Why pay the USI levy?

dublinguy2004

Why should representation by the USI be 'mandatory'? I'm not paying any affiliation fees to any student union this year.

Students should be allowed choose whether they want to join a union or not. The USI have very liberal policies that many students may not agree with. One really does have to be careful what they sign up to these days.

AngelofFire

The money UCD Students Union pays to USI equates to about 5 euro per student per year, as far as i know. if you want UCDSU to disaffiliate from the union of students of ireland, you would have to call a referendum by getting together a petiton of about 1000 signatures. USI is supposed to represent students on a national level, but it is pretty much a taling shop, and a club for people looking to get a good C.V.

I Wouldnt call USI liberal, it does have a policy calling for more Gardai to patrol the streets.

rainbow kirby

And what's wrong with liberal politics anyway?

arbeitsscheuer

rainbow kirby wrote:

And what's wrong with liberal politics anyway?

Exactly what I was gonna say.
This country's becoming like the US, where to be called "liberal" is the ultimate insult.
What's funny is, this new descriptive term, "neo-liberal", which as far as I can make out means the exact opposite of liberal. Bizarre.

dublinguy2004

AngelofFire wrote:

The money UCD Students Union pays to USI equates to about 5 euro per student per year, as far as i know. if you want UCDSU to disaffiliate from the union of students of ireland, you would have to call a referendum by getting together a petiton of about 1000 signatures. USI is supposed to represent students on a national level, but it is pretty much a taling shop, and a club for people looking to get a good C.V.

I Wouldnt call USI liberal, it does have a policy calling for more Gardai to patrol the streets.

5 euro per student per year eh? Well why not let every sports club/society levy students? What percentage of UCD students actually care what the USI are up to anyway? I for one don't want what appears to be 'compulsory' membership of an organisation I have many fundamental disagreements with (as do a lot of my friends).

Without going into specific disagreements, why should I pay membership to a union that I, and lots of students like me, don't want to be represented by? Why is the USI so special that they can levy students and other clubs/socities can't?

Decouple the USI levy from registration fees and give students a choice. Only a tiny minority of students that pay the levy are actually involved in the USI.

Dave!

rainbow kirby wrote:

And what's wrong with liberal politics anyway?

Indeed! I wanna see free joints being handed out on Freshers' week!

AngelofFire

5 euro per student per year eh? Well why not let every sports club/society levy students? What percentage of UCD students actually care what the USI are up to anyway? I for one don't want what appears to be 'compulsory' membership of an organisation I have many fundamental disagreements with (as do a lot of my friends).

Without going into specific disagreements, why should I pay membership to a union that I, and lots of students like me, don't want to be represented by? Why is the USI so special that they can levy students and other clubs/socities can't?

I dont want to get into yet another pro union vs anti union argument, but when you say ''why are USI so special?'' are you referring to USI as in the Union of students of Ireland or UCDSU as in University College Dublin Students union.

Also you seem to be comparing unions to student societies, that is as valid as a comparison between UCD and some of Irelands biggest shopping centres, they are both completely different from each other. A students union is a representative body that looks after the interests of the students, whilst societies and clubs provide activities for students

Ed

there was fierce uproar when the welfare officer showed freshers how to roll joint a few years back - for some reason i doubt udc will see free joint being handed out any time soon.

Dave!

Ahh shoite, lol...

Clive

dublinguy2004 wrote:

Decouple the USI levy from registration fees and give students a choice. Only a tiny minority of students that pay the levy are actually involved in the USI.

If you want UCDSU to leave USI, there is a democratic process for you to make it happen.

If you personally want to leave USI (and UCDSU) there is a precedent in England (Oxford I think?) where you may, and be refunded the fee. You will of course not have access to the bars, shops etc that UCDSU run, but if you kick up enough fuss I´m sure you can get the money back.

dublinguy2004

Clive wrote:

If you want UCDSU to leave USI, there is a democratic process for you to make it happen.

If you personally want to leave USI (and UCDSU) there is a precedent in England (Oxford I think?) where you may, and be refunded the fee. You will of course not have access to the bars, shops etc that UCDSU run, but if you kick up enough fuss I´m sure you can get the money back.

I don't want to be a member of neither the UCDSU nor the USI. I don't care about whatever internal democratic processes there might exist.

In Trinity, there is a student levy, but lots of students simply opt not to pay it. One can still use all the bars, shops etc.

You say that if you don't pay your UCDSU levy then you won't be served in UCD? That's hard to believe since staff members are served and they certainly are not members of any student union. When was the last time you were asked to show confirmation of your UCDSU affiliation when you last bought a newspaper? And as for the bar, well the current setup is that you need a student ID, which I have.

dublinguy2004

AngelofFire wrote:

I dont want to get into yet another pro union vs anti union argument, but when you say ''why are USI so special?'' are you referring to USI as in the Union of students of Ireland or UCDSU as in University College Dublin Students union.

