03/08/2015 ECMD03 - Minutes

KeeleSUUnion Annual General Meeting

held on Monday 2nd November2015

KeeleSU

Minutes

  1. INTRODUCTION –

Emily Horsfall in the Chair. Sam Gibbons taking minutes.

  1. APPOINTMENT OF SERGEANTS-AT-ARMS

Sergeants of Arms were appointed.

  1. PRESENTATION OF AUDITED ACCOUNTS & APPOINTMENT OF AUDITORS 2015/16

The AGM was presented with a powerpoint given by Ela Hollies (EH) attached to this document showing the previous audit. The floor was then asked if there were any questions for Ela, Ceri Smith, *INSERT AUDITORS NAMES*
KelAsika asked why the SU was 6th in rankings instead of 1st, EH responded saying the overall university is 1st but the SU is 6th
The floor was then shown a slide of the affliation costs the university pays out

  1. TRUSTEES REPORT
  1. RATIFICATION OF THE LIST OF AFFLIATIONS

The affiliations were ratified with a clear pass

  1. REPORTS FROM ELECTED OFFICERS

-REPORT FROM CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE

  1. QUESTIONS FOR ELECTED OFFICERS

Enoch Lieu (EL) asked Nick Reeves (NR) what he meant by “lad culture”, what happened at the NUS conference to make him not want to use that term and what word he would use to replace it with?

NR responded saying that it is a conflicting word and a gender defining term. He went onto say that he would rather want to tackle the specific issues that come as a result of it instead.

Tom Snape (TS) responded asking why they want to replace the term completely and EL pointed out that there is more than a sexual side to “lad culture”.

NR replied saying that the gendered term is a problem and that we don’t want to popularise the term as it normalises the behaviour.

Natalie Jordan (NJ) at this point went upto the mike to back up NR saying that the current definition of lad culture is “male students in sports clubs” which is far too narrow to be an umbrella term to tackle the issues. She went onto back up Nick saying the easy tiger campaign and the alcohol impact scheme are much better ways of tackling the culture.

After NJ’s report EL asked NJ to clarify what the Keele is global campaign will be

NJ replied saying that it is to break down barriers between international and home students

Julia LaJupe (JL) Asked Natalie to clarify the rent right campaign

NJ answered saying that the SU will erect a gazebo dressed as a house out on concourse and inside there will information about renting and landlord advise

Lisa Lovibond (LL) asked if it was not too late to have the Keele is global event seeing as though most international students will have been in Keele for 4 months before the event

Natalie answered saying that those starting in January have no really welcome week to help get them settled into Keele

Max Loftus asked why there would be less on campus accommodation

Natalie responded saying that in the long term due to Hawthorns demolishment there will be less rooms on campus

Kansa asked how ‘easy tiger’ was going to be rolled out further

Natalie replied saying that there were going to be more training sessions and a pledge card for all students to sign on enrolment

Motions

The steering group decided it would be best to put motion 2 before motion 1

Motion 2– Motion to Investigate the Students’ Unions Catering Trailer
UlrichPohanka (UP) who proposed the motion said that the catering truck had been vacant and could be used for food storage, preparation and cooking classes.

EL asked to clarify where it was and UP explained its location

EH asked if the catering van could be part of the elected officers ‘food fighters’ campaign, UP said that it would be fine to do so

VOTE TAKEN –PASS

FOR-53
ABSTAIN-2
AGAINST-1
MOTION 1- Democratic Review

CH, NJ, EH and NR as the proposers and seconders read out the entire house notes and resolves before getting to resolves 1
This House Resolves 1 (Recommendation 4)
Joe Porter (JP) said that we must think what is best for the SU and ultimately the students saying that scrapping the president position who is a clear figure head and spokesman would be a bad decision. He went onto say that the president represents students externally and rotating the position of representative for the SU for council meetings or other external meetings would lead to confusion and would not be good to develop relationships.

Elliot Carrigan-Bowen (ECB) said that the president doesn’t get paid more and that there is a false sense of hierarchy in the positions. He went further saying that giving the position a certain remit is good because it means people in the position have a portfolio to start with.

NJ said that the comments about a figure head upset because as welfare officer she hoped that she would also be seen as a figure head as well as CH. She went onto say it’s only a change to the bye laws and that it would also mean the SU wouldn’t automatically send the president as one of its 3 delegates and instead may send the education officer how is more involved with NUS. She finished repeating ECB’s point that having no portfolio has left some president’s in the past with no direction.

