Sunday 19 August 2007

Aviation: The benefits to expand

Heathrow. Often described as the only building site in the world to have an airport. Or the only shopping mall in the world to have an airport. The source of much derision and the constant source of criticism in the last two weeks. If it wasn’t he happy, clappy anti-aviation brigade (see below), it was every minister, trade spokesman or national newspaper. Heathrow bashing, it seems, is a national sport.

It shouldn’t be, and to be brutally honest, if people had got their acts together we wouldn’t be in this situation. In 2002, the first ground was cut on Europe’s biggest building site – Heathrow Terminal 5 (T5). T5 is massive – the largest freestanding building in the UK and Europe, the size of vast number of football pitches, and a fully integrated transport hub. Only thing was, that when first proposed, T5 was meant to open in 2002. On schedule, on budget and on track to open its boarding gates next March, it will relieve vast pressure on the older facilities in LHR, taking capacity limits to 60m, and allowing Terminals 1 & 2 to be demolished to be replaced by Heathrow East, hopefully ready for the London Olympics in 2012.

So, why did it take so long? Because of NIMBYs. The Not In My Back Yard brigade stalled, and caused endless delays to the whole process, with the longest planning enquiry in British history. And now, we are left with those delays. And now we get the complaints. Its difficult to think, but without Heathrow, London and the UK would be a poorer place. Literally. Heathrow brings in over £5bn directly into the GDP of the UK. It supports over 70000 jobs in the London area, and nearly 500000 jobs across the UK. It provides many communities with their income, and brings direct investment links to the financial heart of the UK.

And this is a bad thing? Most mainstream people don’t see the investment, the income and support to the UK economy as a bad thing. However, there seems to be hardcore element of the populous who don’t get it. They seem to think that Heathrow has sprung up overnight – it hasn’t: it’s been there over 50 years, and plays a crucial role in how diverse, and multi-cultural the UK and London has become. Every day that goes by in the last 10 years, Frankfurt, Paris and Amsterdam have increased capacity, built new terminals and runways and have eaten into Heathrow’s lead as the most important destination in Europe.

Heathrow needs to be allowed to expand and grow, it needs to be allowed to move forward and improve its facilities. If it isn’t, it isn’t just Heathrow that will suffer, it will be London and the UK which will – and if that happens, the problems will be bigger than anyone will want to know about.

Aviation: The Threat – to whom?

So as the hour approaches when the Climate Camp takes over Heathrow’s terminals, a little bit of thought and a large amount of anger. First of two postings on the subject.

I’m angry at the Climate Change Camp. Now this may come as no surprise to those of you who know that I’m pro-aviation and pro-airport expansion. No, this particular anger is directed at the liars, hypocrites and other assorted evils who have organised the camp. When BAA tried to get an injunction against a large number of organisations – one move which I will admit was “plane stupid” on their part, and somewhat counter productive – the press was full of commentary on the issues at hand. Many, many members of the organisations that BAA was trying to stop from getting to close to the terminals and other facilities appeared in a constant stream on TV saying how BAA was trying to “curb [their] freedoms” and “reduce [their] of speech and expression”. The usual things the people say when someone is trying to shut them down – and to be fair, I’m all for freedom of speech: I might not agree with what you say, but I defend your right to say it. One caveat: as long as you do it legally.

These protesters arrived last Sunday at Imperial College’s playing fields and decided to squat on it. Illegally. Now, this simply isn’t on – you can’t trespass on land and claim it as your own. Its 1800s a number of European nations did that, and now we realise it might not have been the cleverest thing to do. So taking this on board, and noting that they (the protesters) are on land that isn’t there, and claiming anyone can have access, so they are doing as much, what do you think they do when journalists want to go onto the land? They ban them. They frogmarch them off, they are rude, insulting and down-right dangerous to them, saying they aren’t allowed onto the land. How exactly does that work? What mentality is that? It seems for the protesters, there are two sets of rules – one for them, one for everyone else.