This is not an 'anti-union argument' as you say. I just don't want to be represented by any body (whoever they may be) that doesn't share my views.

AngelofFire wrote:

A students union is a representative body that looks after the interests of the students, whilst societies and clubs provide activities for students

[/QUOTE]

Eh a union should look after the interests of its members I agree, but I'm not a member thank you very much. Societies and Clubs also look after the interests of their members - a group of people who share the same interest/cause, just like a union.

AngelofFire

Eh a union should look after the interests of its members I agree, but I'm not a member thank you very much. Societies and Clubs also look after the interests of their members - a group of people who share the same interest/cause, just like a union

i dont understand your logic at all, do societies and clubs to anything to expand the grants system, prevent the re-introduction of tuiton fees and represent the interests of students on college authorities.

Syth

Someone was telling me that he wanted to leave the union when they took an anti-war stance, he wasn't sure if he could. He had the idea that he could get free legal aid from the students union on whether or not or how he could leave the union.

dublinguy2004

Syth wrote:

Someone was telling me that he wanted to leave the union when they took an anti-war stance, he wasn't sure if he could. He had the idea that he could get free legal aid from the students union on whether or not or how he could leave the union.

Bollox.

Red Alert

i would have no problem paying the SU and USI levies if they actually did anything useful. they seem to have spent all the money hiring buses for damn anti-****ing-deportation campaigns which none of us quite frankly give a toss about. it's not the SU's mandate and shouldn't be wasting time and money doing it.

Clive

So you want to partake of all the services the SU provide but don´t want to pay for them basically?

Red Alert

i like most of the other people here pay my SU fee. i do not want them to use it to hire buses and organise campaigns for their own political interests. they are being paid to represent the students nothing more nothing less. i use their services as paying member like everybody else does. am i wrong to say they shouldn't be fooling around with irrelevant demonstrations?

Vainglory

Red Alert wrote:

i would have no problem paying the SU and USI levies if they actually did anything useful. they seem to have spent all the money hiring buses for damn anti-****ing-deportation campaigns which none of us quite frankly give a toss about. it's not the SU's mandate and shouldn't be wasting time and money doing it.

It is the SU's mandate to oppose deportations. Motions were passed both last year and two years ago specifically calling on the SU to affirm an anti-deportation position. Last year it was following the deportation of Olunkunle Eluhanle, a sixth year student at the time. If it had been one year later he would probably have been a third-level student ; would it still seem so strange to you that his SU would assume an anti-deportation position?

Anyway, whichever way you view the SU's mandate on deportations, it is a decision which was made democratically when democratically elected class representatives voted in favour of it. Hard to argue with.

Jane Horgan-Jones
Education VP

Ed

I disagree with the government's policies, can i stop paying taxes please?
That's a bit of extreme, but i think you see the point. If you don't agree with the policies of the UCD SU, why don't you do something about it? The sabattical officers didn't get where they are by accident - they were elected by the students of UCD because the majority of the students who voted felt they they were the peope who would do the best job. It's quite possible that the actions of the surrent officers/SU, and those who have came before them do not reflect the views of the majority of registered students - but that's because the majority of students don't vote. It's all well and good to say that the SU doesn't represent your interests, and it's quite possible that the elected officers weren't the best candidates(i would say that though, wouldn't i?), and it has been shown in the past that people don't always vote for the best candidates - but it's their right to vote for whoever they want - and whether or not the people running things represent your personal interests, it's not their fault. They're the ones we elected. If they have a referendum on every decision they make there's gonna be a whole lot of time and money wasted.
The simple fact is, if you don't like the people who get elected, either leave or do your best to do something about it - whether that means attempting to mobilise the students who don't vote, and to get them to show more interest in their student's union, or run for something yourself.
Anyways, at least give the new folks a chance before you slaughter them.

The above was probably a bit rambly and nonsensical ,and i'm not arsed reading through it, so take it however you like.

dublinguy2004

Ed wrote:

I disagree with the government's policies, can i stop paying taxes please?
That's a bit of extreme, but i think you see the point. If you don't agree with the policies of the UCD SU, why don't you do something about it? The sabattical officers didn't get where they are by accident - they were elected by the students of UCD because the majority of the students who voted felt they they were the peope who would do the best job. It's quite possible that the actions of the surrent officers/SU, and those who have came before them do not reflect the views of the majority of registered students - but that's because the majority of students don't vote. It's all well and good to say that the SU doesn't represent your interests, and it's quite possible that the elected officers weren't the best candidates(i would say that though, wouldn't i?), and it has been shown in the past that people don't always vote for the best candidates - but it's their right to vote for whoever they want - and whether or not the people running things represent your personal interests, it's not their fault. They're the ones we elected. If they have a referendum on every decision they make there's gonna be a whole lot of time and money wasted.
The simple fact is, if you don't like the people who get elected, either leave or do your best to do something about it - whether that means attempting to mobilise the students who don't vote, and to get them to show more interest in their student's union, or run for something yourself.
Anyways, at least give the new folks a chance before you slaughter them.

