If you’re going to criticise me, fine, but please at least get your facts right,

We didn’t remove anyone’s speaking rights, there isn’t even a provision for that in the VUWSA constitution.

VUWSA were deliberately delaying for as long as possible while they ran around trying to find more people to drag to the meeting.

That’s why we had about 6 quorum counts, why they made me put the motion about 7 times and why it took 40 minutes to vote on one motion.

We moved “that the speaker be no longer heard” because it was a deliberate delaying tactic and we wanted to move to a vote.

-Peter McCaffrey

VSM always brings all the freaks to the yard 300 was probably the best SGM turnout all year I bet!

Although it is not representative, the students who did take the time to show up and be involved in the process (because we are sick of student apathy) deserve to all have a chance to speak to the motions if they had liked to, and hear from all speakers. It may have allowed time for more people to arrive- and thereby the stunt would have failed- but hey thats the trouble with taking the higher moral ground.

The bill is about freedom of association, it is about fundamental rights- it would have been good to see us walking the talk for once.

Of course, the general point you make is correct. SRCs are necessarily not representative of the wishes of all students. That’s why we need voluntary unionism.

That’s a strange pronunciation of mandatory SRC attendance.

Can you email me?

peteremcc@gmail.com

Thanks!

We did not remove speaking rights – we moved that them motion be put, as explicitly allowed in the Constitution. This was because of stalling tactics used to try to allow supports of compulsion to call up thier mates and get them ot the meeting. This included the Chair (Freya Eng) calling her friends, including non-students, to come to the meeting.

Of course, the general point you make is correct. SRCs are necessarily not representative of the wishes of all students. That’s why we need voluntary unionism.

I also don’t have much sympathy for those seeking the motion if they passed motions to remove speaking rights and not allow students to speak to the motions and hear the convincing argument for VSM. They are becoming the very evil they are fighting against. Shame on them.

After seeing this video my mind is clear. VSM is the way to go.

do please speak up more so people realise this isn’t just a crazy right wing issue.

and submit to the select committee too!

OUSAs meetings are usually made quorate by the lunch crowds inside or outside. Just like VUWSA it depends entirely on numbers of uninterested students who don’t speak up over the screaching voices on the microphone. Their budget debates are a farce – we almost got them to reduce the levy to $0 at one SGM only to find out the budget was already set.
Their SGM last week was inquorate as soon as the anti VSM crowd buggered off to their Socialist Workers meetings

VUWSA and OUSA are being very helpful with the VSM cause. More please!

The only thing VUWSA can do now is create more ammunition for VSM supporters.

somewhatthoughtful: did you know that OUSA has a “take it or leave it” clause in their constitution for budget debates (i.e. you can’t make amendments) and that that amendment was illegally introduced at the last minute in a SGM with the comment that it was just “procedural”?

I quote:
23.3 The Student Body will consider the proposed budget and either resolve to set or reject it in its entirety.

I understand that the only exec member who wasn’t ashamed of what they’d done when later contacted now works as a producer for National Radio.

cheers

David Prosser

VUWSA’s argument is that there were more than 50 people in the room, but lots weren’t participating (all the VUWSA supporters deliberately avoided being counted in the quorum count).

Unfortunately, even excluding them, there were 64 people. Which was confirmed when they finally agreed to do another count (and the VUWSA people again didn’t participate).

Their argument relies on 20 of our supporters suddenly disappearing while they did the count, and then re-appearing two minutes later.

Or, they just lied about the count.

I’ll let you decide which is more likely, given the circumstances.

BTW – why is it no surprise whatsoever that James Sleep was right there in the thick of the bizarre tactics being employed by the VUWSA?

Will the Executive shout the Bar?

Will anyone do an age check on participants and turf out anyone under-age?

Aaah so many questions …. so few answers