Next up it is the protesters contempt for the Police. Heathrow is a security target. Every person in Britain can’t deny that Al-Qaeda or any other terrorist group would have the press day of their dreams if they staged an attack on such a prominent and important British target. Now the protesters have chosen to set up camp very close to the airport, and as has been shown before (cf. G8 at Gleneagles, May Day protests in London, etc.), they aren’t exactly the most law abiding bunch in the world. Nor do they know exactly who’s entering the site of theirs – just look the part, be anti-aviation/anti-capitalist or the like and you are in. So how easy would it be for any terrorist to slip in and cause havoc? Of course the police are right to invoke the Terrorism Act to stop and search vehicles and people. Can you imagine the field day the press and public would have if something happened and they hadn’t done the appropriate checks.

And then comes the “peaceful protests”. Only one word springs to mind: lies. Or liars. The day of the court injunction, BBC London News interviewed someone from Plane Stupid outside court and asked if they would be able to promise that no disruption would be caused to the public – they couldn’t make that promise. They couldn’t even promise that they’d be peaceful. We know Plane Stupid like to break the law – they invaded the secure area at Nottingham East Midlands Airport earlier this year, and broke countless laws. This week they’ve already caused public order offences, and trespass at three private facilities in and around the London area. You can’t trust them as far as you can throw them.

No one is doubting the evidence of Climate Change. Its been proven in countless reports that the CO2 produced by aviation is smaller than that of many heavy industries and many of the UK’s diesel trains on some routes. But, the methodology taken by the protesters behaviour is entirely unacceptable. Any breaking of the laws in such a sensitive area should be dealt with harshly and most severely. Disrupting the public, causing possible security threats and upsetting law abiding citizens is one thing; protesting peacefully is another. It seems these protesters don’t know the difference.

Monday 13 August 2007

Blogging Update

Many months have indeed past since the EUSA Elections and it may appear that this blog has died. Alas, no, it hasn't. It's just been resting!

As such, expect more commentary from here soon, but also commentary on all things London, as I move south to start my career in what will be the brother blog to this. The URL is http://www.jordandiaslondon.blogspot.com and more details will be posted in the coming days.

This blog will continue to have hard hitting comments on a number of issues, including local and national politics, and also a continual look at EUSA. Enjoy.

Sunday 18 March 2007

Why I didn't run for EUSA Sabbatical

A question I have been asked a number of times over the last two months is why I wasn't running for EUSA Sabbatical. I want to put these comments on the record, because I feel it is something I should do.

Running for Sabb is a hard job. It isn't something you do lightly, and it isn't something you do if you aren't 100% in the right frame of mind to do. When I discussed who was running for what this year with a number of people, the names that kept coming up for President & VPS (the only two positions I have ever considered running for amongst the Sabbs), were those who I believed were strong candidates, and candidates who came with a substantial backing from certain areas. EUSA is becoming a harder place for the non-aligned, and independent candidates to mount a successful and viable campaign.

Having run for President last year, I believed I could run again if I wanted to - I had a manifesto framework designed, and I had ideas on what I wanted. However, I lacked two things: I didn't have a team of people behind me - unlike people like Josh, Adam, Tom and Stuart; more crucially, I didn't have the mental fight to go 12 rounds with any of them. I would have loved to be EUSA President or VPS - over the years I have been involved with EUSA, I have stood on many of the things that my 2006 Presidential campaign were based - and I believe that these are at the heart of what makes a Students' Association.

Students aren't interested in party politics - people got really aggrieved and annoyed when EUSA decided it would try and "be clever" by taking a stance in the Rectorial elections. People get turned off by the constant political infighting, and people don't even know that the elections are happening. It takes wide scale change for people to be more interested, and with turn out breaking 20% this year, it is a start. It is a choice I made to sit this battle out - I believe I have given everything I can to EUSA and given the opportunities to people to vote for me and vote for what I believe in. People have - on a regular basis - decided against voting for me: for a number of reasons. It is something I obviously wish they didn't do, but that is democracy.

