'No Platform' Policy'

I am against it going to class reps unless thre are 500 signatures collected. This is how you bring about a referendum according to the constitution and this avenue is open to everyone on any issue.
It is not fair to call a referendum at the request of a handful of people. If these lads can demonstrate that there is a significant opposition to the policy then of course there should be a referendum.
Until this point there is no real evidence that there is this opposition to the policy. The Exec needs evidence before it can call a referendum.

I am also against this going to referendum because it is not my place to undermine class reps. They are my boss and it is highly inappropriate for me to override their decision and call for a referendum.

With regard to me being responsible for this, I absolutely refute this claim.
After every single class reps council and during most of them I have openly criticised that the Union was not informing class reps on motions and decisions that were being made. The same problems that people have with the Council that voted in No Platform very much existed for every single other SU Council we have had this year. I have been trying to point this out publicly for months now but to no effect.
If I was to support a referendum on No Platform after class reps voted on it, I would be compelled to call into question every single decision made by class reps on the same grounds, including the deal on RAG week. I simply cannot do this, I would LOVE to but I just can't. I can however offer support and advice to anyone who may want to go down this avenue.

You say that class reps should never had voted on it in the first place. You may be correct, there is a problem with class reps and it seems that many people are questioning their legitimacy. I have pointed out problems in the past and brought them up CONSTANTLY with the Exec yet these has been no improvement whatsoever. I don't know what more I can do.
The same reasons that you say class reps shouldn't have voted on it applies to every other class reps council and vote. If we follow this logic then class reps is a completely unworkable.
All I can do is stick with the class reps system as it is, I can't ignore it as it is the only system we have. I can however draw attention to its short fallings and only hope that people get angry enough that the actually start doing something about it because me doing it alone has not worked in the last 6 months.

I have no resistance to going back and reviewing this broken period, there are a number of decisions made that I would only just love to have reopened that I feel were rushed, I just think that it is far more important that if students are angry here that they direct this anger and energy in a direction that will fix the cause of the problem first as a priority BEFORE going back and examining what has been decided thus far. By all means reopen any votes you want, but for the love of god make sure the system you open it up with is actually functional in your eyes otherwise its just a waste of time.

And I disagree that this was forced through, I made the effort myself to bring this up in Lit and Deb the week before the vote.
It is not my responsibility to ensure class reps are informed but I have all year been highlighting the importance of informing class reps.
I was also not actually aware that reps hadn't been emailled until after voting, this is the truth.
After the vote there was another debate on whether SU officers should give officer reports. A few other members of the Exec decided to stop SU officers from giving reports to and being questioned by class reps, I saw a huge problem with this and argued profusely against it. Accountability is essential for a democracy to function.
During my argument I asked the reps if they had received the motions today as they had been missing previous days and it turned out that a majority had not.
I used this failing of the Exec to further argue in favour of officers being subject to questioning. If the emailling system does not work they good old questions and answers will have to suffice.

ruire wrote:

Originally Posted by bildo
It is a very simple and uncontroversial policy IMHO.
Which is why no one's complained at all about it, yeah?

I believe people are complaining about this for 2 reasons.
Either they support the policy yet disagree with how it was brought about. If this is the case then their issue is with the class reps, class reps council and the education officer and should be directing their anger here or they do not properly understand the policy.
The only arguments I have heard so far against this policy is that it prohibits freedom of speech. It doesn't. This policy does not ban anyone from doing or saying anything and anyone who thinks it does is simply wrong and misinformed.
Of people who actually read and understood the policy 96% agree with it, this is a fact.

I would have no problem signing a petition for a referendum so long as it was on the basis that there is an inherent flaw in the class reps system in general and not directed on one single policy agreed by class reps. I believe and agree that there are problems and would welcome any effort spearheaded by anyone to sort it out.

<mod snip - don't out someone's identity without their consent>
He was present at and vocally supported this policy at both the Exec and at SU Council. He is now heading a campaign to overturn a decision made by the class reps he is supposed to be answerable to. This is a clear statement of no confidence in his class reps and I see this as a very serious constitutional issue.
He also voted in favour of the policy and made no objection whatsoever to the democratic process at the time of voting and has not done so all year. WHy wait until now to bring this up? I have time and time again brought up the issues surrounding SU council and I never heard him speak out once. If you are blamingme in anyway for being responsible for this then you are increasingly more culpable because at least I have addressed the problem multiple times in the past while you have sat by and done nothing.