The above was probably a bit rambly and nonsensical ,and i'm not arsed reading through it, so take it however you like.

It's ridiculous to compare the UCDSU and their levy to government and tax. And besides, if I didn't want to pay tax, I'd just leave the country or maybe renounce my citizenship or something. The UCDSU is precisely that, a union. Membership is optional and students should be more aware of this. Since when was it made law that all students are compelled to join one particular union?

And you're right, most students couldn't bothered voting let alone 'doing something about it'.

So the simple fact is, yes, leave. UCDSU is full of kno*!s (my opinion; I don't think I'm alone on this either!) who go around purporting to being in authority, but in reality nobody really cares what they get up to.

Dave!

dublinguy2004 wrote:

Since when was it made law that all students are compelled to join one particular union?

Labour Front in Nazi Germany, anyone?

I was just wondering, has anyone ever refused to pay the fee? Why not just, not pay it? I wonder what would happen... would they even notice?

arbeitsscheuer

DaveMcG wrote:

Labour Front in Nazi Germany, anyone?

I was just wondering, has anyone ever refused to pay the fee? Why not just, not pay it? I wonder what would happen... would they even notice?

The UCD Gestapo (a.k.a. "Services") would bring you in for some "routine" questioning. After 7 straight hours of "discussion" you emerge with an odd entranced look espousing the virtues of the very Student Union you attempted to leave.

UCDSU: Once in, never out. :cool:

Dave!

DOWN WITH BIG BROTHER!!!

AngelofFire

So the simple fact is, yes, leave. UCDSU is full of kno*!s (my opinion; I don't think I'm alone on this either!) who go around purporting to being in authority, but in reality nobody really cares what they get up to.

Thats not true at all, Sabbathical officers are busy everyday with personal cases, a lot of peoploe benefit from the welfare and education offfice. If it wasnt for student unions the governmnet would be walking all over the faces of students, and tuition fees would be well back in by now. The reason why membership isn`t optional, is because if a certain amount of people were to opt out, then the students union wouldnt have enough resources for those who need it the most. It is also not physically possible for someone to opt out, because sabbathical officers represent students on the governing authority, are you going to tell the sabbathical officers that you dont want them to represent YOU. Therefore if the Sabbathical officers manage to negotiate to extended library opening hours, then you`re not going to avail of the extended opening hours, because you opted out of them representing you. A students union is not a commoddittee its is an organisation working to try and make life in college better for everyone. Just because you have rich parents who can afford to pay fees doesn`t mean everyone else does, Now stop being so selfish and insular.

Blush_01

OP - if you had a problem that you wanted fixed and approached the SU, you'd more than likely be offered help, even if the outcome wasn't what you wanted. What about the subsidies on items in the SU shops, bars etc.? While I acknowledge that the staff in UCD probably don't pay affiliation fees to the Student's Union (possibly because they're not students???) they do have to pay membership fees to use the staff facilities. You can't expect anything for nothing.

Sure, you might not agree with what the SU or the USI does all the time, but do you agree with everything the government does or has done while you were of legal voting age? Likewise, to re-iterate the point made by Ed, the SU officers didn't just drop out of the sky into their positions. They campaigned and they got their places through a democratic process. If you didn't like the candidates, then why didn't you insigate the R.O.N. process, like was attempted with Shane Hennelly (sp?) last year? He turned out to be a damn fine welfare office, as far as I'm concerned. But the opportunity which was offered to all students to re open nominations was also there, as that particular case highlights.

As far as I'm concerned, I don't know a hell of a lot about the USI, but I far from mind paying my membership fee on an annual basis. They organised Pink Training last year with the help of USI affiliated colleges - no equivalent was organised where non-affiliated colleges were concerned. I, for one, believe that weekends such as the one of Pink are vital. You may not agree, maybe Pink has nothing to do with you, or you didn't even know it existed. Hoewever, without the USI there's no alterative weekend for colleges to meet up and discuss the issues that are covered at Pink. Sure, it may seem like one long p!ssup to many people, but for those who attend, it means something.

I guess the point I'm trying to make is, you can whinge all you like, and get nothing done, or you can do something. If you avail of the services that the SU or the USI provide, then you don't have the right to b!tch about them without acknowledging the good along with the bad. If you don't avail of their services, then so be it, but others do - don't diminish whatever good they do simply because it doesn't suit you. Most of all, if you're not happy, then do something. There's plenty of hot air in the world - if it means that much to you, try some action instead of conversation.