Having fought the fight, having got involved and having decided that as a person I had done my upmost to improve student life in Edinburgh, I believed it was time for me to step aside, and move on to other things. Of course, it isn't an easy decision: leaving something that you have heavily been involved in for the better part of 4 years is something that can't be done lightly. But that is what I am doing.

I probably haven't explained this as best as I can, for which I apologise, but I hope this makes my views a little clearer.

Friday 9 March 2007

Looking Forward ...

Many people have asked me over the last few days for my thoughts, predictions and other ideas for the races that are going to happen in 12 months time. It's a hard one to really scope out.

Thinking back to twelve months ago, the money then was that I was would run again this year - against Josh & Adam - in a re-run of last year's External Convener battle. People suggested that Tom French & Steven Lauder would slug it out against Sara Bodle running for VPSA. No one would have mentioned Ben, Anna or Bruce for VPAA and Kwan was fairly unsure if he'd stand again. And Chris Arnold was as anti-EUSA as you could get, let alone thinking about a stab at VPS. Twelve months ago, so many varied names were being suggested from within those elected back then, that you might have put money against any of them.

To use the Grand National analogy a final time - predicting this far out, is like attempting to predict the runners in that race, without seeing what they do in between, knowing their form in the mean time, knowing their handicaps and their advantages.

In twelve months, EUSA could be a very different political animal, and the forthcoming year's Sabbs (those who have just been elected) could turn people on or off to EUSA depending on what they do.

Looking at it objectively, you can pick anyone on CoM or SRC Exec or in SRC and say "they will run because ..." and make your own reasons. People like Katherine Sellar, Nick Ward and Guy Bromley are inevitably going to be linked with standing next year. People who've just been elected for the first time may also be linked with a possible race next year. The issue is - as I say above - what will the next 8 months bring before people begin to make their minds up?

What about the people who aren't "EUSA people" currently? The likes of Will Searle, Chris Arnold and Chris Williams - people who before the beginning of February most people hadn't heard about, and most people would never have imagined standing.

What I want to see is a completely different thing (forgive the political sounding-ness of what follows). I want to see elections for Sabbaticals that are well challenged and where the electorate has a big cross-section of people to choose from. I want to see people from outside EUSA stand, and take part in elections. And I want to see new ideas in the election campaigns. Of course there are people I'd like to see stand and then go on to win, but this far out, I don't know if they will stand come next February.

Put simply - to predict now would be foolhardy, and the merits of it would be very questionable. Feel free to comment.

Saturday 3 March 2007

Post Race Analysis - Overall

Well, what can be taken away from these elections? Is it about hard campaigning; cheating; being from one political faction or another? Or can nothing be taken away?

Well look at the break up.

The Sabbaticals are split, with two Labour members - one of whom (Josh) is in Labour Students, whereas the other (Tom) has made a pact with the Green Devil in return for his safe package to election. Anna also made an 'informal' alliance with the Greens, and Gordon is so close to be a Labour Club person, that he is one. So an even split, although crucially the President continues to be red, rather than green.

The SRC Exec is also taking a red tinge to it, with the 4 of the 6 non-Association Exec Members also being red, against the crucial votes of Emma's more neutral political viewpoints and Jonathan's right leaning political character. It will be interesting to see what policy decisions come out of this body that would await the SRC's approval.

The Unions are full of former Sabbs, and this seems to be the only part of the Ballot paper which the red Labour boys/girls did worse than the Greens, and I wonder how this interaction will work in reference to the new VPS.

The debate and discussions that will happen it might well surround the Sabbaticals itself - will Tom surivive a whole year? Will Josh be able to work with Tom for that long? Will something else come along? Difficult to say currenly - there are simply too many factors to be able to clearly say one over the other.

