SU Elections

Podgerz

Howaye lads,, I see Patrick O'Flaherty and Keith Henry are running for Societies chair; How will this go, I doubt anything real can be achieved seeing the time limits on their term

On a separate note; any talk on full time position candidates?

TheCosmicFrog

Podgerz wrote: »

Howaye lads,, I see Patrick O'Flaherty and Keith Henry are running for Societies chair; How will this go, I doubt anything real can be achieved seeing the time limits on their term

I was at hustings this morning. Both candidates said that they will be running for the full-term next year as well.

Reillyman

Podgerz wrote: »

On a separate note; any talk on full time position candidates?

Yes, heard of at least two who confirmed they are running. Unsure about the rules about naming them yet though?

Ficheall

Fairly sure you can't announce someone's intention to run yet.

Congrats to Patrick who got the Socs Chair position though.

TheCosmicFrog

Quick update. Final vote count for the Socs Chair by-election was:

24 - Patrick O'Flaherty
11 - Keith Henry
4 - Re-open Nominations

Squeeonline

Makes me think about there be a quora for SU elections. Hardly democratic if less than 1% of students voted. I didn't even know there was an election and I'm usually fairly clued in to these things on campus.

mrkiscool2

Squeeonline wrote: »

Makes me think about there be a quora for SU elections. Hardly democratic if less than 1% of students voted. I didn't even know there was an election and I'm usually fairly clued in to these things on campus.

1. It was well advertised via facebook and emails
2. The socs chair is voted for by auditors. There is 110 societies. So, the fact that 39 socs voted means its more than a quarter. Just thought I would let you know
Also, Kevin Donoghue won the Postgraduate Officer election.

Squeeonline

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

1. It was well advertised via facebook and emails
2. The socs chair is voted for by auditors. There is 110 societies. So, the fact that 39 socs voted means its more than a quarter. Just thought I would let you know
Also, Kevin Donoghue won the Postgraduate Officer election.

Ah yeah forgot that socs chair was only voted by auditors... Blah.

I dont have the SU things on fb, far too annoying and the emails go straight to bulk and never read. Ah well.

keesa

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

1. It was well advertised via facebook and emails
2. The socs chair is voted for by auditors. There is 110 societies. So, the fact that 39 socs voted means its more than a quarter. Just thought I would let you know
Also, Kevin Donoghue won the Postgraduate Officer election.

That's not what the email said... Richéal Burns I thought. And I had no idea about that election either, or socs day or anything as it happens really. We're kept completely out of the loop on N. Campus

mrkiscool2

keesa wrote: »

That's not what the email said... Richéal Burns I thought. And I had no idea about that election either, or socs day or anything as it happens really. We're kept completely out of the loop on N. Campus

Oh yeah, I absolutely agree with you on that! I know a few of the candidates who were running full-time last year did have involving north campus more as a priorty on their manifestos. Though, everyone in the past few years has anyway

keesa

And yet, not a single SU poster over there. It's pretty much bus soc and that's it

Ficheall

keesa wrote: »

We're kept completely out of the loop on N. Campus

Have you tried using the Internet?

keesa

Yes.

Reillyman

keesa wrote: »

And yet, not a single SU poster over there. It's pretty much bus soc and that's it

There's a bus soc? God almighty I've heard it all now, what do they do? Ride on buses?

Squeeonline

Reillyman wrote: »

There's a bus soc? God almighty I've heard it all now, what do they do? Ride on buses?

Could be worse. They could try and call themselves Biz soc.

isilidur1980

Does anyone know what the "no name" society do??:D

keesa

Squeeonline wrote: »

Could be worse. They could try and call themselves Biz soc.

Both very helpful comments, thanks for your contribution.

Reillyman

There's about six people that have confirmed that they intend to run so far. What is the purpose of this no-naming rule? Seems daft to me.

Ficheall

Reillyman wrote: »

There's about six people that have confirmed that they intend to run so far. What is the purpose of this no-naming rule? Seems daft to me.

One could ask the purpose of many SU-related things, to be fair.

