A group of York students has won the opportunity to have their very own I-phone application developed after winning The App Challenge final, held at the Ron Cooke Hub on Wednesday, January 18.
YUSU Welfare officer Bob Hughes has warned students to be vigilant after a student loans phishing scam has been revealed.
Her Majesty the Queen will be visiting York on Maundy Thursday, 5th April, as part of the 800th anniversary of York’s Charter for the traditional “Royal Maundy” ceremony.
A flood caused by a heating system “failure” forced the university IT services to shut down many essential systems on Sunday night, causing problems for many students on the eve of their exams and assignment due-dates.
Adam Thorn who spent the No campaign slamming the NUS on its financial incompetence, has worked with the National Student newspaper to lead on the story.
Last night, after confirmation arrived that the 100,000 print would go ahead, he said: "Hopefully this will give Gemma Tumelty a bloody nose. I personally think she should resign. Maybe this will teach them to think about how they spend students' money."
The No campaign have also hinted that they have still unfinished business as well.
Thorn found out about the NUS financial incompetence after phoning the national union for its budgets, while writing a column for YUSU's YorkVision. He told the yorker that it was exceedingly difficult to get anybody at national level to be forthcoming about it.
The National Student newspaper is an independent newspaper which is distributed to students' unions, student associations, HE colleges, accommodation providers, libraries, bars, clubs, record shops and other venues across the UK.
Is the information in the leaflet available online? Does anyone have a link?
'Hopefully this will give Gemma Tumelty a bloody nose'
well this guy sounds unpleasant.
the last issue of vision had adam's original story, if you can find a copy
As was pointed out during the referendum week, the FORECASTS that Adam used in his Vision article were based on out of date papers issued by the NUS, and the actual budget deficit of the NUS this year was £300k (not the 1.1m claimed). That's not a debt by the way, that's a budget deficit. Also, the reason that they didn't make the money they expected was because they offered several unions hardship discounts on affiliation fees, whilst still carrying on their work at national level. NUS have money in the bank to cover this.
I think Mr Thorn might have finally met his match with Gemma Tumelty if he's expecting to cause a massive upset!
A budget deficit is surely worse. If the NUS lost £1.1m a year ago, and £300k this year, then how many millions must they be in debt?
Just to make it clear:
What the NUS didn't tell everyone was that the 'forecasts' i used were released just a WEEK before the end of the financial year - which is where the £1.1m comes from! Meaning the figures I used are extreamley accurate.
The information I used is the latest figures in any form that have been published by the NUS. They tend not to release concrete figures until around 18 months or so after the end of the year...which is why the figures i used were estimates.
I want to make it clear that I stand by my story 100%.
Sorry Adam - I've lost respect for anything you write ever since that utter tripe you wrote about the PPE degree and it's students. Not even on a personal note - if you had written that crap about any other degree (and if you had been reading The Yorker you would know that some degrees had 100% at 2.1) then it would still have been the same biased gibberish.
Had someone from PPE done something to upset you?
On this story it seems to me like you're out of your depth. Nice reporting, but don't get too carried away.
George, Adam wrote that story about degrees.
Is anyone else bored of this story already?
The Yes camp won the referendum. Get over it.
Hear, Hear. (re:#9)
Adam - the fact that there weren't more accurate figures available to you at the time doesn't make your figures accurate. At one point there was no evidence to suggest the world was round, that doesn't make the supposition that it was flat 'accurate', it functions merely as an excuse for drawing flawed opinions from flawed data. The fact that you know the figures are flawed now should give you pause before you continue with the story, and if you have been provided with more accurate data since you are obliged to print a retraction of your earlier figures. You're free to stress that you had no reason to doubt your 'estimations', that doesn't make them facts, and it doesn't mean you can continue to deceive your readership.
Quite what 'war' this is the start of I don't know. York students, after an intensive week of campaigning, voted overwhelmingly to stay with the NUS, despite being provided with exaggerated figures about the 'debt' NUS was in. If that was the decision on inflated figures, it is hardly likely to change on the basis of more accurate figures. The referendum is over, do something constructive with your time.
Just to reitterate what has been said before about the distinction between 'budget deficit'/'forecasts' and 'debt'. The distinction is massively important: this isn't forgetting to check your balance for a while and spending carelessly. Forecasted budget defecit means that the NUS, having cut the affiliation fees of many SUs in financial crisis or hardship (including York), had a decreased income but decided NOT to cut back on the services it offered students, to spend over its income at that time and recoup the loss at a later date. The decision took integrity and a commitment to the needs of students over what looks good to hungry student journalists. If the NUS were not in £300k 'debt' then this would have been because the interests of students had not been put first - and in that situation I think we would have a right to complain.
Where, might I ask, will the funding for the printing of these 100,000 documents come from? If it not Adam Thorn's own wallet then I think he should 'think about how he spends students money'..
'Estimations'
The quoted £1.1m figure for the last financial year was printed in a policy document to conference ONE WEEK before the last financial year ended. One week! Are these 'other figures' relevant? Its far more spurious to talk of this loss of '£300k' - that figure too is a projected loss, sure... for march '08.
£1.1m is the only published figure for loss in the latest financial year - this was put to conference and is clearly relevant
Am I the only one who thinks this story doesn't really much sense? How can you print a copy of a financial mess?
Does the editor not get to vet articles before they are published? This reads more like a column where the author has a specific political agenda rather than a news article.
Poster #5 - to clarify, the NUS are not in debt. A budget deficit simply means they won't make as much money as previously budgeted. The NUS is very asset-heavy and has cash in the bank!
You may also want to see http://www.theyorker.co.uk/news/uninews/917 for the NUS response.
You must log in to submit a comment.
Report