Post Race Analysis - CoM/Union Exec

The last part of the Analysis is in the Unions, sitting at the bottom of the ballot paper. With three distinct categories, there were three very interesting results.

In the Senior Member battle, Ben McNab took home the bacon, polling over half the votes in the first round, and winning by a clear majority. I'm sure that Ben will do a good job, but I am disappointed he got elected. Paul is a good friend of mine, so I would have loved to see him on the Committee, especially as he heavily uses the Unions, and was until the end of the last festival one of the senior staff in the Pleasance (the proper Pleasance, not Pleasance at Potterrow). Iain has been doing a damn good job for the previous three years and I think he too would have been a great continuance in the role.

What however annoys me the most - and why I gave Ben the lowest preference - is that he wants to "resign" at the end of each year to fight his seat again, in a John Major-esque put up and shut up. The point of the Senior Member is that they are there for three years to provide continuity and a guiding hand in a Committee which has its membership change annually. Ben's rather odd decision is jepoardising the stability of the committee, which isn't big, isn't smart and really isn't rather clever. Also by resigning each year (something he would have to do well before nominations open), would mean that Committee of Management would be short of a Senior Member for upto 3 of its 8 annual meetings.

Looking at the Union Executive, and again, it is full of the returners - not a single new person elected; although at least this year the members of UnionExec have a mandate, after the 3 being returned unopposed last year. Ellie Price's "upgrade" from 1st Year Union Exec member is to be congratulated, and gives the Green's a continued voice. Pete Harris makes his return from Canada - although I'm wondering if we can keep our Moose, and if that will keep him there (see his website for more info): he's not caused us any trouble this year, and I quite would like that to continue. James Wallace also makes a return for a 3rd Year on Union Exec - quite an impressive run of results, and something that rivals the Senior Members for continuity. However, with James possibly off to Texas for 2007-2008, will his stay be a short one to the end of May, with the seat coming available again in the October Elections. If so, expect it to be highly contested, and a chance for the losers to get in.

Commitee of Management was a much tighter election with the final two positions being elected at the death, in a battle that looked to go any way depending on who was dropping out. With Tom French "elected elsewhere" (and how many of those in the room wish he wasn't) and James Wallace elected above, the field was cut to 10. It was a surprise that the polling numbers came in as they did. Rosy's excellent performance in the first round is testament to a good clean campaign, a good facebook group, an excellent website - which related to what she was standing for (unlike Nick & Katherine) - and probably because she asked lots of people to vote for her for this position, rather than spending time asking them to vote for other people or vote for other positions: I'm guessing this is what happened to Katherine, Nick, Stewart, Stephen, Ondrej and Alasdair.

All suffered really quite badly, and peformed a lot worse than expected. Tim Goodwin was in the lead from the start, and to be honest that is what you expect from a Sabbatical, so Tim Gee polling lower numbers than Rosy is surprising - no doubt this is in part due to the Green vote being split between himself & Alasdair. Having a total of 3 Sabbaticals on the CoM will be tough next year, and having two former VPSs as well as the current one will also be interesting - especially as Pete & Tim Gee both "supported" Tom this year. It is therefore upto the rest of the Committee to ensure that he does not get away with blue murder or just putting things through. Of the 6 ordinary members who will make up the Committee until after the October elections, only Rosy is the complete new comer to EUSA politics, and Commitee of Management: best of luck, because it's going to be a tough year.

Post Race Analysis - SRC

So, with the Exec/Officers covered, who else was elected to the SRC. And how could they affect the policy outcomes. With many more school reps & ordinary members the situation is slightly different, but I'll take a look at who might be shaping the decisions.

Looking across the schools, its great to see that all schools bar one have members filling seats, and are therefore represented - I hope that the October election see a top up with the remaining seats filled. In amongst the mix are a number of returning members, and it is good to see continued involvement - the likes of Adam Apostoli in ACE, Stephen McFadden in Chemistry, Stewart Martin in GeoSci, Ben P in History, Bruce Golding in Maths, Ondrej Nenadl in Physics to name some.

