VSU Rally vs. Tuts and Lectures? (1 Viewer)

[withoutaface]

It might also interest you to know that the SRC spends only 3% of its budget on non-student campaigns like refugees, etc. (which are still of importance to many students, but I agree far less relevant).

That's direct distribution, and doesn't take into account the money which is distributed to departments within the SRC, of which some (I think the diversity unit was one) spend more than 50% of their funds on such causes.

2) The SRC should become more representative of the general student population, "but this will never happen because only the active minority is interested". Well, whose fault is that? Just because the majority of people are lazy and apathetic, and thus don't have their views represented to the same extent as the more politically active members of society, doesn't mean we should abolish representation altogether! That's a totally unjustifiable leap of logic. It's like saying Americans should abolish their government because not everyone votes.

So what you're saying is that those who are lazy shouldn't have their views represented? Therefore I can reasonably conclude that it is in fact only 3% of students who actually want USU and deserve to have this view conveyed?

 

[Plebeian]

No, I'm saying that it's a bit hard for the SRC to represent the views of those people who don't put those views forward. They're not mind-readers. They can only represent the views of those people who tell them what they want ... in other words, the active minority. It's not like the SRC is isolated from other views, Rose publishes her email address pretty much every week in Honi and encourages people to email her with comments on SRC policy.

In any case, my point was a more direct refutation of the argument that the SRC is useless because it doesn't represent the viewpoint of everyone. Representation of some is better than representation of no-one, and representing those people who care to make their opinions heard is in fact the only available option.

 

[withoutaface]

No, I'm saying that it's a bit hard for the SRC to represent the views of those people who don't put those views forward. They're not mind-readers. They can only represent the views of those people who tell them what they want ... in other words, the active minority. It's not like the SRC is isolated from other views, Rose publishes her email address pretty much every week in Honi and encourages people to email her with comments on SRC policy.

In any case, my point was a more direct refutation of the argument that the SRC is useless because it doesn't represent the viewpoint of everyone. Representation of some is better than representation of no-one, and representing those people who care to make their opinions heard is in fact the only available option.

Nor are the government. If more people want USU then more should have protested, and if the SRC wanted the government to think everyone was genuine they (or the Union, can't remember which did this, but it's kinda irrelevant anyway) shouldn't have provided free food, bands and comedians to bribe people into protesting. I contacted Rose the best part of a week ago with this concern and she hasn't responded.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

No, I'm saying that it's a bit hard for the SRC to represent the views of those people who don't put those views forward. They're not mind-readers. They can only represent the views of those people who tell them what they want ... in other words, the active minority. It's not like the SRC is isolated from other views, Rose publishes her email address pretty much every week in Honi and encourages people to email her with comments on SRC policy.

In any case, my point was a more direct refutation of the argument that the SRC is useless because it doesn't represent the viewpoint of everyone. Representation of some is better than representation of no-one, and representing those people who care to make their opinions heard is in fact the only available option.

hahahaha BS the SRC isn't iscolated from others views.
They see any right-wing views as fascism or some other evil buzz word, they wouldn't listen to any group of students who opposed their view.
Many students are angry over the unions protesting, but they probably just hang around their leftist social clique, so they wouldn't know this

 

[Plebeian]

Nor are the government [mind-readers]. If more people want USU then more should have protested, and if the SRC wanted the government to think everyone was genuine they (or the Union, can't remember which did this, but it's kinda irrelevant anyway) shouldn't have provided free food, bands and comedians to bribe people into protesting. I contacted Rose the best part of a week ago with this concern and she hasn't responded.

