niversity U bserver O
the
opinion
sport
an Interview with Connacht’s
David McSharry v o l u m e
UCD Law Society Auditor describes own behaviour as “arrogant and reckless”
x v i i i
·
OTWO
Should UCD leave the Usi?
i s s u e
v III
·
OTWO talks to
Steven Moffat Roddy Doyle · Darina Allen Cathy Davey · S Club
w w w. u n i v e r s i t y o b s e r v e r . i e
Copy Bureau not to re-open despite protest
by Kate Rothwell · DEPUTY Editor
UCD Law Society Auditor Francis Mc Namara has described his behaviour as “arrogant and reckless” when questioned by the University Observer regarding the controversy which led to the resignation of nine members of the Law Society committee last week. In an email sent to a member of the Lawsoc committee on January 15th, Mc Namara expressed his preference for that member as his successor as Lawsoc Auditor, as well as stating which other committee member he would prefer either as Vice Auditor or Treasurer; “In my opinion, the optimum result for next year would be you as Auditor with ... as your right hand.” Mc Namara went on to imply that there was an agreement between himself and Societies Officer Richard Butler regarding his selection as next year’s Chairman of Societies Council, an elected position; “Myself and Richard Butler have reached an understanding and I will probably run for Chairman of Societies Council as Stephen’s successor.” Speaking to the University Observer, Butler stated that he did not know to what Mc Namara was referring to and that no such ‘understanding’ existed. “There is no arrangement, understanding, agreement or any other form of outcome discussed, arranged or in any way planned for any position within the Societies Council for Mr Mc Namara, or any individual, nor could there be, as this is something that the Auditors vote on among themselves.” He went on to say that Mc Namara had already made a statement to him regarding the matter; “I have already accepted Mr Mc Namara’s statement to me that he inadvertently phrased his email in a careless manner, such as to allow a number of interpretations to be made from his comments.” Mc Namara stated to the University Observer that he had incorrectly phrased his comment regarding this ‘understanding’; “I mis-phrased, I believed that we had come to an understanding on how far I’d progressed as Auditor.” He continued by expressing regret for his actions; “I was arrogant and reckless; I didn’t appreciate my
SU President Pat de Brún addresses the crowd at protest objecting to the recent closure of the SU Copy Bureau
UCD prepared to support SU in “addressing the resourcing issues” by Katie Hughes · News Editor
Students’ Union President Pat de Brún has confirmed that the SU Copy Bureau will not be re-opening, despite a protest being held on January 25th against its closure. “This was not something that was done flippantly, it was nothing but a last resort.” committee and my pride has led me to hurt many people with whom I’ve shared wonderful friendships … Over the past week I’ve realised some truths about myself and I will do my best to learn from past mistakes in the execution of my role as Auditor.” A prominent member of Lawsoc, who wished to remain anonymous, indicated that elections for Lawsoc Auditor could, subject to UCD approval, now be held as early as next month. This source also maintained that the society was unlikely to disband over the controversy.
Photographer: Caoimhe McDonnell
Seconder of motion to rehire Copy Bureau employees withdraws support
Protest described as “more like a riot” by member of Student Centre staff
SU President de Brún confirms that Copy Bureau will not re-open
Auditor of the Socialist Workers Student Society, Karl Gill was pleased with the turnout and level of interest at the protest, estimating there to have been up to 300 people present, “it was fantastic to see that people were angry and wanting answers.” A motion was put to Union Council two weeks ago regarding rehiring the recently let go Copy Bureau employees, but was rejected by a vast majority. The motion was put forward by Gill and seconded by Auditor of the Inclusion, Participation, Awareness (IPA) Society and second year Social Science Class Rep, Brian O’Brien. O’Brien has since withdrawn his support from the cause after viewing a YouTube video of de Brún and Campaigns and Communications Officer Brendan Lacey being “pulled out of their offices and heckled and being made speak in front of two to three hundred people.” O’Brien maintained that “it was a good protest, it got people out but you
cannot drag people out of their offices and make them speak … Pat shouldn’t have gotten the abuse he did, no one should abuse someone for taking a decision – he has to make hard decisions and that’s his job.” De Brún confirmed the extreme behaviour, stating, “I was disappointed by a small minority who resorted to verbal abuse and name calling. I don’t think there is a place for that in the University and I think it undermined their protest.” An anonymous employee of the Student Centre described the protest as being “more like a riot … it was something I’ve never experienced before, what I heard was … swearing. I was a little bit scared, it just all suddenly happened. I heard all the loud yelling and the swearing and I wouldn’t expect a protest to be like that.” Following the protest, De Brún released an open letter to UCD students detailing the reasons behind the decision and information about the Union’s current €1 million debt.
De Brún explained his reasons for releasing the letter, “I felt that it was time to engage a bit more directly with students on the ground about the current financial situation because I’ve become very concerned that that campaign was spreading quite a bit of misinformation and exaggeration. I think that students deserve to be told exactly what the facts of the financial situation are and I wanted to lay it out in plain and simple terms, and ensure that it reached as many people as possible.” The protesters suggested that the Union approach the University for financial support, an idea that was dismissed by de Brún in his letter. However, when asked whether the University would be willing to consider bailing out the debt, a UCD spokesperson stated, “the University has been, and intends to be, fully supportive of the Students’ Union in addressing the resourcing issues, and providing input to the work which has been undertaken by the firm of professional accountants.”
Belfield FM’s removal from SU would be “a large step backwards” by Katie Hughes · News Editor
UCD’s student radio station, Belfield FM, will no longer have a place within the Students’ Union should the new draft of the constitution pass a student body referendum in the next few months. Students’ Union President Pat de Brún supports the idea of having a student radio station on campus, but believes that it no longer has a place within the SU, stating, “we are in fa-
vour of Belfield FM, we think it’s a good idea. It has a place on campus but we don’t think the place for it is within the Union.” Belfield FM Station Manager Peter Branigan expressed his disappointment at the news, “we feel that exiting the SU structure would be a large step backwards for the station and would not be beneficial for its volunteers. We also feel that it might discourage prospective students from coming to the University, instead choosing a univer-
sity with better media facilities.” De Brún defended the move, stating that the SU is unable to give Belfield FM the attention it requires, “I don’t think there’s enough of a focus within the Union and I don’t think, with the nature of the Union, there ever will be a focus or resources put into it … a society structure would benefit it more and suit it more.” He explained that when Belfield FM was originally established, it was only intended to lie within the realms
of the SU for a couple of years before moving on and finding a home elsewhere, an idea that, he insists, “fell by the wayside”. The SU will continue to support Belfield FM during its transitory process. However, under the new constitution, Belfield FM will not have a constitutional status within the Students’ Union. De Brún cited Belfield FM’s move to their new studio in the new Student Centre as a time to “solidify it in a home that is more suited to it … I believe that
home is within societies and we have tentative support for that to go ahead.” No talks have taken place with Societies’ Officer Richard Butler to date, which appears to have left the station in an uncertain state. According to Branigan, “the response from our staff has been overwhelmingly negative towards the news. Many are in first or second year and would have hoped to work with the station again next year, and are now left unsure of what next year’s structure will entail.”