Equally pleasing is the number of new names in the school seats, many of whom stood on manifestos which obviously really engaged with students and got people in their respective schools to vote for them; people like Rosy Burgess in BioSci, Karen Apitzch in Management or Gabriel Arafa in PPLS (even if Gabriel has been on the fringes for a while).

Going onto the Ordinary Members, this is a bit of an old hacks convention. With Tim Goodwin, Tim Gee & Tash Shotton all making the cut in the first two rounds, and Pete Harris joining them after a 14 round slog (surely he should have done better?), this part of the ballot really doesn't have too much new. The first round however did bring the surprise of the massive total for Hannah Critchlow, who's only campaign credentials seem to be her green-ness. Also elected in this round was Adam Ramsay. On the night, I'm sure that this didn't seem like an important win, but this gives Adam the chance to put something back into the SRC, and to what extent he does, depends on how much he feels like re-involving himself, as I noted below. So after 5 candidates being elected in Rounds 1 & 2, it took 'til round 11 before another, and I'm sure Stephen Allinson's fairtrade stance no doubt won him a few votes along the way - as well as being top of the ballot paper; a similar sentiment can probably be attributed to Ellie Price's victory a couple of rounds later. Also joining Pete in the final round were George Thomas and Anne Clark.

So who are these "ordinary" people? Well - the majority seem to be Green or Labour, with only a couple of independents thrown in. Most are hack, and are heavily involved in EUSA. What it may mean is that the debates in SRC are going to be heavily polarised. It could also be highly "intelligent" debate. We'll wait and see.

Post Race Analysis - SRC Exec/Officers

Having taken a look at the results from the top of ballot paper, tonight's results look elsewhere and take a look (albeit briefly at times) into what it might mean for the year ahead. First up is the top of the SRC - the Executive and the SRC Officers.

With three convenerships returned unopposed, we've had three candidates who we (as an electorate) don't really know what they stand about or stand for. Laura & Thomas are as red as they come, and I'd be surprised if they weren't actually card carrying members of the Labour Party. Laura's behaviour towards some of the other candidates in this elections means that I'm very sceptical of her, and what she might do. She's also a first year currently and I wonder how much influence she will be able to have over others as External Convener - I also wonder what her leadership skills are like. As I said before - if I wasn't a final year student, I'd have relished taking on Laura in battle for External Convener. Thomas, as I've already said, I'm not totally convinced has the character to do the job in hand. Jonathan's problem as PG Convener, is that currently he is a Committee of 1. But knowing Jonathan, I'm sure he'll make something of it.

That leaves us with three other elected members of the Exec.

First off, SRC Editor. In what could be the last person in the role, Guy Bromley took the election by some margin from Ross Cullen. Guy is, of course, a member of the Labour Club, which can't have done him any harm, but to be honest this won't have single handedly won him the election. My best guess, is that he had a website, whilst his opponent didn't, although Ross did have some interesting posters. Either way, Guy's in the job. The SRC Editor appears to do bugger all these days, and I'd be interested to see what Guy makes of the role - he can't be any worse in the job than the current incumbent. Guy has given us some results as Academic Services Convener, so maybe that will continue as SRC Editor.

Welfare Convener also went to a Labour Club man, but the race between Nick & Adam was more a microcosm of the election as a whole: Labour man against a man put up by the Greens. Well, it was close to that. Adam & Nick are apparently good mates, so maybe Adam'll contribute ideas to Nick, but either way this could be interesting. Nick has - in some circles - been described as a man who is just "a brain dead lump", which I feel is slightly harsh. I hope that Nick remembers that he has a whole University of students to represent and that welfare is a universal issue, not one based on any of the usual discriminants. However, what is interesting is that he has loyalty to both Tom & Josh: so is he really going to be independent on the Exec, or will he take orders from one, the other, or both?