Red Alert

I just think that items such as deportations or anti-war stuff (much of which I actually sympathise a lot with) have no place in the SU. They are there to represent current students, and they seem not always to be sticking to that brief.

m1ke

Every single year there's guff about USI, constant re-affiliation and de-affiliation B.S. has been going on since the 1970s.

If you don't like the way either union is run then you're free to try and change it. If not.... stfu.

Without these unions, students would become the most walked on sub-species out of humankind.... strength in numbers really does count.

Even if they're doing absolutely feck all.... their mere presence ensures certain safegaurds for students.

Zaph0d

AngelofFire wrote:

Also you seem to be comparing unions to student societies, that is as valid as a comparison between UCD and some of Irelands biggest shopping centres, they are both completely different from each other.

True, a shopping centre as ugly as UCD would have no customers.

Welcome to hell


this is where to study


and this is where to eat


etc.

Red Alert

Funny you don't see those wonderful architectural features on the brochures. It's really sad

Annasopra

dublinguy2004 wrote:

UCDSU is full of kno*!s (my opinion; I don't think I'm alone on this either!) who go around purporting to being in authority, but in reality nobody really cares what they get up to.

I'm going to repeat what I said (in the DCU thread to Dublinguy2004) UCDSU is the entire student body - it is not 5 sabbatical officers or 30 or 40 council members so if you are a UCD student (very doubtful - probably just someone with a personal grudge against USI) you're in fact calling yourself a kn*b

Johnnymcg

Johnnymcg wrote:

...very large writing...

Yeah, he's a Trinity student who has already been banned twice in the past week on boards, as well as having been banned several times on http://www.tcdsu.org/ under several usernames.

Annasopra

Myth wrote:

.... very large writing

I know sorry...

It just annoys me a lot when people say "the students union......" referring to a small group of 4 or 5 people thereby reinforcing the negative images of cliques etc... and deterring involvement

The reality is that all students are the Students Union and all students in USI affiliated colleges are USI - if this message was driven home a bit more then perhaps there might be a bit less apathy and a bit more involvement

Vainglory

Red Alert wrote:

I just think that items such as deportations or anti-war stuff (much of which I actually sympathise a lot with) have no place in the SU. They are there to represent current students, and they seem not always to be sticking to that brief.

Any anti-war or anti-deportation motion discussed and carried at SU Council was brought by a UCDSU member. The SU is there to represent the interests of students and act on their behalf, whatever way they are mandated to do. If UCD students are interested in the anti-war and anti-deportation movements, and bring motions on these issues to council which are then passed, then as far as I can see any work the SU does on these mandates is indeed "representing current students".

arbeitsscheuer

Vainglory wrote:

Any anti-war or anti-deportation motion discussed and carried at SU Council was brought by a UCDSU member. The SU is there to represent the interests of students and act on their behalf, whatever way they are mandated to do. If UCD students are interested in the anti-war and anti-deportation movements, and bring motions on these issues to council which are then passed, then as far as I can see any work the SU does on these mandates is indeed "representing current students".

Spot on.
Tbh, I'm quite proud of our SU's stance on, and active involvment in, ant-deportation movements. If anyone has a problem with the SU's position on this, feel free to use the democratic process to bring about change.

No? Can't be bothered?

Then SHUT THE F**K UP.

Pythia

Being pro or anti deprotations has nothing to do with representing the students of UCD. Neither has being anti war or anything like that.
Surely the SU's job is to look after student matters like library opening hours, access to computers, grants, things which we have no other representation on.
There are loads of groups opposing the War in Iraq, deportations. Why do we need another. It has nothing to do with attending college.
And another thing, are the shops not run for profit? Are they simply a service?

pretty*monster

dublinguy2004 wrote:

You say that if you don't pay your UCDSU levy then you won't be served in UCD? That's hard to believe since staff members are served and they certainly are not members of any student union. When was the last time you were asked to show confirmation of your UCDSU affiliation when you last bought a newspaper? And as for the bar, well the current setup is that you need a student ID, which I have.

Your right, if you managed to opt out of the union you'd probably still get away with reaping the benifits.
That doesn't change the fact that it would be a disgustingly self centered act. The idea that students, due to their relativly low income, should get subsidised food, newspapers, drinks, etc is a pretty liberal one. If you are offended by the unions liberal polices then opt out of disassociate yourself from all of them.

If you aren't willing to cough up the measely €5 you are not entitled to services the SU provides.

And I agree with Ed arguing that you are if like saying you should be able to stop paying taxes if you don't like the goevnment while maintaining that the government should still provide you with a health service, social welfare, infastructure, etc.

Vainglory

Pythia wrote:

Being pro or anti deprotations has nothing to do with representing the students of UCD. Neither has being anti war or anything like that.
Surely the SU's job is to look after student matters like library opening hours, access to computers, grants, things which we have no other representation on.
There are loads of groups opposing the War in Iraq, deportations. Why do we need another. It has nothing to do with attending college.
And another thing, are the shops not run for profit? Are they simply a service?