I think the purpose of it is that the vast majority of students on campus, who care not one whit for the SU, do not wish to be plagued with canvassers for any longer than necessary.

IheartGOW

Reddit has a thread about this.
http://www.reddit.com/r/NUIG/

mrkiscool2

Schedule 1 Section G of the SU Constitution says:
"A candidate shall not distribute, nor cause to have distributed, any
promotional material until 6:00pm on the Sunday before the election.
Promotion via any websites is also prohibited until that time."
So, I believe as long as no-one actually promotes any candidate, naming them is quite alright.

Reillyman

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

Schedule 1 Section G of the SU Constitution says:
"A candidate shall not distribute, nor cause to have distributed, any
promotional material until 6:00pm on the Sunday before the election.
Promotion via any websites is also prohibited until that time."
So, I believe as long as no-one actually promotes any candidate, naming them is quite alright.

Yeah I looked carefully at the SU constitution about this, and too be honest it seems that there's absolutely nothing wrong with naming candidates, but there is a widespread belief in the SU that naming a candidate is complete taboo so I don't want to chance it until we get some kind of clarification.

isilidur1980

Ficheall wrote: »

One could ask the purpose of many SU-related things, to be fair.

I think the purpose of it is that the vast majority of students on campus, who care not one whit for the SU, do not wish to be plagued with canvassers for any longer than necessary.

I completely agree!! And the difference between canvassing and downright harassment is a line which the canvassers cross quite a bit. Last year on the final day, I couldn't sit in Smokies without been harassed by the same people every minute. A few of them actually sat down and were almost begging us to vote. It was crazy!! Hopefully this year they will accept when people say no! Canvass away but don't harass.
And if they are going to run, have some good ideas. We had nonsense last year. Apps, buses, etc! Jesus!!:D

mrkiscool2

isilidur1980 wrote: »

Hopefully this year they will accept when people say no! Canvass away but don't harass.
And if they are going to run, have some good ideas. We had nonsense last year. Apps, buses, etc! Jesus!!:D

Hopefully! Also, if you have any ideas yourself tell the candidates! It helps them to help you!

Manco

The prospect of a referendum on the SU being pro-choice should be interesting, looks like the 500 student signatures to mandate one to be held will be collected. If anti-abortion candidates are elected to the SU, will they campaign for the policy or resign, presuming it's passed?

isilidur1980

Manco wrote: »

The prospect of a referendum on the SU being pro-choice should be interesting, looks like the 500 student signatures to mandate one to be held will be collected. If anti-abortion candidates are elected to the SU, will they campaign for the policy or resign, presuming it's passed?

It would be an absolute terrible decision and extremely divisive one. Have the Students Union anything better to be doing besides dividing its membership. I'm not surprised though! It seems to be the caliber of a union we are used to.
On the other hand, they barely get 500 people to vote in the elections itself. However they represent the whole student body. I was wondering if there was a mechanism in the university for a student to opt out of the union. I have enough of their nonsense at this stage!:mad:

Ficheall

With the due amount of respect, I don't think the SU need to have a position on this.
As one of the SU officers said to me "Intelligence isn't for everyone", and I can't imagine consulting any of them on this issue if I needed to.
The decision in question here is far more important than whether or not your grant is late or whether or not you should get a student travel card.

What exactly are the proponents of this change hoping for? (I am referring here to the supposed changes to the college, as opposed to the legalisation of abortion.)

Squeeonline

isilidur1980 wrote: »

It would be an absolute terrible decision and extremely divisive one. Have the Students Union anything better to be doing besides dividing its membership. I'm not surprised though! It seems to be the caliber of a union we are used to.
On the other hand, they barely get 500 people to vote in the elections itself. However they represent the whole student body. I was wondering if there was a mechanism in the university for a student to opt out of the union. I have enough of their nonsense at this stage!:mad:

Agree

I am pro-choice but I wouldnt want the SU representing the whole student body on something as divisive as this.