Teaching & Learning Convener had originally 5 candidates, which dropped to 4 after Stewart Martin's withdrawn papers. Leaving 4 candidates, all of whom stood on similar issues, the decision for voters was always going to be a tough one. I was surprised Leah polled as few votes as she did - proving looks aren't everything, and proving I can be wrong; I do think her poor showing was down to her effectively withdrawing from competing in the race. Leaving three candidates, Emma's re-election posters no doubt didn't do anything but help her; although the last person to ask for re-election was Josh MacAlister in the External Convenor elections last year ... and he lost. As it was, Emma romped to victory, leaving Stephen & Ondrej in her wake. I expect Emma to do more of the same as this year - although hopefully a few more appearances at SRC won't go a miss.

That leaves the 6 non-Assoc Exec members of the SRC Exec, being a 4 Labour, 2 Independent split. More of which in a later post.

So the officers. Matt Mole was returned unopposed, and Schools & Induction Officer is a position I hope he really gets involved in.

Accommodation Officer saw a tight battle between Sam Hansford and Greta Dargie. I'm personally disappointed that Greta didn't get in: she's further along in her Uni career, and has clearly shown her involvement and wanting to get involved in the issues after her General Meeting Motion on Grant Management - something that took a lot of balls and hard work. Sam, it seems, is a P&P/Green leaning lackey, and has been elected after a very good leafleting campaign.

Community Officer saw a win Jude Harrison by some margin. As I said in earlier posts, I did not think it was right to re-elect Joe after doing bugger all this year. I honestly cannot think what impact he has had, and I hope that this fresh set of ideas will have some impact on the role. Jude's victory was a surprise in only so far as how large it had been. Again, this could be down to a good Facebook group, and his Labour party support. Either way, his manifesto did look good, and this may well have caused his win.

Finally, in this section, there is the Equal Ops Officer. Nahuel beat Kiril by a comfortable margin. I can't claim to know anything about either of these guys, but like Guy, this could be the last year for the position, so I wonder what they will do with the job. With Tom French in the VPS seat, he will no doubt push for reforms to the Liberation Groups, which Nahuel will be heavily involved with. Time will tell to see how far these reforms go.

Friday 2 March 2007

Post Race Analysis - VPSA

Elections shouldn't take that long to announce, and so by the VPSA result, the crowd was thinning, and people were growing tired especially after two hard days of campaigning, not to mention the long battle beforehand. The reasoning must have been sound to leave it all the way to the last, but it was probably for a good reason.

Gordon's victory over Will was predicted in some quarters, and yet also a dissapointment to many. This was seen as the most likely race to result in a non-EUSA hack winning, but it wasn't to be, as Gordon took victory by a significant margin.

It's difficult to ascertain how good Gordon will be - his position within the Exec is crucial, and could be seen as powerbroker between Tom & Josh. Gordon's work will be hard, but he is cut from the same cloth as Tash, and I believe he has the makings of a good VPSA. His work throughout the last Freshers' Week involved a lot of varied things, and having seen first hand what he has done, I've been impressed.

For Will, he must take away the fact that he ran an excellent campaign, which brought a lot of people into the 'EUSA arena' and got them involved. It was refreshing to have a serious, open and honest candidate (and a KB kid) standing, who really made the elections a better place to be over the last four weeks. If he stands again, there'll be a tide of support for him.

Post Race Analysis - VPS

Quite frankly, where do I start on this one.

First off, I'm surprised it wasn't closer. I truly believed that this would go to a second round, and that second preference votes would come into play. Secondly, I didn't expect Tom to win as many votes as he did, nor Stuart to get as low a total he did - even Chris' extremely high vote total (higher than mine in last year's Presidential race) is excellent for a candidate who came into the race 4 days before nominations closed and created a manifesto, website and all the rest at such short notice, whereas Tom/Stuart were planning this assault for months.