From dictionary.com, "represent".

To serve as the official and authorized delegate or agent for.
To act as a spokesperson for.

If a UCD student brings a motion to Council on the war or deportations, and it is passed by a simple democratic majority, then any action the SU takes on these issues is by its very definition "representation". The SU officers have every right to follow through on their mandate and act as the motion dictates ; they are consitutionally required to do so.

There is no higher authority which dictates what motions passed at council are worthy of representation by the SU. What validates each and every one of them is the fact that without exception , they have been brought by UCD students through the proper democratic channels, something which you and I and Pat Paterson are equally entitled to do.

In such a case, campaigning against the war is the interest of the student who has proposed the motion. Action the SU then takes on this is in the interests of this student, and of his/her peers who have democratically voted to support the action. This is representation and it is democracy at work.

John_C

AngelofFire wrote:

Just because you have rich parents who can afford to pay fees doesn`t mean everyone else does, Now stop being so selfish and insular.

I think that this is the type of comment which can make students feel like the diverse opinions and backgrounds in UCD are not respected.

I think it's a little bit revisionary to say that the students unions prevented fees from coming back.

Red Alert

Mea culpa to begin with here: For the record, I'm anti-war, anti-deportation and against the US's use of shannon. Nor am I disputing the fact that anyone brought up this motion at all at SU council. Like most UCD students I do also often view the 5 sabbattical officers as 'the' SU.

The SU should most certainly have views on issues. It's a question of perspective that matters. Now more than ever, the students in UCD are going to be squeezed for lack of services, increases in the registration amount, bringing back of fees (lets not forget that Hugh Brady is a proponent of fees). I feel strongly that we need to unite behind these issues first and then if we've time we can deal with the others in that order. The governing authority swiped the sports bar during the summer, my feeling is that was only a rehersal of things to come.

I don't think not paying the SU sub is the answer - I purchase my 70 cent paper each day etc and too-regularly drink in the bar. Not paying the SU sub also decreases its critical mass so the governing authority think they can do what they like and reduces the resources available to do good work. The sabbats and many of the reps do great work on the ground and a lot of them put their whole heart and soul into it but what really annoys me is that the bread and butter stuff gets lost in philosophical noise sometimes. (Fair dues to vainglory for sticking out boards! )

Stabshauptmann

If you did leave UCDSU and got refunded your fiver would you honestly not go into either the pubs or shops operated by the SU? I doubt it

The benifits of being in UCDSU outweigh the costs even if like me you never get involved with them in any way. If you dont like the USI then either go through the channells to disassociate the two unions (I think trinnity did) or just add it to the cost of the great pubs, shops and services UCDSU supply and I think you'll still find the benifits outweigh the costs.

AngelofFire

I think that this is the type of comment which can make students feel like the diverse opinions and backgrounds in UCD are not respected.

I think it's a little bit revisionary to say that the students unions prevented fees from coming back.

I wasn`t attacking the poster based on his/her background, i was attacking their viewpoint which compared the union to a student society which thus seemed to suggest that people should only get involved in the union if they are getting something out of it, i stated that the union was not about individuals, it was about defended the interest of students on a communal and democratic basis.

The Government had floated the idea of tuition fees in 2002 and 2004, but backed out prior to mass opposition from student unions and student protesters.

Vainglory

Red Alert wrote:

Mea culpa to begin with here: For the record, I'm anti-war, anti-deportation and against the US's use of shannon. Nor am I disputing the fact that anyone brought up this motion at all at SU council. Like most UCD students I do also often view the 5 sabbattical officers as 'the' SU.

The SU should most certainly have views on issues. It's a question of perspective that matters. Now more than ever, the students in UCD are going to be squeezed for lack of services, increases in the registration amount, bringing back of fees (lets not forget that Hugh Brady is a proponent of fees). I feel strongly that we need to unite behind these issues first and then if we've time we can deal with the others in that order. The governing authority swiped the sports bar during the summer, my feeling is that was only a rehersal of things to come.

I don't think not paying the SU sub is the answer - I purchase my 70 cent paper each day etc and too-regularly drink in the bar. Not paying the SU sub also decreases its critical mass so the governing authority think they can do what they like and reduces the resources available to do good work. The sabbats and many of the reps do great work on the ground and a lot of them put their whole heart and soul into it but what really annoys me is that the bread and butter stuff gets lost in philosophical noise sometimes. (Fair dues to vainglory for sticking out boards! )

Thanks

And in response..

