the satisfaction of doing it, rather than any other reward
• People in the clique in question often share the same interests, if you're not interested then you're hardly going to sign up

However, that's where the similarities end. I knew no one in DCU when I arrived 4 and a half years ago. I found some interesting looking things to get involved in, met people with whom I shared interests, and ended up getting involved in different things. My point here is that it's not exclusive. There's obviously important positions that are likely to be given to people who have experience and proven themselves before, but that's common sense. Every group I've been involved in has encouraged and welcomed involvement by new people.

What I've rarely seen is immediate agreement on anything but the most trivial of matters. People involved in the SU and other bodies rarely share the same views and opinions on everything, and 'heated debates' are common. This is a good thing, discussion of differing view points leads to better decisions.

That said, I do acknowledge that there is a problem, my argument is that the problem is perception from 'the outside' rather than an actual clique. This is the problem that you're not presenting a solution to, and the problem that everyone would like addressed. As has been acknowledged by others, attendance at meetings organised by the SU is pretty poor, what can be done to encourage more people to become involved?

Cid-Highwind

gizmo wrote: »

The first comment is completely incorrect. I, along with countless others, am proof of this. The year I ran I was great friends with the existing SU team and plenty of other C&S people, was Chair of a society which out of nowhere had been tipped for Best Soc, sat on Union Council and ran a pretty damn good election campaign. Did I win? Nope.

I can also be counted in there

Art_Wolf

There does appear to be a problem here that if someone who attempted to get involved with the SU was not easily able to do so.

They did try if they found out and attended the SPC election. It is a pitty that they were put off from continuing their efforts from that one meeting.

What could be done to avoid this happening in future? If someone was not able to get involved after standing up in front of a group of strangers than the student who takes no notice of the posters is a lost cause.

Maybe it's an idea that the SU make it easier for people to volunteer and participate in the SU? Big "Get Involved" button on their website with info on the different things people could be working on?

You can get involved through volunteer work for the SU, being a class rep and club & soc committees occasionally work with the SU - any other options people know of?

Shea O'Meara

It's natural for there to be groups which seem exclusive, as posted like minded people will gravitate to each other. I've been in a few societies and been involved with SU activities. There is the perception that no outsiders are welcome, which is generally nonsense. Unfortunately for the majority of SU/SOC folk there will always be CV hounds, in it for the padding. Nothing wrong with wanting a broader base to your CV, but it shouldn't be the only driving force when you are representing the views of others.
Thankfully IMO there has only been a few, who usually become transparent over time. This is where I believe everybody gets tarred with the same brush. I've seen and heard people take the odd minor role, work their way in and show little regard for students or in some cases fellow officers. People who decide to run for a particular office and then decide why, or more accurately, what they are going to say the reason is if asked. Certain publications will go after a candidate, write a fluff piece on one or completely disregard another. I stress, this is not common, but it's remembered when it does occur.
It can seem to people outside of student activities that three or four SU officers call all the shots. Anyone in the know, knows this is nonsense, but again, if you're not involved, it can look that way. Point is I can see where doug is coming from.

Cid-Highwind

douglashyde wrote: »

My reason for posting this thread was because of an older thread getting closed, if all students HAVE TO pay the 38 euro reg, and this is how the SPC/SCC/SPC get their funding,

I should have clarified this earlier, as it wasn't pointed out on the previous thread, the €38 doesn't go to fund the SPC/SU/whatever, it's the student center levy, the money goes to repay the loan that was taken out to build the Hub.

The money that funds the SU/SPC/SCC comes from the registration fee. The university gives a certain amount per student to the Office of Student Life. After shared costs like staff etc., the remainder of the budget is divided between the SU, SPC and SCC. At the end of every second academic year the ratio of this split is reviewed, based on who is under/over budget etc.

phantom_lord

what are the SPC and SCC?

cocoa

This is something I've been meaning to ask through the proper channels but I thought I may as well throw it out here too... Does the SPC's TGM have any real meaning? To me, it seems utterly pointless, treasurers are given a very, very quick glance over money allocated, without a hard copy in front of them or a soft copy circulated in advance, and then asked to vote on it. How could anyone possibly have an opinion based on that?

I mean, it's a large amount of information and trying to get every single treasurer to agree is quite a task, which is why an executive is the only logical way to do it, quickly running it past everyone else once the outline has been made, but running it past this quickly seems utterly pointless to me.

Urizen

phantom_lord wrote: »

what are the SPC and SCC?

Societies & Publications Committee and Sports Clubs Committee.

cocoa wrote: »

This is something I've been meaning to ask through the proper channels but I thought I may as well throw it out here too... Does the SPC's TGM have any real meaning? To me, it seems utterly pointless, treasurers are given a very, very quick glance over money allocated, without a hard copy in front of them or a soft copy circulated in advance, and then asked to vote on it. How could anyone possibly have an opinion based on that?