However, what worries me is Tom himself. As one candidate put it to me last night, Tom is a case of "tick, tock, tick, tock - a bomb waiting to explode". Tom's performance on stage in his acceptance speech was diabolical, and made Tim Cobbett's comments almost look polite. To be honest, I didn't mind Tom's diatribe against me for the entirely reasonable actions I took to protect my intellectual property (as opposed to the ludicrous accusation that I was trying to divert democracy), and was quite touched to get such a large amount of appluase. What frustrated me (amongst other things) was the fact that he didn't even mention his opponents who had worked tirelessly to make the election something; that he made it clear that one Sabbatical had actively helped him in his campaign; that he suggested that Adam Ramsay was the "rightful winner", when the democratic vote (yes, the democracy that Tom is so fond of) had said otherwise; and also Tom's general behaviour on the night.

This is a man who is meant to be in charge of the Association's finances over the next year, and yet doesn't clearly know how to budget £95. His constant cheating and rule breaking frustrates me (as much as it frustrates me that the Returning Officer did nothing), and I am worried for the state of the Unions over the next year. I do hope that the Committee of Management/SRC manage Tom and keep him in line.

I worry also for the state of EUSA if Tom doesn't get his way - Tom has been seen to act like a spoilt three year old when he hasn't got his way before, and if he doesn't agree with things in the next few months, and during his time in Office, then heaven help EUSA. He has to learn how to get on with his colleagues on the Association Exec, and he will need to learn how to mend/build bridges and not destroy them. Last night's speech was the opening gambit to war, not the opening speech to a better EUSA.

Feel free to agree/disagree in the comments.

Post-Race Analysis - VPAA

It's hard to critique a race in which all four of the candidates were running and standing on nearly exactly the same issues. With the candidates all approaching the race with the same stand point, and the real lack of tension between them (come on, have you ever seen such a bunch of nice opponents), the only thing going for this race was the fact that four people were standing. That and perhaps the old/new Labour battle: Bruce is a senior Labour Club member, appearing in a party broadcast (as seen on YouTube) for the Labour Party, so it was perhaps a surprise that the majority of Labour Club members were on Ben's team ... or more crucially that Ben was on Josh's team, something I had seen when he went into a Josh campaign meeting on Tuesday night.

The fight itself played out like the Presidential race from last year, except that this time new Labour (Ben) didn't defeat Green (Anna). Anna's win obviously was a shining moment for the Green/P&P group (contrast Tim Gee's reaction with Anna, with that of Josh), and I'm not too surprised she won. As I said to her 4 weeks ago at the Politics Away Weekend, she was always going into this race as odds-on favourite, more so especially as the only female sabb candidate. She went for the Sabrina Russo Method: pretty picture on the posters, combined with a strong manifesto. I doubt it was all down to this, but in an election which didn't set the pulses racing, it's hard to tell.

It'll be an interesting year in the next SRC, with Bruce returned to Mathematics and Ben to History & Classics, it'll only be Kwan not at the SRC, which is a step down after 2 years of heavily committed time on many EUSA and Uni committees. I would like to see Kwan make a return - hopefully in the October elections as Physics Rep, and I am sure that Bruce & Ben will continue to do a damn good job in their respecitve schools.

Post-Race Analysis - President

So as the dust begins to settle in the 2007 EUSA General Elections, the first (possibly of many, but lets see how it goes) part of the analysis into the race. This isn't going to be a Grand National style race re-run to see where the runners and riders fell, but more or a look at the results.

