the
University Observer
features
science
otwo
Croke Park II
Arrested Development
The Vaccines
the reaction of the Trade Union movement to the new deal
the removal of Ireland’s Chief Scientific Advisor may be a step backwards
Freddie Cowan about the band’s pop lineage and the realities of living and working as musicians
v o l u m e
USI seek legal advice as DCU declare affiliation referendum void
x I X
·
i s s u e
X I
·
3
a p r i l
2 0 1 3
·
w w w . u n i v e r s i t y o b s e r v e r . i e
Irish Research Council funding applications in chaos by emer sugrue · editor
by aoife valentine · deputy editor
The Union of Students in Ireland (USI) has sought legal advice concerning the decision taken by Dublin City University Students’ Union (DCUSU) President Paul Doherty to declare the USI affiliation referendum that took place in February, “null and void”. The referendum had returned a 55% ‘Yes’ vote, voting to re-affiliate to the USI. Following a meeting last week with the Office of Student Life (OSL) in DCU, Doherty released a statement to all students, saying: “The constitutionality has been challenged in relation to Article 9.1.6 which states that “The Students’ Union shall be responsible for the posting of the wording of proposed constitutional changes and the promotion of each referendum.” In the case of the USI referendum, DCU SU Executive did not to hold an information campaign or promote the referendum. Therefore, as protector of the Constitution I must now declare the USI affiliation referendum null and void.” USI have since distributed emails sent out by DCU’s Returning Officer and from a number of SU College Convenors to students, informing them that the referendum was taking place and outlining the voting options open to students. USI believe that this should fulfil the information campaign criteria, but at the time of going to print, were seeking legal confirmation of this. USI have responded to the statement from Doherty, with USI President John Logue stating: “Our primary focus now is to protect the democratic decision of DCU students to affiliate to USI. It is evident from the events that have transpired since the result of the referendum that a
Delegates voting at the Union of Students in Ireland’s National Congress 2013, which took place last week in Ballinasloe. small cohort in DCU is intent on subverting the students’ decision by any means necessary. This has culminated in the highly questionable decision by DCU Students’ Union today to declare the referendum null and void. USI will now take any measures necessary to ensure that the constitutional right of DCU students to join and form a union is vindicated.” This is the most recent in a series of dispute following the result of the referendum. The day following the referendum, February 29th, Doherty had
expressed the opinion that this outcome was as a result of an unfair campaign, as USI Officers were allowed campaig n on campus, something which had not been permitted during the UCD USI affiliation referendum. Doherty stated at the time: “Given that the deciding result was so close it [USI officers canvassing] probably was the deciding factor, in my opinion”. Further disputes arose when DCUSU Executive tried to put a motion to DCUSU Council, asking them to declare the referendum void because it
wasn’t included on the ballot paper that students would have to pay the USI levy, leaving DCUSU to foot the bill themselves. This would amount to a total of €55,000, a quarter of DCUSU’s budget, something which Doherty believed to be an unfair result. Former DCUSU Returning Officer Steve Conlon asked that the motion not be put to Council as he said the SU cannot question the decision made by DCU students and this was accepted, three days before Doherty’s declaration voiding the result.
