Sir Menzies Campbell

[Guest]

Surely Sir Menzies can no longer be a seen as a candidate for election as Chancellor of St Andrews now that he seems likely to take over as Leader of the Lib Dems?

[ronald villiers]

i think he'll be able to manage both. anyways he might not win.

[McK]

I've said it before, but I'll say it again: Churchill managed to be Prime Minister *and* Chancellor at Bristol. I'm sure that Sir Menzies - should he become our Chancellor - would manage quite well.

[exnihilo]

Yeah, because he has given so much of his time to the University over the years.

Or not.

[Al]

Frankly, I think his behaviour throughout this whole "crisis" is more of a reason why he should not be Chancellor of the University. Does anyone really believe that he hasn't been one of the people briefing and manoeuvring against Charles Kennedy? Furthermore, he is a leading member of a party that has lied repeatedly over issues that affect universities and students.

[flarewearer]

Sir Ming is from the party that proudly proclaims to have "abolished student tuition fees in Scotland" at every possible opportunity, and yet never mention the fact that it has been replaced by a graduate endowment tax. Hardly the sort of person you want fighting the University's corner.

[hr]

image:www.magnificentoctopus.com/x/elgar.png

[David Bean]

I think it would be inappropriate for a serving leader of a political party to be our Chancellor, whatever the historical precedent might be, and I'd say that whatever I thought of the party he was leading.

[hr]

I'm your Guardian Angel.

[exnihilo]

Sadly, there's a very real possibility he'll be the front-runner in a field of one. But that's what happens when you deliberately give very little time to find alternatives - Monday's the deadline despite the Chancellor's next official duties taking place in June.

Well done, St Andrews.

[McK]

Quoting David Bean from 17:57, 7th Jan 2006
I think it would be inappropriate for a serving leader of a political party to be our Chancellor, whatever the historical precedent might be, and I'd say that whatever I thought of the party he was leading.

[hr]

I'm your Guardian Angel.

Fair enough. I disagree.

I wonder whether there was this amount of controversy when Sir Kenneth was nominated, what with the issue of his 'involvement' in the death of Trevor Aston? Or perhaps it was less widely known in 1980?

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/p ... 201-02.htm

[thinkagain]

Quoting exnihilo from 18:13, 7th Jan 2006
Sadly, there's a very real possibility he'll be the front-runner in a field of one. But that's what happens when you deliberately give very little time to find alternatives - Monday's the deadline despite the Chancellor's next official duties taking place in June.

Well done, St Andrews.

Oh come off it. You're just annoyed that you haven't got a campaign to run. Haven't you got research you should be doing?

[exnihilo]

What makes you so sure I haven't nominated someone? My complaint is that the announcement and the manner in which it was notified to members of the General Council left insufficient time for people to seek out quality candidates.

And don't presume to know what motivates me, or what I do or do not need to do with my time, o anonymous sniper.

[RJ Covino]

Were you actually notified in any real way? I know I never received anything official from the GC.

As for the sniper - would people actually campaign for an election for Chancellor? I think not.

[hr]

http://www.ralphcovino.com

[exnihilo]

No, I wasn't notified qua member of General Council - nobody was. But then, I requested papers for the GC meeting in Dundee and was ignored - and not for the first time. And, no, I doubt anyone will be campaigning, but it would have been better for the University to have taken a more relaxed pace, as there is no great urgency, and allowed the GC to come up with a few worthy candidates instead of this, which has the whiff of stitch-up to it.

[BenEsq]

Quoting exnihilo from 22:15, 7th Jan 2006
No, I wasn't notified qua member of General Council - nobody was. But then, I requested papers for the GC meeting in Dundee and was ignored - and not for the first time. And, no, I doubt anyone will be campaigning, but it would have been better for the University to have taken a more relaxed pace, as there is no great urgency, and allowed the GC to come up with a few worthy candidates instead of this, which has the whiff of stitch-up to it.

Well, it's not as though he's Dr Lang's favourite for the post or that they were gullible enough to think he was stepping down from politics before the next election...

The media didn't like the campaigning that occurred for Chris Patten for the Chancellorship at Oxford, true. If St Andrews was contested (dunno if it is, yet), it would be the first with easy means of mass messaging and communication - which would make it possible if anybody did have the inclination to campaign.

[hr]

Lions and tigers and bears...Oh my!

[RJ Covino]

Quoting exnihilo from 22:15, 7th Jan 2006
But then, I requested papers for the GC meeting in Dundee and was ignored

I got told that I wasn't sent them because I don't live close enough to Dundee to have merited an invitation. Astounding.

Of course, it took me ages to convince them that I was still resident in St Andrews too.

Still, we shall see what miracle of nonsense Monday brings. I'm quite glad that Sir Kenneth remained Chancellor right through my entire time as a student. A great man - and his shoes will be terribly hard to fill.

[hr]

http://www.ralphcovino.com

[Jamie potton]

Quoting McK from 18:26, 7th Jan 2006
[Fair enough. I disagree.

I wonder whether there was this amount of controversy when Sir Kenneth was nominated, what with the issue of his 'involvement' in the death of Trevor Aston? Or perhaps it was less widely known in 1980?

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/p ... 201-02.htm

I doubt there was any controversy: Aston died in '85...

I would have to say that if Ming were to become Chancellor, being capped by Dr Lang would not be quite so undesirable.

[Jamie potton]

Quoting McK from 18:26, 7th Jan 2006
[Fair enough. I disagree.

I wonder whether there was this amount of controversy when Sir Kenneth was nominated, what with the issue of his 'involvement' in the death of Trevor Aston? Or perhaps it was less widely known in 1980?

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/p ... 201-02.htm

I doubt there was any controversy: Aston died in '85...

I would have to say that if Ming were to become Chancellor, being capped by Dr Lang would not be quite so undesirable.

[Tweedle-Dum]

Quoting Jamie Potton from 01:51, 8th Jan 2006


I would have to say that if Ming were to become Chancellor, being capped by Dr Lang would not be quite so undesirable.

Mr Potton, are you thinking what I'm thinking: Barry Joss for Chancellor?

Could work.

[hr]

Tetragrammaton is a four letter word.

[McK]

Quoting Tweedle-Dum from 01:59, 8th Jan 2006

Quoting Jamie Potton from 01:51, 8th Jan 2006


I would have to say that if Ming were to become Chancellor, being capped by Dr Lang would not be quite so undesirable.

Mr Potton, are you thinking what I'm thinking: Barry Joss for Chancellor?

Could work.

[hr]

Tetragrammaton is a four letter word.

Please, let us not entertain that idea just yet.

As for Mr Aston, his death was... unfortunate... but still, Sir Kenneth's 'stirring' is still muttered of in certain Oxford corridoors. I shan't complain as it makes good gossip.

[exnihilo]

Yes, let's not, and let's stop using a name neither you nor Potton ever knew me by!