The government is not passing VSU because they feel they are representing the interests of the majority who did not protest against VSU. Their legislative history shows they don't really have the best interests of students at heart, financially or otherwise. If the government was serious about establishing whether VSU has majority support on campus, they would accept the demand for a binding student referendum on VSU that has been put forward by the SRC. Rose was probably a bad example, she is very busy and probably doesn't reply to a reasonable proportion of emails, so I probably shouldn't have used her email as a specific example. But with that said, the SRC is generally quite an accessible body, even to first-years (like me).

hahahaha BS the SRC isn't iscolated from others views.
They see any right-wing views as fascism or some other evil buzz word, they wouldn't listen to any group of students who opposed their view.
Many students are angry over the unions protesting, but they probably just hang around their leftist social clique, so they wouldn't know this

That view has not been publicised at all on campus, though. Personally, I have seen two pro-VSU chalkings, neither of which was actually directed at the SRC. It's not like those students have attempted to organise a pro-VSU action and were shut down by the SRC. If you want a democratic body to represent your views as a citizen, you have to get involved, there is no other way. When was the last time your local MP rang you up and asked you what you thought about certain issues, just to make sure he was reflecting the views of the whole electorate? It doesn't happen, because it's not practical. There are tens of thousands of undergrads at USyd. Having no policy, "because there will be some people who oppose it, even if they don't speak up", is a pretty useless outcome.

I also think it's a bit ironic how you say the SRC disregards everyone else's views because they are always stereotyping the opposition as "fascist"; and then in the very next sentence stereotype the entire SRC as members of a "leftist social clique"! I'm not sure if you've ever been to SRC meetings, but they are definitely not a homogenous bloc. There are a lot of Liberal and Labor Right students on Council, and there is often just as much dissent between Labor Left and the Broad Left (ie. Greens etc) as there is between Left and Right. Basically, all parts of the political spectrum are represented there, so don't fall into the same trap you (erroneously) accuse the SRC of being in. It is in fact a measure of the opposition to VSU within the wider higher education sector that anti-VSU protests can be organised by people like Sam Crosby, the Union President who is definitely not a far leftist.

 

[withoutaface]

An on campus referendum would be problematic because as you've said, the most vocal members on campus are the left, and likely they would make up 90% of those who bothered to vote.

 

[Plebeian]

An on campus referendum would be problematic because as you've said, the most vocal members on campus are the left, and likely they would make up 90% of those who bothered to vote.

Then make it compulsory. See if there really is a 97% pro-VSU majority as Nelson's spokesperson suggested

 

[withoutaface]

Then make it compulsory. See if there really is a 97% pro-VSU majority as Nelson's spokesperson suggested

Then we have the problem of inadequate representation on campus of the other side of the argument. All of the union's so called informative VSU webpages etc are excessively biased, all their forums are one sided, and Angus coming into lectures telling us that VSU means the definitive end of clubs and societies, union food (privatisation of such facilities would be beneficial anyway imo), and various other fanciful claims doesn't help the matter either.
EDIT: And a large percentage of those who don't care either way would no doubt be swayed by the inevitable gauntlet of the anti VSU pamphlet squad.

 

[Plebeian]

First you say that USU lacks real widespread support because more people would have protested if they really believed in it. Then you say that the majority of people in fact do support USU, but only because of leafletting.

I am not sure how you propose to find out what students really think. Clearly a rally won't work because no measure in society ever has 97% support, especially not one as controversial as VSU. You are probably right that a referendum now might not be definitive. But I see no better alternative. Yes, one side of the issue has been publicised more. If other people think it is in their best interests, and the interests of the student body, to give up their time to publicise the pro-VSU side and try to build support for that side of the vote, then they can do that.

Alternatively, can you suggest a more accurate method of finding out whether students really want VSU than a compulsory vote on the topic?

 

[Sarah168]

im not even gonna comment on the whole vsu/usu thing but i just wanted to say that that Angus dude shits me so badly. arghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

 

[Phanatical]

Hear Hear. Angus came to our campus and pretty much vandalised the place with his posters. Since it's a public building, the rules we observe at our campus are far more strict than at main campus (which is GOOD), so he should have been disqualified on the spot for his actions.

 

[withoutaface]

First you say that USU lacks real widespread support because more people would have protested if they really believed in it. Then you say that the majority of people in fact do support USU, but only because of leafletting.

I am not sure how you propose to find out what students really think. Clearly a rally won't work because no measure in society ever has 97% support, especially not one as controversial as VSU. You are probably right that a referendum now might not be definitive. But I see no better alternative. Yes, one side of the issue has been publicised more. If other people think it is in their best interests, and the interests of the student body, to give up their time to publicise the pro-VSU side and try to build support for that side of the vote, then they can do that.

