Home

TheSinner.net

News from NUS

This message board is for discussing anything in any way remotely connected with St Andrews, the University or just anything you want. Welcome!

News from NUS

Postby Marco Biagi on Sat Apr 09, 2005 1:24 am

At the NUS national conference on Thursday, the National Organisation of Labour Students (NOLS) failed to win any of the six sabbatical elections. I believe this is the first time in the history of NUS that all six have been independents.

By contrast, our own Director of Representation (the praiseworthy Ben Reilly), who is a member of NOLS, is set to serve a second term as Convener of our NUS 'alternative', the Coalition of Higher Education Students in Scotland (CHESS).

Interesting how things turn, isn't it?
Marco Biagi
 
Posts: 1218
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am

Re:

Postby quarterstaff on Sat Apr 09, 2005 1:41 am

RARARARARA!

BLOODY HIPPIES!


RARARARA!
god damned mongolians!
quarterstaff
 
Posts: 637
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2003 10:57 am

Re:

Postby Guest on Sat Apr 09, 2005 9:35 am

[s]Marco Biagi wrote on 04:24, 9th Apr 2005:
I believe this is the first time in the history of NUS that all six have been independents.


What are the odds that most if not all of those 6 are still arch-lefties? No one in their right mind would expect to win a student election on a Tony Blair Ticket at the moment.


By contrast, our own Director of Representation (the praiseworthy Ben Reilly), who is a member of NOLS

Why are our sabs not obliged to be politically independent while in office? Especially when considering how many st andrews students hate the labour party....
Guest
 

Re:

Postby Ben Reilly on Sat Apr 09, 2005 10:03 am

Quoting from 11:49, 9th Apr 2005
Why are our sabs not obliged to be politically independent while in office? Especially when considering how many st andrews students hate the labour party....


We are. We don't stand as representatives of political parties (but membership is on our Declaration of Interests). if we are members, we don't receive any help in standing (c.f people standing in NUS elections).

Essentially, we are all sabbaticals (or SRC members, etc. )who may just happen to be a member of a political party, rather than people who stood as a representative of that party for election.

As to hating the labour party, as Marco knows, I dislike immensely many of the actions of the government- but I think that the only current alternative is far worse.

[s]Marco Biagi wrote on 04:24, 9th Apr 2005:
I believe this is the first time in the history of NUS that all six have been independents.

By contrast, our own Director of Representation (the praiseworthy Ben Reilly), who is a member of NOLS, is set to serve a second term as Convener of our NUS 'alternative', the Coalition of Higher Education Students in Scotland (CHESS)

As to serving a second term as Convener, that is up to the members of CHESS.

Quoting from 11:49, 9th Apr 2005

What are the odds that most if not all of those 6 are still arch-lefties? No one in their right mind would expect to win a student election on a Tony Blair Ticket at the moment.


NOLS has traditionally been on the right of the political spectrum in NUS terms, so to describe them as arch-lefties is quite ironic.
Ben Reilly
 
Posts: 590
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 3:55 pm

Re:

Postby Marco Biagi on Sat Apr 09, 2005 5:39 pm

[s]Ben Reilly wrote on 13:03, 9th Apr 2005:
NOLS has traditionally been on the right of the political spectrum in NUS terms, so to describe them as arch-lefties is quite ironic.


Political position doesn't matter so much to student representation as naked careerism though. I take it you'd heard that Rami Okasha, ex-NUS Scotland President and failed candidate for NUS UK Presidency is now running for the Labour party in Banff & Buchan? Can't see him troubling Alex Salmond though.
Marco Biagi
 
Posts: 1218
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am

Re:

Postby Ben Reilly on Sat Apr 09, 2005 6:39 pm

Yeah, so I heard. I think it would be a good idea if we had a (higher) minimum age requirement for posts, perhaps something like the 35 minimum age for US president.
Ben Reilly
 
Posts: 590
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 3:55 pm

Re:

Postby Andrew Cusack on Sat Apr 09, 2005 8:42 pm

I'm about as far from being a member of Labour as possible, and I have every confidence that Mr. Ben Reilly represents me as a St Andrean more than adequately.
Andrew Cusack
 
Posts: 209
Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2003 3:05 am

Re:

Postby ever_nocturnal on Sat Apr 09, 2005 10:11 pm

.
Last edited by ever_nocturnal on Sun Mar 15, 2015 11:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
ever_nocturnal
 
Posts: 334
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2003 7:11 pm

Re:

Postby Guest on Sun Apr 10, 2005 1:44 pm

[s]Ben Reilly wrote on 21:39, 9th Apr 2005:
Yeah, so I heard. I think it would be a good idea if we had a (higher) minimum age requirement for posts, perhaps something like the 35 minimum age for US president.


Thus preventing both Pitt the Younger and Churchill entering parliament when they did? Let the people decide; if they want an 18 year old or a monkey (after all, h'angus did beat the labour candidate in hartlepool...) so be it.
Guest
 

Re:

Postby Ben Reilly on Sun Apr 10, 2005 7:27 pm

Perhaps it was appropriate in the past, but what we now have is the development of a political class who will never have a "real" job. These people depend on the goodwill of the leadership of the parties to ensure that they have a long term future. I think that this is one of the things that has lead to the huge change in the sort of politicians we get nowadays (as Robin Cook puts it, 20 years ago if you argued against party policy on something, it was likely to get you promoted as it showed you weren't afraid to use your brain. Nowadays, the only way is to sing from the hymnsheet.)
Ben Reilly
 
Posts: 590
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 3:55 pm

Re:

Postby Guest on Sun Apr 10, 2005 9:31 pm

[s]Ben Reilly wrote on 22:27, 10th Apr 2005:
Perhaps it was appropriate in the past, but what we now have is the development of a political class who will never have a "real" job. These people depend on the goodwill of the leadership of the parties to ensure that they have a long term future.


And if you stop them entering parliament till they are 35, they will simply work for CCO, Milbank, think-tanks etc until that time (none of which are real jobs). However, in practise, few MP's are elected until they are in their 30's anyway.

The growth of a professional political class has only been helped by this government's Elections, Political Parties, and Referendums (sic) Act, which has given vastly more power to the party machines - vide Howard Flight, who could not have been got rid of so easily if it was not illegal for his name to appear on the ballot paper as a conservative unless a central office functionary had signed his papers as the tory national elections officer rather than only his local association.
Guest
 

Re:

Postby piers on Sun Apr 10, 2005 9:37 pm

[s]Ben Reilly wrote on 21:39, 9th Apr 2005:
Yeah, so I heard. I think it would be a good idea if we had a (higher) minimum age requirement for posts, perhaps something like the 35 minimum age for US president.


Charles James Fox made it into the Commons at 19, Anthony Eden was 26, Charles Kennedy was 23.
piers
 

Re:

Postby BenEsq on Mon Apr 11, 2005 12:10 am

So up the age requirement then ;)



[hr]
Lions and tigers and bears...Oh my!
Lions and tigers and bears...Oh my!
BenEsq
 
Posts: 283
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 12:35 pm


Return to The Sinner's Main Board

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests