Student Executive Want Re-election!
By Frank Talk
Members of the Student Executive are to complain about the way the sabbatical elections were conducted.
Usually the so-called 'Golden Oldies' are deployed to man the polling stations, located around campus. However, this year the elections must have coincided with something good on Richard & Judy or perhaps a National Trust holiday; certainly 'Golden Oldies' were not to be seen.
Many people would say, so what, who cares, the result might be more accurate without the aid of Vision Express. But certain student sabbatical officers, who I think it is fair to say have too much time on their hands, have decided to complain that 'Golden Oldies' were shelved in favour of part-time students. Despite obviously being burdened with the big issue day and working hard for student welfare, some members of the Executive are allegedly going to make their complaints public. Of course when you think about it, issues such as increased fees, student housing being over-crowded and under-regulated and lecturers going on strike all pale into insignificance when you compare it to the absense of the 'Golden Oldies'. I mean there is always the risk that part-time staff would want to gerrymander the result!
The thing that these Student Executive members have obviously not considered*, is that if the part-time staff 'fiddled' the result, or at least had the ability to do so, then they quite possibly should not have been elected. How different could the result be, if we held another election, just for clarification? The tables could be completely turned and narrow victories could easily become decicive defeats.
Part-time staff were employed because the old folk didn't want to put their chilblains to the test, by sitting in foyers around the University. By demanding that old people count the ballot papers, student executive members could be exposing senior citizens to harm. Old people matter too you know!
I suppose it is logical enough to assume that the personality types who pick a fight over these sorts of non-issues, are also likely to be offended by being told to grow up, grasp perspective and get a life...whoops did I just say that?
* Recent reports suggest this issue may not come up - obviously another election is not something they want to risk.
Members of the Student Executive are to complain about the way the sabbatical elections were conducted.
Usually the so-called 'Golden Oldies' are deployed to man the polling stations, located around campus. However, this year the elections must have coincided with something good on Richard & Judy or perhaps a National Trust holiday; certainly 'Golden Oldies' were not to be seen.
Many people would say, so what, who cares, the result might be more accurate without the aid of Vision Express. But certain student sabbatical officers, who I think it is fair to say have too much time on their hands, have decided to complain that 'Golden Oldies' were shelved in favour of part-time students. Despite obviously being burdened with the big issue day and working hard for student welfare, some members of the Executive are allegedly going to make their complaints public. Of course when you think about it, issues such as increased fees, student housing being over-crowded and under-regulated and lecturers going on strike all pale into insignificance when you compare it to the absense of the 'Golden Oldies'. I mean there is always the risk that part-time staff would want to gerrymander the result!
The thing that these Student Executive members have obviously not considered*, is that if the part-time staff 'fiddled' the result, or at least had the ability to do so, then they quite possibly should not have been elected. How different could the result be, if we held another election, just for clarification? The tables could be completely turned and narrow victories could easily become decicive defeats.
Part-time staff were employed because the old folk didn't want to put their chilblains to the test, by sitting in foyers around the University. By demanding that old people count the ballot papers, student executive members could be exposing senior citizens to harm. Old people matter too you know!
I suppose it is logical enough to assume that the personality types who pick a fight over these sorts of non-issues, are also likely to be offended by being told to grow up, grasp perspective and get a life...whoops did I just say that?
* Recent reports suggest this issue may not come up - obviously another election is not something they want to risk.
posted by Gown Team at
12:34 pm
11 Comments:
Whats this all about? Who's complaining and about what?
not really sure myself david i knew about this but not to this extreme
What exactly is going on here might this be a wind up thats got out of hand. Can someone explain the full situation for us Queens students not around Queens this year?
I don't think it is a wind up. Apparently a couple of people on the executive, 'senior people', heard that some part-time staff member said to a student, "I suppose your going to vote for ****" or something like that. They were claiming this breached proper electoral procedures.
If anyone wants to email me with the details that'd be great ;) Oh and email David there, sounds as though he's itching to know as well.
Yeah that would be great if anyone can let me know. Still knowing how hard it is to get re-elections called I believe this will be at worst nothing more than a storm in a teacup.
I think I know what the Gown is alleging here but neither of those
'senior people' have suggested anything of the sort to myself and we have discussed the issue at length.
I am attending Election Regulations on Wednesday and I very much doubt if it will come up.
I also believe it very unlikely that an election court petition will be submitted.
Would it not be too late at this stage to petition an election court in any event.
David
I think you're right. I believe a petition for an election court has to made within five working days of the election. Once more, a mountain is being made out od the smallest of molehills.
PS
It's 72 hours I think. But why on earth would anyone challenge the result of an election they've just won?
i think it might be more pertinant to note that the part time staff members involved, mainly from security, were not told any of the most basic rules about manning the election stands. poor sods.
at least the golden oldies knew how the thing should be conducted properly
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home