The battle for James: interviews with the chair candidates

James College

And the nominees are:

• Chet Khatu

• Andrew Marshall

• Tom Mole

Main Policies:

• KHATU: Possible trip to Iceland (as in the country - not the supermarket), make JCR focal point (possibly converting it to a bar) support sports, take focus off alcohol-fuelled events

• MARSHALL: More inclusive events, sports and building community.

• MOLE: Sport paid for by college funds, a James card for benefits, training sessions with York City FC, JCRC member assigned to each block.

Most interesting facebook group they're a member of:

• KHATU: 'Man vs. Pigeon'

• MARSHALL: 'Down with Ben Culpin'

• MOLE: 'I worked at the Maize Maze'

1. Why are your running for Chair?

• KHATU: "Getting involved in college and community life has been an interest of mine for a very long time; it has also provided a vast experience to back up my campaign for becoming Chair of James. Running for the Chair so far has already been a great experience, the people I've met and caught up with during campaigning has brought back loads of memories and it's been a brilliant exercise to get an even bigger feel of the personalities within each block.

I'd see it as a privilege to be able to help run my college in such a substantial way."

• MOLE: "To reinvigorate James College student life. The changes recently made to our constitution really provide an opportunity to push on and get our students to engage with James College in a way that has been lacking."

• MARSHALL: "I decided to run for chair firstly and foremost because I enjoy being part of James JCRC, during my time as treasurer I’ve enjoyed taking an active role in the college and would very much like to continue to do so. I feel I have the experience, the attitude and the drive to make a great chair and to guide a committee that could really have a positive impact upon the college."

2. What do you think are the biggest failings at college level?

• KHATU: "My time here so far has not shown that many people feel that they have been let down by the college, the accommodation, security, aesthetics, and facilities are all generally agreed as very good.

The main point here is the absence of a main social area i.e. the JCR. We usually end up in other campus bars and our JCR doesn't see too much fun! I had my 21st in our JCR before the party moved on, it's a good venue with a lot of potential. I'd like to make the JCR a bigger people magnet and to give people absolutely no reason to doubt our college as the best one!"

• MOLE: "I think the biggest failings at college level have been sports, and charitable activities. Our reps for these have done a fantastic job whilst I've been on the JCRC, but in meetings there has been too much focus on events, and things which will make us money, rather than what we can do to put that money back in and serve our student body."

• MARSHALL: "JCRC’s can tend to get too political, spending hours debating over minor constitutional details and organising JGMs where students who have barely been briefed on the changes blindly vote and then wander back to their rooms none the wiser to what just took place and more than often didn’t care to start with."

3. Finish this sentence....the biggest mistake in uni politics in my time at York is.....

• KHATU: ....."some student bodies forgetting that the students are the reason that they are there in the first place. The JCR at James is an important body that will communicate views to people like YUSU and surrounding businesses and facilities, however its main objective is to make sure it uses its power to ensure residents have the BEST time that caters for ALL people."

• MOLE: .... "the decision taken by the University to attempt to cut down the hours in which porters were available to students in a bid to save money. This was a blatant attempt to try and make money out of selling off one of York students' fundamental privileges, and the student backlash proved that the university's actions were woefully misjudged."

• MARSHALL: ...."supporting the NUS in its condemnation of the Oxford Union Debating Society’s invitations to British National Party leader Nick Griffin and discredited historian David Irving."

"I believe it’s essential to maintain freedom of speech even if what is being said isn’t something we agree with or in this case can’t even stand. Obviously I believe that Nick Griffin and David Irving are truly awful people but it is only by having debates such as this and allowing them to outline their opinions that we can see and show others just how ridiculous what they say is and how flawed their arguments are."

Add Comment

You must log in to submit a comment.