"Vote for Glasgow" or "unity is strength and our strength is numbers"
As a member of Glasgow University, I have to vote in a referendum today on whether the Glasgow University Students’ Representative Council (GUSRC) should join the National Union of Students (NUS).
The GUSRC has some objective information and presents the "yes" argument and "no" argument.
I think we can disregard the issue of student discounts as you can already enjoy that benefit with the current non-NUS card. I believe there are two main points, in descending order of importance: representation and cost. We'll start with the easier topic of cost: the yes campaign states that that cost is £50,000 (actually £52,531.25), which is a lot of money, but it is stated by the Yesses that "that’s not even 5% of total student body funding". Looking at the information, this is calculated by including all the money allocated to the SRC, GUU and QMU including funds for capital expenditure. This is a bit misleading, as it will be the SRC who will have to pay the affiliation fee, which is ~12% of their total income. Although the University may be able to help with the cost; with 19,547 students this is only £2.69 per student. Thus, I don't believe that this should be a decisive issue.
Next, representation. This is a much more difficult issue to reason about, as it is very difficult to quantify. The no campaign highlight issues of accountability, under-representation, disorganisation and destructive inner-politics. The University of Sunderland, who disaffiliated, concur. The Noes give the following example regarding the lecturer strikes:
With differences between the Scottish and English education systems and the vast majority of members from England, I originally thought that the NUS would neglect specific issues such as the strikes, but there is a NUS Scotland arm.
I don't have much more time to research these questions since voting closes at 6pm and I should get back to work. I think I will vote "yes" because the cost per student is not much and although I am unable to say whether the NUS can effectively represent the University of Glasgow, we can make a more informed decision after a year (and part ways if required), plus the GUSRC will still be there.
--
mond
P.S.
On the other hand, I'm not sure I want to be part of an association who's website name includes the term "online". If you have a website then you are online, so there is no need to say so.
P.P.S.
Also, do the "Aasian-looking" people described in paragraph 7 have any relation to those "Assians"? Christopher? ;)
The GUSRC has some objective information and presents the "yes" argument and "no" argument.
I think we can disregard the issue of student discounts as you can already enjoy that benefit with the current non-NUS card. I believe there are two main points, in descending order of importance: representation and cost. We'll start with the easier topic of cost: the yes campaign states that that cost is £50,000 (actually £52,531.25), which is a lot of money, but it is stated by the Yesses that "that’s not even 5% of total student body funding". Looking at the information, this is calculated by including all the money allocated to the SRC, GUU and QMU including funds for capital expenditure. This is a bit misleading, as it will be the SRC who will have to pay the affiliation fee, which is ~12% of their total income. Although the University may be able to help with the cost; with 19,547 students this is only £2.69 per student. Thus, I don't believe that this should be a decisive issue.
Next, representation. This is a much more difficult issue to reason about, as it is very difficult to quantify. The no campaign highlight issues of accountability, under-representation, disorganisation and destructive inner-politics. The University of Sunderland, who disaffiliated, concur. The Noes give the following example regarding the lecturer strikes:
In a 3-hour executive meeting dominated by Non-Student issues, they spent 7 minutes discussing the strikes.I don't know much about the inner workings of the NUS, apart from what I have read on their website, so are they supposed to talk about student issues in an executive meeting? The SRC is not part of the NUS so should they have to discuss issues affecting Glasgow Uni? The strikes did affect other Universities that are affiliated with the NUS, so did the seven minutes pertain to just Glasgow? Regarding the strikes in general, what did the NUS actually do? The Noes say that the NUS wouldn't take action but the SRC did; what is to stop the SRC from doing this if they are part of the NUS? The backbone of the argument seems to be that the NUS will replace the SRC, which I don't think is the case. If the NUS can do what they say they can, surely, they will be an additional implement for students?
With differences between the Scottish and English education systems and the vast majority of members from England, I originally thought that the NUS would neglect specific issues such as the strikes, but there is a NUS Scotland arm.
I don't have much more time to research these questions since voting closes at 6pm and I should get back to work. I think I will vote "yes" because the cost per student is not much and although I am unable to say whether the NUS can effectively represent the University of Glasgow, we can make a more informed decision after a year (and part ways if required), plus the GUSRC will still be there.
--
mond
P.S.
On the other hand, I'm not sure I want to be part of an association who's website name includes the term "online". If you have a website then you are online, so there is no need to say so.
P.P.S.
Also, do the "Aasian-looking" people described in paragraph 7 have any relation to those "Assians"? Christopher? ;)
posted by mond at
2:40 pm
|
0 comments