In UCD, the threat of fees in 2002 was met with opposition from the Campaign for Free Education, which ran a slate of class rep candidates and organised protests and activism throughout the year. Dempsey did not succeed in bringing fees back, and one of the activists involved in CFE was Paul Dillon, President of UCDSU 03/04. It's not true to say that the CFE or even students alone were responsible for stopping fees, but it's equally stupid to say that they didn't play a major part in making sure that this happened

During Dillon's year as president, he was vilified by the college media when the union hired a bus to go down to Shannon and was also criticised for the union's involvement in the anti-deportation campaign. The "SU" was also accused of wasting student money and time on the Coke referendum.

However, this was also the year which saw library cutbacks reversed due to student activism and library occupations, fees well and truly put off the agenda and real achievements for UCD students on clinical placements (just ask any radiography student from around that time).

The myth that certain administrations have prioritised national or international issues over education and welfare issues to the detriment of "regular students" in the past is simply that ; a myth. A strong union will be strong on all issues it is mandated on, it will gain its strength from successes in the past on matters that its members choose to organise on.

Acting on a mandate from council and hiring a bus to Shannon Airport (Warport?) does not stop SU reps on various commitees in the college defending the student position on many issues, nor does a presence at an anti-deportation protest mean that the SU bookshop or grinds file will fall into neglect. SUs, like their members, have positions and opinions on a wide range of topics, and this should be reflected in their activism throughout any year. No motion or mandate should be stifled in the name of "prioritising" student issues..each SU issue is a student issue, as they have all been brought to the fore by students. The definition of student issue should not be "one which affects students", but rather "one which students care about, and have the initiative to organise on".

You say that we need to unite behind these issues first and then "if we've time we can deal with the others in that order." These things don't always come set out in a nice chronological pattern. Do we do nothing about an anti-deportation rally in November because we want to save time for our library protests in March? The SU is a huge resource. Money is not tight. There was a surplus last year, and there is more than enough money there to be spent wisely on issues that students have demonstrated they care about. Students were the biggest interest group in society to mobilise against the war and they are a huge presence at any anti-deportation protest.

And "philosophical noise" ? A lot of people would feel very strongly that an Irish government which is complicit in people being killed in Iraq for oil and sending asylum seekers back to warzones is a lot more than just "philosophical noise".

Lastly, there is no UCDSU subscription. You pay a student centre levy, but that is nothing to do with the SU. The reg fee, while it goes towards funding the SU, also goes towards funding for things like exams, etc. The college makes that decision. If there was no reg fee, there would still be a union. If the registration fee was abolished, the SU would get its money from the same place it always has, the college. If there was an attempt to cut the amount of money given, then I'm sure there would be bloody murder, and rightly so. The reg fee just goes into the college budget, and a lot of colleges don't even relate the SU funding to student numbers or the fee.

John_C

Vainglory wrote:

And "philosophical noise" ? A lot of people would feel very strongly that an Irish government which is complicit in people being killed in Iraq for oil and sending asylum seekers back to warzones is a lot more than just "philosophical noise".

The point is that a lot of people would also have the exact opposite view. If a student is in favour of the war in Iraq and in favour of deportations they'll feel like they're not being represented by their Union. While I don't deny that a majority vote was held in council on these issues I do still think that the union has no business getting involved in them. I was first elected to council the same year as Paul Dillon and I worked with him on a few small issues. He's a nice person and I have plenty of time for him but I didn't agree with a lot of his policies. Like Angus O'Huraihain (sorry for the spelling) before him he was very devisive by getting involved in too many national issues which are always going to alienate from the union students who don't agree with his political opinions.

The union would be much better off if it avoided getting involved in national or international politics when the issues don't affect students. If any students then want to get involved in politics there are plenty of political parties and other organisations active on campus.

Vainglory

If a student is in favour of the war in Iraq and in favour of deportations they'll feel like they're not being represented by their Union...

Right...

So from now on, the Union cannot take positions on subjects that the student population is not entirely united on? One, two, three or even three hundred students who disagree with a stance democratically decided at SU council immediately renders that body "unrepresentative"? In anarchist society, decisions can be made by consensus agreement on any issue, with one person able to block decisions that the entire rest of the group agree on. Is this a better arrangement than that of simple democracy? I don't think so, I'm sure you don't think so, and neither do most European countries. Hence their choice of government style.

UCD is a cross section of society, and it is natural that there be disagreements on policy within the SU. However, this doesn't mean the organisation sits there and stagnates and dithers about the fact that not everyone is always going to agree with how council votes and the SU's democratically decided actions. That is democracy, democracy is what we've got to work with here, and the best thing about that is that if you don't like the way it's going, feel free to change it.

While I don't deny that a majority vote was held in council on these issues I do still think that the union has no business getting involved in them..

The union? What's the union? Five sabbatical officers? No, it's not. It's everyone. What you're basically saying here is that the sabbats, exec officers etc have "no business" following the mandates that they are given by UCD students, because you don't think they're worthy of time, money or effort. Like I said before, there's no higher authority to dictate which mandates should be followed or not. They're all mandates, the officers have no choice but to follow them. No business ? They could be impeached if they didn't.