I also don't want the government meddling in it, but that's another argument entirely!

mrkiscool2

isilidur1980 wrote: »

It would be an absolute terrible decision and extremely divisive one. Have the Students Union anything better to be doing besides dividing its membership. I'm not surprised though! It seems to be the caliber of a union we are used to.
On the other hand, they barely get 500 people to vote in the elections itself. However they represent the whole student body. I was wondering if there was a mechanism in the university for a student to opt out of the union. I have enough of their nonsense at this stage!:mad:

You do realise that the SU has absolutely nothing to do with this referendum yes? It is up to the individual student to sign this motion, then up to them to vote. Also, last year nearly 4,000 people voted in the Full-Time elections, so your wrong about that also.

Does that mean I think there should be a referendum? No, I do not. We don't need to divide the students on such a decisive and emotional issue. The SU needs to remain the way it is; neutral, giving advice on both sides as in abortion and other non-termination methods of dealing with unplanned pregnancies.

isilidur1980

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

You do realise that the SU has absolutely nothing to do with this referendum yes? It is up to the individual student to sign this motion, then up to them to vote. Also, last year nearly 4,000 people voted in the Full-Time elections, so your wrong about that also.

Does that mean I think there should be a referendum? No, I do not. We don't need to divide the students on such a decisive and emotional issue. The SU needs to remain the way it is; neutral, giving advice on both sides as in abortion and other non-termination methods of dealing with unplanned pregnancies.

I'm not up to date on Student Union affairs. I'm a member because it is "compulsory" so i go along with it. Not really too bothered about it. I would want to opt out of this Student Union if they had a mandate for either side of the abortion issue. It is an extremely divisive issue and people are entrenched in their views regarding this matter. The idea that someone has to be part of a body which advocates against their views on this matter is nonsense.
Where does the "compulsory" requirement to be part of the Student Union come from? Is there an opt-out mechanism? I'm thinking if there was, a move like this would lead to quite a few opt-outs!

Manco

I dunno, a lot of people were saying the same about 'divisiveness' when the SU was campaigning for contraception in the 70s, but their role in that issue is seen as fairly admirable nowadays. And if the student body don't like it, they in their infinite wisdom can vote it down. At least it's something of political interest that affects a great many actual people, in contrast to the apolitical personality-contest tripe which constitutes 95% of Student Union elections.

isilidur1980

Manco wrote: »

I dunno, a lot of people were saying the same about 'divisiveness' when the SU was campaigning for contraception in the 70s, but their role in that issue is seen as fairly admirable nowadays. And if the student body don't like it, they in their infinite wisdom can vote it down. At least it's something of political interest that affects a great many actual people, in contrast to the apolitical personality-contest tripe which constitutes 95% of Student Union elections.

Jaysus the feminists and the socialists!! Where do I sign to leave??:D

IheartGOW

I think it is important to remember that the union is currently pro choice. If you are in that situation the union gives you no advice whatsoever. They merely inform you of ALL options. Where you do choose one option they direct you to people qualified to help. They DO NOT adivse anyone in any direction.
Furthermore for those who are not in the know, the union has advocated at both councils where a change on the abortion stance was brought up that we do not change the current stance as it would alienate too many people.
I feel it would be productive to research what the union does before criticising it!
Also, as a matter of interest, has anyone actually looked at the wording of this referendum? It is terrible!!

mrkiscool2

isilidur1980 wrote: »

Where does the "compulsory" requirement to be part of the Student Union come from? Is there an opt-out mechanism? I'm thinking if there was, a move like this would lead to quite a few opt-outs!

It comes from providing you, the student, with loads of different things. Firstly, support. If you ever have a problem, you can go to the relevant officer and they can assist you

Secondly, services. Without you being a "compulsory" member of the students union, we wouldn't have things like Smokey's, the SU Shop, the Wall Cafe or the College Bar. The students that work in the bar and cloakroom would be out of work, and things would be more expensive in the bialinn for students as there would be no competition.