CH said that the president doesn’t represent the SU in all external meetings and that the new DUD officer will go to council as the position is more operational

Alex Hunt (AH) said that it is simply a renaming of positions and there is no change to power, he said further that people run for the position without knowing about the role or what it entails. He also said that we will be able to ratify the role descriptions at the next UGM

James English (JE) said that there hadn’t been enough student engagement before implementing these major changes and that there should instead be a referendum to increase engagement in the change
Megan Sarah Hayman Tansley (MSHT) said that it was a very simple change to the title only

Antony Slack (AS) asked what a referendum would entail

HW explained that because there are separate resolves but 1 motion a referendum would have to be called on the entire motion not just the changes to president

NJ responded saying that there had been enough engagement thoughthe previous reports listed in this house note 3 and repeated point 7 that 1500 students had been engaged. She then went onto say that a 15% turnout for SU referendums to be called valid which is not even reached in president elections

JP responded saying that he never intended to say that the other officers weren’t figure heads but that instead the SU president is the first port of call to new students
-GUILOTINE MOTION -
FOR-45
ABSTAIN-1
AGAINST-6
VOTE TAKEN –PASS

FOR-46
ABSTAIN-1
AGAINST-0
This House Resolves 2 (Recommendations 9, 10, 11 and 12):
JE said that the merger of positions was unrepresentative and that it would mean less students are left out of the decisions making process and that some of these positions require a representative to sit at student council

Tom Snape (TS) said he had reservations with this change saying that in the future there will be even more off campus students and that hospital campus students will have specific issues that may get ignored

Nick Conville (NC) said that there is already a full time payed officer that has to report and that held accountable at UGM’s that has student’s welfare including off campus welfare under their remit

ECB said that people are not running for the positions and that people don’t do much when in them, he also said that it’s a merger so they will still be represented under different roles

EL said that the people should a specialised knowledge and that only a medic will know what it’s like on the medical campus

EH said that the new portfolios will take in the roles that are being lost for example the ents team already do the job of the ents rep

CH said that a future UGM could mandate officers to have a forum on the hospital campus to gauge their views. He went onto say it’s better to have it under a full time officers mandate as they are under greater scrutiny to follow through

LL said that the reason why less people run for part time officer positions is because they aren’t advertised enough

Taylor King (TK) asked if the motion should be voted separately

NJ pointed out that that the health campus will be getting a woman called Rose Taylor from Student support and development services who will be based on the health campus

TS said there should be greater consultation with the hospital campus and agreed that a UGM should mandate them to have forums

AH said that because the representation of for example off campus rep is changing to becoming under the remit of a full time position this means that they’re getting greater representation he also agreed that consultations/meetings with for example medics to gain knowledge in their problems

-GUILOTINE MOTION -
FOR-48
ABSTAIN-2
AGAINST-2
VOTE TAKEN –PASS

FOR-40
ABSTAIN-7
AGAINST-5

This House Resolves 3 (Recommendation 13):

Alex Whitworth (AW)said that he as station manager along with Carrie Hodgkins (Councourse editor) was not consulted and that Will the last station manager was consulted when he was not in a fit state to do so. He went onto say that the SLSs so good work and they need a representative on council.

TS agreed that there was poor timing in consulting and agreed that SLSs needed some representation

AH said that SLSs benefit all students and that they are integral to the Keele experience but he said that some SLSs are not on there such as Think:green or Street team and went onto say that all SLSs should get equal representation on student council and proposed that there should instead be a single person to represent SLS’s on student council

EL agreed with AH that SLSs are important but said that it would be overly complicated to have one person to be an umbrella representative of all SLSs and so instead proposed that each SLS president have a seat each on student council instead

NJ proposed an amendment that states all SLSs will have representation on student council through a single SLS officer who shall be voted for by the committee members of SLSs

-AMENDMENT CHANGE -
FOR-41
ABSTAIN-2
AGAINST-5
VOTE TAKEN –PASS

FOR-34
ABSTAIN-8
AGAINST-7

This House Resolves 4 (Recommendation 14):

TS said that the position was heavily contested in the most recent election and stated that he believed the role was still important and so proposed to have it amended that 1 position remained
-AMENDMENT CHANGE -
FOR-32
ABSTAIN-8
AGAINST-2

EL said that getting rid of positions on student council doesn’t address the issues of disengagement. He continued saying that the open portfolio officer is important to bring issues forward that wouldn’t normally be brought up by the other officers

Alice Spikings (AS) agreed saying that they hold an important role in bringing issues that might get overlooked to the forefront of SU policy

VOTE TAKEN –PASS

FOR-30
ABSTAIN-3
AGAINST-4

This House Resolves 5 (Recommendation 15):

No discussion took place and it went immediately to a vote

VOTE TAKEN –PASS

FOR-43
ABSTAIN-1
AGAINST-1

This House Resolves 6 (Recommendations 16, 17, 18 and 19):

No discussion took place and it went straight to a vote

VOTE TAKEN –PASS

FOR-38
ABSTAIN-5
AGAINST-0

This House Resolves 7 (Recommendation 20 and 21):

No discussion took place and it went straight to a vote

VOTE TAKEN –PASS

FOR-36
ABSTAIN-5
AGAINST-0

This House Resolves 8 (Recommendation 22):
MSHT believed that the allotted time of 5 minutes by the Chair for this motion was not enough time for such an important motion and quorum was called

Quorum was not reached and so the steering group allowed 15 minutes for more people to come. After the allotted time quorum was still not reached and so the meeting was closed.

Page 1 of 7