Everyone has a different view on what's the union's business and what isn't, and the system that we use to figure that out is elections, referenda and Council meetings. There might be another system (dictatorship? tarot card reading?) but within the system that we have at the moment, that's how we decide how we as officers spend our time. There are people out there who think the national government shouldn't be involved in issue X or Y, but they express that through voting and campaigning, and it's just the same within UCDSU.

The union would be much better off if it avoided getting involved in national or international politics when the issues don't affect students. ..

Would you feel comfortable turning to a student who had brought a motion on deportations to council and telling them they had no place using their democratic right to do this in their own student union, established to represent students whatever way those students so decide , because it didn't "affect" him or her on a day to day basis?

That's the great thing about democracy...the members of the organisation control the direction of the organisation. Only the members can be lauded for its successes, and only the members can be blamed for its failures. Rights and responsibilities go hand in hand here. Whether things go well or bad is in the most part decided by what our membership wants us to do. Debate and disagreement is healthy and necessary , it should not stifle or obstruct the work of an SU when the integrity of the democratic structures upon which it is based upon cannot be questioned.

LovelyHurling

In all fairness lads its just a few squid let the goodlooking *ahem i mean... hardworking* girl get on with her job. Yeah yeah yeah I do know how many Foster's could be bought with that dosh but hey - if you ever get deported it'll all be groovy you'll have the whole entire USI on McDowells back like Mary Harney riding a donkey at the circus.

HOWEVER since we're on the whole issue of UCDSU sticking its nose into issues that not everybody agrees with, well Im no holy Joe myself in fact I think religion is for the minions but well maybe it should actually stick to you know student matters and out of the moral theological realm of contraception as makes you excommunicatiable by the Big Rev.

All's Im saying is you don't get the IFA campaigning about the war in Iraq. Doesn't mean they don't care just means they ain't in the tractor driving business for that particular cause.

But hand over the money I say. SU's not great, but ah they're alright

Blush_01

You're hilarious. (Genuine, re: your post above.)

Just one thing that was brought up that I feel needs to be addressed... The Coke referendum was a bit of a sham really, wasn't it? I didn't agree with it personally. That doesn't mean that I'm pro Columbians being killed. It does mean that maybe the focus from one side was on saving the world, and on the other on saving irish jobs. Can anyone tell me what's happening in Columbia at the moment in relation to Coca Cola? (Genuine query, people seem to have lost interest now that their egos have been soothed and big bad Coke isn't parading around UCD like it owns the place.) Yet I can tell you what happened to Irish workers where Coke was concerned. http://www.lasc.ie/news/priceofloyalty.html

What was going on with Coke was brought to light. But I bet you the contents of my wallet (which is currently 6 receipts, 3 60c stamps, a Tesco key fob and €2.59 in change) that they're not the only company in the world behaving in a dispicable manner. They're just the ones who got caught this time, like Nestle did a few years ago, doesn't mean they're the only ons who do it, it just means they're worse at covering up their tracks.

John_C

Vainglory,
I think we've got our wires crossed a little bit. I have no problem with the decision making process in the Union (or for that matter with the concept of democracy). That doesn't mean that I will necessarly agree with every decision which will be reached. (If you need an analogy you may consider your opinion re: military the use of Shannon Airport. You disagree with the policy and you may or may not have voted for the current government but you still accept Ireland's democracy and aren't proposing that we revert to tarrot cards or another form of decision making).

While I don't agree that three people who oppose a decision should be able to hold the union up I do think that those three people might feel left out. Problems arise when the union makes decisions which several thousand students disagree with and then makes several of those decisions each year. That quickly leads to a situation where the majority of students don't get involved in the union or even vote in elections.

We can agree to disagree if you like but that is the situation as I see it. Ive been in UCD since Alison Gibney's time. I was involved in the union for a while and am still involved in a few different clubs and societies. In my time here there has always been a (usually quite vicious) conflict in SU council and between those involved with the SU as a whole between Fianna Fáil on one side and socialist parties on the other. I'm not opposed to debate or disagreements but I've seen enough meetings descend into either shouting matches or simply slagging and petty name calling to know that there is a problem which needs to be adressed. Before a problem can be addressed it needs to first be recognised.

Vainglory

wrote:

I have no problem with the decision making process in the Union (or for that matter with the concept of democracy). That doesn't mean that I will necessarly agree with every decision which will be reached.

Nobody's asking you to agree with any particular decision, just to stop saying that the union has no business getting involved in issues it has been democratically mandated to be involved in. The SU has business in these issues because it has a mandate ; the latter gives rise to the former whether you agree with the substantive issue or not.

wrote:

(If you need an analogy you may consider your opinion re: military the use of Shannon Airport. You disagree with the policy and you may or may not have voted for the current government but you still accept Ireland's democracy and aren't proposing that we revert to tarrot cards or another form of decision making).

