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.
The positions of LGBT, Women's, Racial Equality, Policy and Campaigns, Services and Finance, Academic & Welfare and President were all debated.
Each candidate (or set of) was given a three minute speech, followed by rounds of questions applicable to each candidate of every position.
LGBT Candidates, Sarah Fennell & Ben Humphrys, brought up various policies, such as constructing a website and forum, as well as placing emphasis on welfare and representation, and on being held more accountable by their committee.
Women's Candidates, Sophie Harrison & Eilidh McIntosh, announced that they wish to pull on the success of Freshers Week and make it known that "sexism affects men as well as women".
Those competing for Racial Equality Officers, Nadia Aziz & John Apea and Iman Khabireh & Marat Omarov, argued many points. Aziz and Apea drew attention to figures that showed that York has a low proportion of students from ethnic minorities, whilst Khabireh and Omarov said they wanted to build on the success of International Week.
The position of Policy and Campaigns, which is being contested four-ways, allowed for much debate.
First to speak, in an emotive speech, were John Heritage & Chris Etheridge, who said that York was "a campus under threat" and that if elected they "promise to stand outside the library and warn prospective students about budget cuts". They added: "The time for beating around the bush has gone."
Next to speak were Kate Evans & Emily Cousins who said: "We pledge to run an initial campaign on bridges." They plan to educate students on how to "run a UGM motion" whilst, surveying "campus about what campaigns matter."
Lisa Clague & Laura Vitty said that: "University needs to remember whist Hes East is important, we're still here."
Finally, YUSU oldies Tom Langrish & Michael Batula made an impressive speech announcing: "We don't talk about campaigns, we do campaigns and we will campaign for you."
They backed up their statements by adding: "Every campaign we run, we'll aim for a UGM motion to be admitted."
Questions had to be addressed to all candidates. Policy and Campaign candidates were faced with the question: "Are Policy and Campaigns there to do all the crap that the President can't be arsed to do?"
First up, Heritage and Etheridge announced: "That's what the ordinary members are there for". Evans and Cousins said: "We do the things we feel passionate about." The third response came from Vitty and Clague, who said: "We need someone to represent students as a campaign group." Lastly, Batula and Langrish said: "We don't want to be left with the crap, because if Anne-Marie doesn't want to do it, it must be bad."
There is a three-way candidate tie for Services and Finance. Nick Bradley took to the floor first, saying that he is "against University closure, and the YUSU takeover" of Langwith Bar.
Matt Burton, who is seeking an unprecedented second term as Services and Finances Officer, said: "Please re-elect me to do another great job."
The third candidate, James Thompson, told students: "Respect for the Union policy is at an all time low." He said that: "The majority of students are either constantly complaining or not caring."
The debate for the Academic and Welfare position, another three-way tie, began with Al Duffell, who said University Welfare requires "a systematic and pragmatic review of welfare offered".
Charlie Leyland said that she also wanted to place emphasis on academic standards: "We're falling down the academic league tables, we need to investigate why."
She discussed the issue of supervisors who fit the whole scale: "Some don't know your name, whilst some know what you had for breakfast."
Finally, after a three-hour epic, Presidential Candidates Tom Scott, Laura Payne and Nadz Kunwar took to the stage.
Mad Cap'n Tom said: "If they [YUSU Officers] must be concerned in late night altercations outside Derwent, it might be better to chop some limbs off."
He said that if the Goodricke-Vanbrugh Bridge cannot be repaired, then if half of it were demolished, "we can walk them off it".
Second to speak was Laura Payne. She claimed: "A student bar would put us, the students, in control."
She said she wouldd bring "drive and passion" to the role of YUSU president as well as emphasing a need to pressure the university to commit to repairing campus, she emphasised that we shouldn't be second to Hes East. Other ideas included a "promise that the University gives a swimming pool by 2010".
Kunwar said his campaign was about "delivering a changing YUSU, answerable to you" and "open to all". He said that in future he wants sabbs to attend JCRC meetings, upon invitation, to answer questions.
He said: "It is the first time in a while that academia has been a high priority for a President." Kunwar wants to see the roles of Academic and Welfare officer separated as a part of this pledge. He also spoke of a free media policy aiming to “make YUSU a help to our award winning media, not a hindrance.”
