SVS to affiliate to the Students' Association

[lizzie]

If you really are all so interested in the fate of SVS then please get involved-- there is so little interest in committee postitions that I am surprised there is so many argumants against svs associating with the union. Everyone please get your facts straight- please come and talk to the committee, 1pm on a tues afternoon in the salad bowl- and we will be able to discuss any problems you have against us affilliating. Otherwise, please keep your uninformed tosh to yourselves and leave it to those who actually care about making a difference. Thanks.

[José Jimenez]

Quoting exnihilo from 11:23, 9th Dec 2005

Quoting Tweedle-Dum from 03:15, 9th Dec 2005
I also just realised waht is wrong with it affiliating: Elections.

Cross campus elections for everything! Better an uninformed and totally uninterested multitude should vote entirely at random than that the actively involved and interested people should make an informed choice. If that happened the people who would be good would be elected, and that's just silly.

[hr]

He [Julian the Apostate] had found by experience that no wild beasts are so hostile to men as are Christian sects in general to one another.
[s]Ammianus Marcellinus (c. AD 360)

There is a point I would to address here, though unrelated it may be to this thread. In terms to issues that are of special interest to particularly qualified persons, I do not support "cross campus elections for everything" In my limited experience in working with SVS, I have found them to be extrodinarily committed to their organizations mission and purpose. I trust those in charge now to make decisions that will best serve both the interests of their society, the student body, and the beneficiaries of their volunteer work. I also trust Bean to use his position in the best interest of all parties concerned.

Having said that, I think there should be far more referenda conducted by the Association on issues of critical interest to the student body. If the opinion of the student body is to be accurately represented, I think opinion of the masses is critical to generating support for the Associations and increasing the legitimacy of the positions it takes.

A good example of this would be the library rennovation: I for example believe that this measure will be insufficient to deal with the increasing enrolment of students by 2013. I think a better plan would be saving up for a new building by 2015 or so. Wouldn't be useful to determine other students thoughts such matters? I am after all only one of six and a half thousand.

[David Bean]

I just want to respond to the claim that I'm trying to expand the Association irrationally to take on areas it has no business dealing with. Nothing could be further from the truth.

There are people involved in the Association who believe that the Association is the be-all and end-all of existence here in St Andrews, that all organisations should affiliate and that those that don't should be disadvantaged until they see the light. I don't agree with this view at all, and I've argued strongly against it on a number of occasions. However, just as it's silly to claim that the Association can be all things to all people, it's equally silly to say that it mightn't have value in any particular case: there's no point in taking either a blanket pro- or anti- Association line on all things, and then hanging on to it like a dog with a bone. If and when I can see real advantages for an organisation to work with or even affiliate to the Association, of course I'm going at least to make the case to them, and then if they agree with me, I'll work my hardest to make sure it works out for them. That's where we are with the SVS right at this minute.

Far be it from me to question the degree to which former committee members care about the SVS or did their homework when trying to decide where to take the organisation, but I can only point again to the fact that Harmless Loony's objections appeared to be based upon a number of concerns that, whilst if they had been correct they would present a very strong case against the affiliation, really aren't valid now, or have been worked around. If I think that the people who previously concluded it was a bad idea were basing their conclusions on false premises, then surely it stands to reason that I'm going to think myself and the current committee who agree with me to be more correct than they were.

[hr]

I'm your Guardian Angel.