Whats wrong with doing both things - "fixing the broken student blah blah", and holding a revote/referendum on the issue - at the same time?

One does not preclude the other you know.

Just seems to me that you seem to be hiding behind the issue of the 'broken whatever' and using it as an excuse for not dealing with the controversy.

bildo wrote: »

<mod snip>
He was present at and vocally supported this policy at both the Exec and at SU Council. He is now heading a campaign to overturn a decision made by the class reps he is supposed to be answerable to. This is a clear statement of no confidence in his class reps and I see this as a very serious constitutional issue.
He also voted in favour of the policy and made no objection whatsoever to the democratic process at the time of voting and has not done so all year. WHy wait until now to bring this up? I have time and time again brought up the issues surrounding SU council and I never heard him speak out once. If you are blamingme in anyway for being responsible for this then you are increasingly more culpable because at least I have addressed the problem multiple times in the past while you have sat by and done nothing.

Poor form dude.
It's bad enough to publicly identify another poster without their consent but to insult them by saying they're undergoing a personality crisis is even worse.

Reillyman wrote: »

Some groups have been mentioned already, and some of them groups are a legitimate threat, as they are linked to groups that have killed people on this island. How many deaths or assaults are the BNP or C18 responsible for in Ireland? Terrible groups they are, but to be honest I can't ever see either of them bothering to lay foundations in Ireland, whereas some of the left-wing groups actually would.

Agreed. The organisations listed are most definitely dangerous and hateful groups. One could also say that many people are attracted to far-left politics during times of economic hardship, it can just as validly be said that many people "don't want to see a rise in that sort of crap."

Some of the groups are based in Ireland and many more ARE at this very moment trying to mobilise in Ireland, I monitor racist groups regularly and can assure you that they are more than a threat in this country.

And as previously stated, if you can demonstrate to me that there are violent racist/fascist left groups, please let me know and I will consider adding them to the motion. You are the ones being represented here!

More importantly the wording of the policy clearly says that this list is reserved for groups deemed violent racists and fascist by class reps. There are simple avenues to have a group added or removed by a simply vote at class reps. I was sure to make this policy reversible otherwise it is not fair or workable.

Reillyman wrote:

It's legislating for something the SU should probably do anyway.

Exactly, SHOULD. They should be doing this anyway, but after recently dealing with a few other SUs in the country about issues like this I have found that many are very reluctant to openly speak out on issues like this.
As a representative body for students I feel that the SU should be obligated to speak out against racism, this is what I want to achieve from this policy.
I know that this year if there was an invitation issued to a racist to speak here that a number of people on the SU would certainly campaign against it, i want future SUs here in NUI Galway to be expected to do the same.

Reillyman wrote:

And also, there's no way that a referendum will lead to all other decisions going to referena. That's a lame excuse. You are the politician now, you have the power, listen to what the people want.

Please don't call me a politician, I hate that word, I am a Unino rep, traditionally that is fundamentally opposite to being a politician.

I have no problem with this going to referendum, in the right way. I simply disagreed with the Exec calling for it immediately after class reps voted on it, it is not my place or the place of anyone on the Union to question the class reps. They are our boss and we are very scared of them.

Yes, we do have a certain abount of power but the class reps have a hell of a lot more power and I along with the rest of the SU are constitutionally bound by their decisions. That is the situation according to the constitution and if I was to act against the constitution I would have to resign.

I would welcome a referendum if it is brought about by clearly demonstrating a want by the student body to have one. I have already said I will work with and advise the guys collecting the petition.

I am friends with Marxists who tend to bring out flags alongside beer, big deal. If you tried you could very easily find some far more interesting pictures of me too. I am certainly not a communist anway.
If pushed I would probably susbscribe to anarchism over anything else but I'm not pushed so I don't.
You are free to think I am far left, or indeed anything at all, I just don't describe myself in that kind of language is all.
When you put yourself in these pigeonholes you inevitable alienate someone and I'm not interesting in that.

X

Skopzz wrote: »

Some of the militant socialists on here (including the NUIG SU representatives) should understand their involvement will jeopardize their prospects of getting a job. Anything you do with your face or with your name can be easily seen so good luck trying too find a job after you 'mature'.

Incredibly insulting to many people there, also considering they could very easily know alot more about politics than yourself....