Any fixed policies from Nadz yet, or is he still just giving wishy washy statements like these?
Well he's planning an 'international viking raid' which he thinks he'll have time to do after spending 8am-7pm in university committee meetings before heading off for other stuff like UGMs... more importantly of course, isn't that a Services and Finance area?!
Or possibly Student Development & Charities, as the Raids were originally run by RAG.
Chris don't comment that Nadz has no policies when he does. If you took the time to do the absolute minimum of research (hence look at his facebook group) you would see he does. It seems you have some type of grudge against him
Chris, I think you will find that Viking Raids have ALWAYS been run by YUSU. YUSU handle all of the organisation etc for it and then on the RAG affiliated ones share the profit with RAG.
@#4, I have absolutely nothing against Kunwar, I'd never even heard of him before the elections. I was basing my comment on the articles published in The Yorker which seem to be representing him as a single issue (the media charter) candidate. I'll probably research the candidates in greater detail when it comes to vote, but for the time being I'm just basing my opinion on the articles in The Yorker and Nouse.
Don't you think its a bit ignorant to start passing judgement then without even taking the time to do some basic research? He has provided policies, you just didn't bother to read them. Your "wishy washy statement", not his I feel.....
Chris, you are now going against what you said/implied. You said "is he still just giving wishy washy statements like these?" and in previous articles you have said you don't know why everyone is supporting Nadz (even though they wern't) That sounds to me like you have rather a low opinion of him.....
I've read Nadz's policies on Facebook, and they are by far and away the best. The others are either focusing on things that are out of student control (like the bridges, seriously students can't just campaign to make campus services ignor the fact they are dangerous)or policies that are just not that important.
Nadz is focusing on what students want, and what is actually going to be changed.
If one of the candidates who is making promises about bridges for students wins, i am 100% sure nothing (nothing) will be done about them, as building a new bridge will be extremely costly, and the university will be pumping cash into Hes East.
So, to finish
Nadz for President
Based on the comments made in the article about his speech at Hustings
<sarcasm>Oh no, I missed a pun that only works when read out loud that's expressed in text.</sarcasm>
I'm a pessimist, especially when it comes to politics. I wait until someone proves themselves before I form a high opinion of them.
Okay, so I've gone and read Kunwar's policies on Facebook now, and once you get past the attempts to draw parallels between himself and Barack Obama I must say I honestly don't agree with them, or they're superfluous. Let's break down the policies:
> online module/lecture ratings
I'm kind of missing the point, what's wrong the current online module feedback system?
>Viking Raid goes International
If I'm not mistaken, Viking Raid was started as a RAG event and his proposal doesn't really mention anything about charity.
> Campus-wide Hes East Student Survey
I agree with this
> The Free Media
In addition to his obvious conflict of interest with a private company here, this is not as big a deal as he's making out (Vision and Nouse reporters have said as much)
> Split Academic & Welfare into two separate sabbatical officers
I don't think employing another sabb is really something that YUSU should be doing.
He then continues to list more policies without giving any explanation to how he plans to achieve them, such as an arbitrary figure for RAG, increasing funding for JCRCs and the AU (despite the fact he also wants to employ another sabb), Campaign for later licenses for Campus Events, despite the fact that there are more pressing issues with the bars at the moment then the amount of time they're allowed to stay open for, and then this "Open YUSU policy", without even explaining what it is.
I don't have any ties with Nads or anyone else, but think the Yorker is getting a bit of an unfair beating over the free media policy... rather than showing his 'conflict of interest', actually by loosening up the media charter Nads would be giving Vision and Nouse a better chance to take on the yorker. At the moment, whatever YUSU and the papers tell you about not being censored, EVERYTHING they publish HAS to be read by Sam Bayley. EVERYTHING. And quite a lot of things do get changed by him, if usually only in small ways. By giving the YUSU media free rein, Nads would be allowing Vision and Nouse to take back control. Why would he do that if he was biased towards the yorker??