I don't really accept an analogy that compares UCDSU to the national government. UCDSU is a lot more immediately accountable to its electorate, for one thing.

If one of the sabbatical officers (comparable to a minister, in your analogy) makes a decision between Council meetings that people disagree with, that decision can be debated and overturned at the next meeting by a vote and if the officer then breaks that mandate then he/she could be impeached. Bertie Ahern never asked the electorate if they minded US warplanes landing at Shannon and making Ireland complicit in this war for oil, and he sure as hell isn't planning on holding any sort of a vote or referendum on the issue anytime soon. Unless of course you count the General Election, which is constitutionally required to be held every 7 years. UCSDU Council meets every two weeks.

Basically, I accept that the people of Ireland voted FF and the PDS into government, but I don't believe they have any mandate to allow those planes to land in Shannon. Their actions in Shannon have nothing to do with the democratic process. The fact that I oppose this policy does not mean I oppose democracy ; it means I oppose an action taken by a government that was democratically elected but made no effort to democratically discover the feelings of the Irish people on an issue that has such importance for our neutrality.

If the President of UCSDU made a comparable decision in terms of importance, without any mandate from his election, and refused to be held accountable by Council or the student body, then I'd call that undemocratic too and say that yes, he has no business getting involved in whatever issue it was. But fortunately, that's not how it works here.

wrote:

While I don't agree that three people who oppose a decision should be able to hold the union up I do think that those three people might feel left out. Problems arise when the union makes decisions which several thousand students disagree with and then makes several of those decisions each year.

If those hypothetical several thousand students cared enough about these "decisions" to do something about it then those same decisions would never be made in the first place. Just to paint the picture...Last year, class reps were elected with 30 votes from their class on average. In some cases, it was much lower. If these alleged several thousand students who would prefer the SU to concentrate on issues which directly effect students' day to day lives in UCD ran a slate of Class Rep candidates and voted together they would probably win every seat. Thus, they'd control Council, and they'd control the sabbatical officers.

But this doesn't happen. Why not? Because "they" (if they exist) obviously don't care enough to do it. And if they don't care enough to get involved and try to change things, then they most certainly can't whinge when the SU does things that they disagree with. .

LovelyHurling

Vainglory wrote:

Nobody's asking you to agree with any particular decision, just to stop saying that the union has no business getting involved in issues it has been democratically mandated to be involved in. The SU has business in these issues because it has a mandate

Ahern never asked the electorate if they minded US warplanes landing at Shannon and making Ireland complicit in this war for oil, and he sure as hell isn't planning on holding any sort of a vote or referendum on the issue anytime soon.

I don't believe they have any mandate to allow those planes to land in Shannon. Their actions in Shannon have nothing to do with the democratic process.

If the President of UCSDU made a comparable decision in terms of importance, without any mandate from his election, and refused to be held accountable by Council or the student body, then I'd call that undemocratic too and say that yes, he has no business getting involved in whatever issue it was. But fortunately, that's not how it works here.

If these alleged several thousand students who would prefer the SU to concentrate on issues which directly effect students' day to day lives in UCD ran a slate of Class Rep candidates and voted together they would probably win every seat. Thus, they'd control Council, and they'd control the sabbatical officers.

But this doesn't happen. Why not? Because "they" (if they exist) obviously don't care enough to do it.

If I could just come in on a related point, there's a difference between disagreeing with a political decision and disagreeing with the UCDSU's involvement in a praising or berating a political decision. It's a fairly huge difference.

UCDSU has no business mentioning Shannon Airport unless the next sentance out of their collective mouth relates to student travel. Out of curiosity, when were USI/ UCDSU mandated to campaign on something like the use of Shannon?


UCDSU/ USI = Student Matters Interest Group

Oireachtas Eirinn = People Welfare Organization and Lawmakers

Vainglory

wrote:

UCDSU has no business mentioning Shannon Airport unless the next sentance out of their collective mouth relates to student travel. Out of curiosity, when were USI/ UCDSU mandated to campaign on something like the use of Shannon?

I will keep this brief because I've said already why mandates on issues mean that the mandated organisation has business getting involved in those issues.

The only thing that UCDSU has no business doing is breaking mandates given to them by its members. We are mandated to campaign against things like the Criminal Justice Bill, McDowell's racist deportations, and the G8 meeting which advocates the privatisation of education. We were mandated to take a bus to Shannon for the Peace Camp, and are mandated with regard to the Coke and Nestle boycotts. End of story. I'm not as well up on USI mandates, they'd be able to tell you down at Ceann Áras. The principle of whether or not USI would have business being involved in these issues is still the same, though.


And UCSDU and USI are campaigning organisations, not Interest Groups. Issues that students care about are student issues, ie the issues students consider to be important.