Posts by Paul Williams
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Field Theory: Rugby World Cup stories, in reply to JackElder,
It was a great story and clearly a wise judge.
-
Likewise... I know most of the scandals from the late 80s and 90s and was active in student politics... I know their failings, but I know their value and successes too.
The ideological part of this debate, not the one here, has sometimes obscured the fact that on the ground, save for the aforementioned scandals, Students' Associations have a proud history of achieving tangible and enduring benefits for students.
-
OnPoint: Set it on fire, then, in reply to Lew Stoddart,
Paul, I'm not aware of any other meaningful challenge to the CSM system itself, such as this one. There certainly hasn't been one in the previous decade, though 'first' was probably unrealistic.
That's not correct. It's the fourth time its come before Parliament, which almost makes your first point right; Lhaws had a (unsuccessful) Members bill in 1994/5, Steel (a successful) one circa 1997/8, then it was amended by Labour and now this one.
-
OnPoint: Set it on fire, then, in reply to Lew Stoddart,
There are exceptions, sure; and this will be a great blow to those student unionists who work hard and honestly.
The ones that are self-promoters you mean?
But the bare fact is: a SA that can't gain a meaningful mandate under compulsory membership, or that can't defend their system from the first meaningful challenge, doesn't really deserve to exist.
First meaningful challenge? Your history is selective. This has been going on since 1991 and many many people have fought very hard against it on each and every campus to varying degrees of success. I don't know what's happening at Vic today, but I know what happened in the 90s and many associations reformed their governance and services to (a) better meet student need and (b) to more effectively engage the student body and not just measured in terms of SRC attendance (the tendancy to conflate the health of an organisation with the level of voting is misleading).
-
OnPoint: Set it on fire, then, in reply to Lew Stoddart,
That's a different point, and one you could've made without dumping on everyone involved in the union. It's also the argument often made about any and every issue that I don't care about.
-
OnPoint: Set it on fire, then, in reply to Lew Stoddart,
For student unionists, it's basically just patch-protection. Student unions are atrophied, dysfunctional organs run by and largely for self-promoters, and they understandably don't want the tap of unearned, unmandated revenues shut off.
What a gross over generalisation Lew.
ETA. Snap Islander.
-
OnPoint: Set it on fire, then, in reply to Danyl Mclauchlan,
It won't be replaced by the institutions, but I predict we'll see pretty much the same people advocating on behalf of students after VSM as we do now.
It's been a long time since I worked in a university, I concede, but I'm at a loss to understand why you'd think the same people will be involved? The inevitable loss of income will be lead to a de-professionalisation rendering redundant the Education Officer Graeme mentioned upthread.
Do you mean the elected representatives?
When Waikato went voluntary in, I think, 1996, it shed most of its staff and many assets (something that I found particularly galling given they'd been build up over 30 years) and hugely reduced it services including advocacy.
-
They are, at the best of times, self-appointed advocates who occasionally do good work
I'd rephrase somewhat.
Most of the times they do useful work that possibly wouldn't have been done in a timely mannter by the institution itself. Sometimes they do invaluable work that the institution is determined to avoid. Often, they do provide a voice for people who're otherwise a little powerless (or not nearly well enough informed).
They have also enriched campus life immeasurably over the years. Sure there might be a counterfactual argument that Orientation would have been run by unis themselves if Assocations hadn't done it but frankly I can't see it.
That said, I can't muster the passion for this issue that I once could.
-
Hard News: Auckland, so much enormity to…, in reply to Ian Dalziel,
I missed this at the time, certainly Northern Hemisphere rugby is "ugly and bruttish"
-
Hard News: Who owns the news?, in reply to George Darroch,
I recently stumbled on this via Slate, which excepts a chapter, haven't got it yet but it's top of my list.