Finally, security. It's there to defend you and protect you. It means that the University are less likely to **** you over, lectures are more likely to be better and put their notes on blackboards etc. It's a lot more than just "issues with grants and student travelcards"

isilidur1980

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

It comes from providing you, the student, with loads of different things. Firstly, support. If you ever have a problem, you can go to the relevant officer and they can assist you

Secondly, services. Without you being a "compulsory" member of the students union, we wouldn't have things like Smokey's, the SU Shop, the Wall Cafe or the College Bar. The students that work in the bar and cloakroom would be out of work, and things would be more expensive in the bialinn for students as there would be no competition.

Finally, security. It's there to defend you and protect you. It means that the University are less likely to **** you over, lectures are more likely to be better and put their notes on blackboards etc. It's a lot more than just "issues with grants and student travelcards"

You are serious,aren't you??:D Everything would close down if the student union wasn't around. The union fosters competition.
We need to be forced to join something to protect us.
I could list numerous things wrong with your nonsense post but I'm not going to get into nonsense debates on here with people who say things like that. Si I'm finished with this particular nonsense thread and your nonsense answers!

mrkiscool2

isilidur1980 wrote: »

You are serious,aren't you??:D Everything would close down if the student union wasn't around. The union fosters competition.
We need to be forced to join something to protect us.
I could list numerous things wrong with your nonsense post but I'm not going to get into nonsense debates on here with people who say things like that. Si I'm finished with this particular nonsense thread and your nonsense answers!

Ok then, I won't argue any which way. Even though you just focused on one of the 3 points there...
So yeah, SU Elections huh?

Manco

isilidur1980 wrote: »

Jaysus the feminists and the socialists!! Where do I sign to leave??:D

Don't let me stop you.

nobbo

http://carey4prez.com/

#carey4prez

Ficheall

Could have done more with that video, but I approve of the campaign in general.

Squeeonline

Ficheall wrote: »

Could have done more with that video, but I approve of the campaign in general.

I can't seem to find any information about which SU he's running for? He appears to be from Ennis.

Aside from that, I sincerely hope this is a joke campaign.

Reillyman

Squeeonline wrote: »

I can't seem to find any information about which SU he's running for? He appears to be from Ennis.

It's for the NUIG SU obviously, he's been here five years he wouldn't dream of being president anywhere else.

#carey4prez

nobbo

Squeeonline wrote: »

Aside from that, I sincerely hope this is a joke campaign.

I'd be careful about making such accusations. As soon as he's finished dominating this election he could be dominating you.

#carey4prez

Jamie___Hogan

So yeah, nominations opened on Thursday and close tomorrow!
Exciting stuff!!

Squeeonline

Reillyman wrote: »

It's for the NUIG SU obviously, he's been here five years he wouldn't dream of being president anywhere else.

#carey4prez

Oh yeah, so obvious. He doesnt mention NUIG in his video or the website. I have no idea who this guy is, never heard of him before and he could be running for any su anywhere by vagueness of everything.

I'm not actually sure if this is just an idiot who wants to get into the SU, or if it's a joke campaign.

ciano1

nobbo wrote: »

http://carey4prez.com/

#carey4prez

Well, he's got my vote!

IheartGOW

List of candidates available here,
http://www.reddit.com/r/nuigalway/comments/19c77r/nominations_for_full_time_su_positions_are_in/

Ficheall

IheartGOW wrote: »

List of candidates available here,[...]

Or here, for convenience's sake:

President:
Niamh Carney
Sean Kearns
Rory McCormack
Conor Stitt

Welfare:
Saoirse Nic a'Bhaird
Patrick Clancy
Claire McCallion
Cathal O'Hagan
JD Kiely
Declan Higgins

Education:
Catherine Breslin
Mark Kelly
Kevin Kennedy
Conor Nolan
Thomas McConnell

Reillyman

Declan Higgins is running for Welfare not Education.

IheartGOW

Ficheall wrote: »

Or here, for convenience's sake:

Most awkward single click ever

laoch na mona

anywhere with proper info on candidates like party views ect

ciano1

laoch na mona wrote: »

anywhere with proper info on candidates like party views ect

I'm pretty sure campaign facebook pages and such will appear over the next few days!