UCDSU walk out on USI Congress by kevin beirne
The majority of the UCD Students’ Union delegation left the floor of the Union of Students in Ireland (USI) Congress last Thursday in protest at the lack of time given to debate a motion on whether or not the USI should affiliate with anti-austerity groups. UCDSU claim that their request to raise standing orders to increase the amount of debate time was ignored. UCDSU had hoped to speak against motion UO14, which mandated “Officerboard to set up a committee whose function it is to establish ties and affiliations with other groups in our society who oppose austerity.” The motion had been criticised for its vagueness by UCDSU, and the attempt to allow more time for discussion was also supported
by Trinity College Dublin SU President, Rory Dunne. Despite the protest, the motion was passed by a two-thirds majority. In a statement released by UCDSU President Rachel Breslin, it was claimed that “those who left the floor felt that the proposer deliberately exploited the Congress rules to ensure that not a single opposition speaker had a chance to speak.” The statement went on to further clarify that “UCDSU members did not walk out because of the technicalities but because the proposer of the motion purposefully used the entire remaining time to make his speech, despite the UCDSU President walking onto stage and urging him not to summate in the circumstances.” UCD students recently voted to
disaffiliate from the USI in February, but as UCDSU is still affiliated for the remainder of the year, the sabbatical team chose to send a delegation to Congress. UCDSU also claimed that there had been continued hostility towards their delegates at Congress prior to them leaving the floor, which was likely a response to 63% of the referendum vote was in favour of leaving the USI. Breslin stated that she felt that the UCDSU delegation’s presence was “negatively swaying votes due to an increasingly emotive and hostile atmosphere” and felt that they had no choice but to leave the Congress floor as they no longer felt welcome. “UCDSU acknowledges that it is difficult for other colleges to respect and understand UCD students’ decision to leave while they remain members, but
at delegation meetings UCD delegates reported increasingly hostile reactions. When it became apparent that it was no longer going to be possible for the UCDSU delegation to positively engage in the debate a majority of the delegates chose to leave Congress floor.” Many students took to social media to demonstrate their frustration with both sides. Many criticised the fact that UCDSU wished to oppose affiliation with anti-austerity groups, while others questioned why there was no time to debate the motion when there had been time to debate the USI’s stance on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict the previous day. USI President John Logue declined to comment on the matter when contacted.
The new Irish Research Council’s (IRC) online application system for postgraduate funding has seen numerous complaints from applicants, who saw their work repeatedly deleted and made inaccessible to them. This is the first year the IRC has existed as a united body, with the Irish Research Council for the Humanities and Social Sciences (IRCHSS) and the Irish Research Council for Science, Engineering and Technology (IRCSET) merged in March of last year. A UCD PhD student spoke to the University Observer of the problems experienced with the new system, noting that the centralised application created increased demand on the system and difficulties for students who would have once only applied for one grant or the other. The main problem experienced was the repeated deleting of nearly completed sections of the application. “When you’re filling out the online form, you can save drafts of the pages as you go along. However if you leave any section of that page empty and you try to save the draft, instead of saving what you have on that page it deletes everything you’ve put in. I lost about two hours of worth work one day because of that.” Another UCD student had similar trouble, stating: “If you entered something in certain fields, it couldn’t be changed, a design flaw which had the capacity to completely screw up your application. I know one international student who entered the wrong continent as place of residence, and was unable to change it, thus possibly invalidating their application... This, as you can imagine, caused a lot of panic in applicants, and it really is insufficient for a government system.” There were also issues with the system recognising registered supervisors, with the application unable to proceed without it. “It wouldn’t let me put in information from my supervisor. Every time I tried to put in their information it claimed that they weren’t on the system, despite the fact that they had actually registered with them three weeks before. I’m not the only person this happened to, I was talking to other PhD students and they said they had the same difficulty. You had supervisors for people having to ring up three or four times to make sure they were on the system.” One student concluded that: “It seems the IRC are actively trying to dissuade people from applying. Every step was made as difficult as it could possibly be. You need three different references of up to 1,500 words; it seems to me this is just in the hope that an applicant won’t be able to convince busy researchers to write it, so there will be one less application to worry about.” UCDSU Postgraduate Officer, Mark Stokes, condemned the IRC merger. “I think the decision to merge the IRCHSS and the IRCSET was one that will in time be reversed. Even when they merged, there was a strong emphasis on the traditions of both bodies being maintained and their institutional memories being maintained. The recognition that a centralised body is not always the best way to to streamline is there, the Government just need to be willing to reverse a wrong decision. Teething problems are to be expected, but this decision and the problems that seem to be occurring would in many ways stem from the new structure not being a workable one or one that is best for the role.” The Irish Research Council refused to comment on the situation, stating that “in the midst of a live call, we cannot comment.”