Union AGM 2006 (1 Viewer)

[super katie]

Re: Union AGM this wednesday

The point is that the candidates with the most money always - ALWAYS - win elections. Hell, even I could get elected if I were willing to spend the thousands upon thousands of dollars the Labor factions are always up for. The reason I do not win elections is simple - the Labor Left give out more free t-shirts than I have dollars to spend.

Quah, you could supply the entire world with free tshirts and still no one would vote for you. Thank god.

 

[greeninsanity]

In terms of numbers on board, because there are 11 students you only need a block of 6 to get president (there's no reason for the Senate reps to involve themselves and change the vote).
Katy - Angus, Rose, Tom, Danielle (Total = 5)
James - Tanner, Simon, Jackson, Roz (Total=5)
I haven't included Lauren, because I don't think the Right can count her as a safe vote. In fact, I think Katy will get Prez...

 

[ujuphleg]

Speaking of which, I was very surprised to see you vote against the motion yesterday...

 

[Phanatical]

Re: Union AGM this wednesday

hey quah, it was rumoured in honi soit that you only recieved one vote from the conservatorium booth.

What they didn't mention is that next to no votes were recorded at the Conservatorium booth, seeing as how they held it on the one day of the week where everybody's either at home or in rehearsals for the entire duration of the polling time. Wednesdays are also the day where the Con has its successful Lunchtime Concert Series, and it ensures that the Music Café is full of geriatrics and members of the public.

The facts are simple. Support for the Union/SRC/Sport is so low at the Con that the most popular policy I've presented there has been the one to secede from the main campus, affiliating instead with SASCA. We'd go from being less than 3% of the Union membership, to being 60% of the SASCA-CSA membership.

 

[gerhard]

Re: Union AGM this wednesday

if lauren sells out i will be bitterly disappointed

 

[townie]

Re: Union AGM this wednesday

given how the thread started, wat happened to the motion, did it pass/fail?

 

[Phanatical]

Re: Union AGM this wednesday

it failed dramatically. 68 votes against, 28 votes in favour.

 

[greeninsanity]

Speaking of which, I was very surprised to see you vote against the motion yesterday...

It wasn't a good idea. There were a lot of valid arguments against it, particularly the fact that the Union Board has two-year terms. Board directors can judge each other on their performance in the first year in a way that the general student body can't (because elections are run on slogans, personality etc.).
Also, Labor Left put very little effort into getting it up. It seemed like they only moved it so that Tom could say he had proposed it during the election campaign. It was quite badly written (evidenced by the fact that they'd accidentally deleted two paragraphs, irrelevant to the election of the President, and had to amend the motion during the AGM).

 

[ujuphleg]

It wasn't a good idea. There were a lot of valid arguments against it, particularly the fact that the Union Board has two-year terms. Board directors can judge each other on their performance in the first year in a way that the general student body can't (because elections are run on slogans, personality etc.).
Also, Labor Left put very little effort into getting it up. It seemed like they only moved it so that Tom could say he had proposed it during the election campaign. It was quite badly written (evidenced by the fact that they'd accidentally deleted two paragraphs, irrelevant to the election of the President, and had to amend the motion during the AGM).

I was just glad to see someone who is involved in Labor Left with enough brains to vote with what they see is correct as opposed to strictly adhering to party lines - it makes for a refreshing change

 

[withoutaface]

Oh and for all interested I voted against the senate having to approve fee changes because the senate no longer directs compulsory fees to the Union, so I feel that their power to set/approve such fees should be diminished.