I mean, it's a large amount of information and trying to get every single treasurer to agree is quite a task, which is why an executive is the only logical way to do it, quickly running it past everyone else once the outline has been made, but running it past this quickly seems utterly pointless to me.

The TGM is essentially so people know what's going on. I'm sure you could make a whole weekend of it (or longer, knowing how much work goes into grant apps). That is, however, impractical. Possibly a hard copy in front of you would make it easier to understand, but making the meeting longer is a bit pointless.
It's essentially a confirmation of what each individual society got, so you know for yourself. Any questions I'm sure can be addressed to the SPC afterwards, if neccessary.

cocoa

Urizen wrote: »

The TGM is essentially so people know what's going on. I'm sure you could make a whole weekend of it (or longer, knowing how much work goes into grant apps). That is, however, impractical. Possibly a hard copy in front of you would make it easier to understand, but making the meeting longer is a bit pointless.
It's essentially a confirmation of what each individual society got, so you know for yourself. Any questions I'm sure can be addressed to the SPC afterwards, if neccessary.

If it's purely so each individual soc knows for itself, a simple e-mail or letter would be far more appropriate, as it is it has the appearance that a vote is taken on the allocations, when, with so little information it is totally meaningless.

monument

Choc123 wrote: »

Name one thing the SU has done since the start of semester one (bar the opening of the NuBar) Are they planning on riding that wave all year long?

I'm guessing they are doing everyday work rather than trying make headlines.

Choc123 wrote: »

There is no Union voice in this college whatsoever. Not going off topic but if the whole campus magazine error of judgement had happened anywhere else in the country, the editor's resignation would have been sought.

I'm not saying he should have resigned but it wouldn't matter if he had published anything whatsoever, the student movement hasn't the balls to do anything.

You're not saying he should have resigned? Then what do you mean by "if the whole campus magazine error of judgement had happened anywhere else in the country, the editor's resignation would have been sought"? What was the point in saying that if you don't think he should have resigned?

Choc123 wrote: »

Shame on the class reps who claim to represent their peers. The majority of them only run so as to get into the Union.

Shame on them for what exactly?

gizmo wrote: »

Because they don't want to, simple as that. The vast VAST majority of students who don't get involved in college life do so because they're just not bothered. They come to college, go to their lectures and then leave - that's all they're there for. They either do not recognise, or perhaps don't care about, the benefits attached to getting involved in extra curricular activities. So what can be done to attract these people? ....:(

And I was just thinking nobody has mentioned apathy.

I've heard way too many people give out about college life or DCU's socs and the same people won't join the socs or won't get involved much.

robby^5

Landa2 wrote: »

To vote with different societies i hope.. Article 2 of the SPC Constitution states that each society is only allowed one voting representitive at any meeting of the SPC..

Membership:

1. The treasurer of each recognised society is entitled to membership of the SPC.

2. Treasurers of provisionally recognised societies may attend as observers at 
general meetings.

3. Although members of the Executive may be treasurers of individual societies, 
they should be very conscious that they are not representing their society on the 
Executive. Their aim should be that of the SPC, that is, to allocate funds in an 
efficient, fair and democratic manner.

4. A society can nominate an officer other than the treasurer to represent them. 
This person is entitled to vote, but the society must notify the Executive Secretary 
in writing at least twenty-four hours before the AGM of such a position.

Silly rule, we always sent a few people and we weren't the only soc to do so.

It's not even enforced (which could be done by simply saying only 1 rep per soc at the start of a general meeting) which is a good thing. I think it's a much better way of voting to send more than one committee member from each soc as this way you have a consensus on who each soc will vote for as not everyone knows who will be running beforehand. Giving one person free reign to vote for whoever they like is just silly.

If this rule was enforced it would just impact further on attendance at general meetings, which usually start late or end up with people looking for representatives from socs because they cant get quorum. It's been like that the three times I've been there to vote for a new SPC.

markpb

cocoa wrote: »

This is something I've been meaning to ask through the proper channels but I thought I may as well throw it out here too... Does the SPC's TGM have any real meaning? To me, it seems utterly pointless, treasurers are given a very, very quick glance over money allocated, without a hard copy in front of them or a soft copy circulated in advance, and then asked to vote on it. How could anyone possibly have an opinion based on that?

I totally agree, it's always a disappointing event because it could be (and should be) so much more. Unfortunately in my year, some grant apps came in late, some decisions were hard to make and the whole process ran late. We finished the last of the grant apps the night before the TGM so there was barely enough time to prepare the documents for the treasurers. It's always a hectic time of year so the TGM gets less priority than it should. Those aren't excuses btw, we should have done better.