For anyone who's interested in the media charter, see pages 19-29 of the Union Code - http://www.yusu.org/uploads/democracy/UnionCode%2015%20Feb%2008.pdf, and come to your own decision on how restrictive it is. I've formed my own opinion and until I see some compelling arguments to the contrary, I'm sticking by it
Chris you may have to concede to defeat on the media issue. Having worked with several of the universities papers, under the umbrella of the university (with its strong welfare stance), it can be hard to publish stories about certain topics and individuals even if it can be seen to be in the interest of all students, as it its deemed to infringe upon the individuals welfare. This means, on occasion, important stories cannot be reported. The current system takes certain editorial control away from the editors of the papers. But this is done with the good reason of student welfare. I do not know exactly what could be done to re-establish this control back to the individual papers without infringing student welfare. But without more editorial control it is true that The Yorker has an air of advantage with regards to news reporting as they are an independent company.
As for your apparent strong views on everything else, maybe you should go down to hustings yourself and ask some questions. Especially if your not sure on someone’s policies. (I’d just like to clarify I am no nadz lover or hater but am keeping an open mind) I suppose that’s the only way to make your opinions more concrete or to the contrary. Otherwise it just sound like you yourself have pretty wishy washy views.
J
At the end of the day, whether or not my views are wishy-washy or not doesn't matter, as I'm not running for an SU position.
I would have been at the hustings if circumstances were different, however I was unable to make it.
I realise this is very nerdy but I think the version of the media charter that is still included in the Union Code that you posted, Chris, is an old version! Incredible cock up if so. It still refers to 'Yor:mag' rather than Bad Taste. And I'm willing to bet my last penny that Anne Marie Canning isn't a 'member of the NUJ' (7.20). If this *is* the current version, how can anyone say it doesn't need updating?
Personally I think the Yorker deserves all of the freedom it wants. At the end of the day, as an independent company (charity?), not governed by YUM, it can print whatever it likes, but equally its legally liable for its output.
A scoundrel might argue that it would provide a nice little loophole for YUSU to publicize things that it might not be able to because it would put the union in a difficult position either ethically or legally...
Right, let's get this media stuff sorted out.
I can supply anybody who's interested with the new copy of the Media Charter which was agreed only last week (with the support of Vision and Nouse, I'd point out). I will put it up on our website shortly under "The Union" section.
I don't read EVERYTHING that goes to print, I read anything that could be contentious and put the Union at financial risk or harm a student's welfare. This is to protect the individuals running the outlets as much as anything! We don't remove stories that criticise the Union or University as long as they are reported accurately (i.e. legally).
Commenter 15 - the new Media Charter requires me, rather than AMC, to be a member of the NUJ. And I have been since last July.
On another note, until the change of editors I was working with The Yorker on a "Fair Practice Agreement" - hopefully this will be resumed soon.
As Pro-Returning Officer I'm not in a position to comment on anybody's campaign.
One other point - Viking Raid did NOT start as a RAG event, though it has been run in conjunction a couple of times.
As ever - any questions - communications@yusu.org...
OK to follow up on this - you can see the new Media Charter at:
http://www.yusu.org/uploads/union2/media%20charter%202008.pdf
The student media at York is fantastic. It gives us a vitality that other unis don't have and the Yorker has added to this.
But it is precisely because the media in York are so strong, that the framework set out by the Media Charter, which enshrines an ethic gaurding the welfare of individual students, is so important.
I support a strong media able to hold YUSU and the University to account. But I do not want to see a media that would be free to intrude on other students personal lives or publish articles about other students, beyond that which is neccessary to hold people to account for the positions they hold. These things are important enough to warrant stronger checks than recourse to legal action provides.
I am not suggesting the Yorker is doing that. But the kind of 'free media' being talked about leaves the door wide open to all of the above. Why can't the Yorker find ways of reconciling its innovative set-up with the provisions of the Media Charter?
There has always been a consensus about this. So why is this issue being raised so heavily now? This is just utterly irresponsible.
It shouldn't have to be a choice, but if it is a choice between 'media rights' and student rights. I say student rights.
Why do students have to have a different set of rights than the general public? The Yorker is subject to the same journalistic ethics as any other British media, and is restricted by the same laws concerning libel.
That being the case, I'd pick 'media rights' - being freedom of speech - over some kind of special 'students rights' anyday.
You must log in to submit a comment.
Report