Alternatively, can you suggest a more accurate method of finding out whether students really want VSU than a compulsory vote on the topic?

To be honest, no I can't, but publicising the other side would result in a huge backlash from the other 90+% of those on the Union and SRC boards, and there would be no resources allocated to it, the numbers promoting it would be insignificant, and the minds of a lot of people are already made up based on biased information.
But the Union and SRC have known VSU was coming since the 80s, and they've done very little to improve themselves and become a more efficient and (more in the case of the SRC) less corrupt organisation, so now they're going to be forced to prove their worth to students, and/or become profitable. Also important for the SRC, I can't see it costing too much money to organise protests apart from a little bit of photocopying, but perhaps the student representation will go, and that is in my mind one of the few regrettable consequences of VSU.

 

[greeninsanity]

I have a serious problem with that guy because the union's supposed to be politically independent, but he's campaigning "For a LEFT union":S

If you were serious about a politically independent Union, you wouldn't be supporting a candidate who's an executive member of the Liberal Club.

 

[Xayma]

If you were serious about a politically independent Union, you wouldn't be supporting a candidate who's an executive member of the Liberal Club.

Simon Fontana as far as I have noticied has not been campaigning for a right union or similar. How do you know that withoutaface purely does not support his views on how the union should go.

withoutaface: left generally refers to economic stances, which does come into the union.

 

[withoutaface]

If you were serious about a politically independent Union, you wouldn't be supporting a candidate who's an executive member of the Liberal Club.

I think you'll find all of the candidates (except Marc) are aligned with one of the political societies to some extent, and Angus has been the only one that I've noticed that has actually been pushing his political alignment as a reason to elect him. Simon hasn't actually stated anywhere that he wants a right/Liberal union, nor has he mentioned his political alignment anywhere in his campaign. I support him because he has a plan for the union's survival which looks further than the all or nothing approach to stopping VSU that most of the other candidates seem to have.

 

[Phanatical]

I've met Simon Fontana, and was impressed by his understanding of student issues. He has some very valid concerns about the way the Union and SRC are run, and his solutions for fixing these organisations aren't destructive in the way that left candidates would brand him, but grounded in common sense. His idea of greater autonomy for the Con is one that I'm especially impressed with.

 

[Plebeian]

Simon Fontana's policy of complete privatisation of Union outlets, in comparison with the more measured approach taken by people like Marc (if you really believe in privatisation anyway) is not one which would seem to be in the best interests of students.

It has been argued before that private outlets will be more expensive, based on the current trend where the private outlets on campus charge the most, and also the fact that these businesses will have to subsidise themselves for a 3-month period of no business annually.

 

[Phanatical]

Yet the commercial outlets on campus don't seem to have any problems getting customers. If they were so much less cost-effective, then why is it that they can still maintain enough business to justify their continued presence at USYD?

 

[withoutaface]

Simon Fontana's policy of complete privatisation of Union outlets, in comparison with the more measured approach taken by people like Marc (if you really believe in privatisation anyway) is not one which would seem to be in the best interests of students.

It has been argued before that private outlets will be more expensive, based on the current trend where the private outlets on campus charge the most, and also the fact that these businesses will have to subsidise themselves for a 3-month period of no business annually.

But if we look at the Union owned outlets on campus Wentworth and Holme are both making a loss and Manning's just breaking even, but level 2 or 3 (can't remember which, the one with BB's, Donut King etc) is actually making a profit for the union. If these private outlets are still turning a profit, even with missing 3 months of trade, then it would suggest they have something going for them that the Union outlets don't, otherwise people wouldn't buy the more expensive food from them at all. Privatisation of facilities may not be the most desirable approach by any means, but if the Union wants to make enough money to keep itself and its other essential services afloat, then it might be a necessary one. In my opinion full privatisation is preferable to partial privatisation and keeping businesses open when they're turning a loss because this will take money from other services which are good for students, but I guess it's open to interpretation.

 

[Rorix]

withoutaface, what are the policy stances of the union runners that I'd actually consider voting for (i'll trust your judgement here)?