Josh's win over Adam was less of a surprise - simply because for many the race was too close to call throughout the contest, with the two neck and neck. The margin of victory though was a surprise - I wouldn't have expected a 600+ vote win, and would have thought that Chris Williams' transfers would have come into play. However, a turn out in excess of 4700 for the Presidential vote is unheard of, and that really would have affected the way that voters cast their vote (Josh won with nearly 900 more votes than Tim Goodwin did last year). I wonder what a couple more candidates would have done - especially if they were none EUSA hacks, who would have brought some more uninterested and normally non-participating students into the Elections. Josh also is the second Labour-based President, following Tim, and the question now has to be asked - are we in a Labour era, following the three P&P Presidents (Will Garton, Steve Cockburn, Ruth Cameron)?

Where does the win leave EUSA? Well I believe that Josh will have a postive effect on EUSA - his policies seem to have some sound backing behind them. He does need to ensure he represents all students, as I believe Tim Goodwin has done, and does not lead EUSA down a merry Party Political path like Ruth Cameron. Josh may well be a Labour student and be proud of it, but he will no doubt get a lot of stick from some of the defeated Green elements - anyone at the count last night will have been hard pushed not to notice Tim Gee's body language when congratulating Josh on stage: it could not have said "I don't like your win" any clearer or louder.

Josh will have a tough year ahead: he will be working with Mark Ballard as Rector - a man who has made it quite clear that he supported another candidate in these elections; and Josh will also have to deal with the fall out from the Holyrood Elections. If Labour retains power, I hope Josh uses the Political Capital he has for the benefit of students, rather than for himself. Josh also will have to deal with a couple of other factors that will spring up during the year, and I haven't even mentioned the VPS yet.

As for Adam - a year back in the backbenches, taking a step down from External Convenor. Adam has two options: he can continue his fight from regularly turning up to the SRC sub-committees, and push for the policy he can actively engage with; alternatively he can take a route take by many defeated Sabb candidates (Pat Hannon, Gill Dunn, Sara Bodle spring to mind), who get quickly bored of the SRC and don't engage. Adam also has the option to run again next year, if he feels it's the right thing to do - or will it be a different P&P candidate? The choice is his.

Live Results - VPSA

This is it. Final one.

So after 6 schools, Gordon leads Will 162-110
So after 9 schools, Gordon leads Will 244-156
So after 12 schools, Gordon leads Will 649-389

With Tash racing along, its hard to keep track ...

With 6 schools left, Gordon leads Will 1074-678
With 5 schools left, Gordon leads Will 1233-760
With 4 schools left, Gordon leads Will 1393-844
With 3 schools left, Gordon leads Will 1442-881
With 2 schools left, Gordon leads Will 1558-966
With 1 schools left, Gordon leads Will 1633-1013

Therefore Gordon Aikman is elected the next EUSA VPSA - unsurprisingly his song is Flash Gordon by Queen.

His speech is very complimentary and although he fails to mention his opponent in it, it is a breath of fresh air after Tom's performance a couple of hours ago.

And that completes the results section of this blog. Coming up in the morning will be a summary of the results, how I see the division of power and a number of other things.

Live Results - SRC Ordinary

The SRC Ordinary Results are ongoing - they have been for a while.

So far, the three returning Sabbs have been returned - Tash, Tim & Tim, alongside defeated Presidential Candidate, Adam Ramsay and Hannah Crichlow.

We are currently redistributing votes in the middle order with people who haven't achieved quota. Its a slow business.

Joe Calvert has just lost his third election and as such does not have a seat on the SRC next year.

Stephen Allinson has now been elected. Nearly half of the votes he collected at this stage didn't have a further preference, so we are in for another long haul.

Ellie Price has now been elected - getting quota by 3, and with 3 places left. A rare victory for the Greens tonight.

Sarah Clarke, Pete Harris and George Thomas have all now been elected, thereby completing this stage of the proceedings.

Four returning Sabbs and a few other interesting people, basically.

Couple of school results follow - Management and something else.

Live Results - CoM and Finance

So, whilst the Tom French debacle rumbles on in the debating hall, more results have been announced.

Union Exec sees the return of James Wallace (maybe he will put some sense in to Mr French), Ellie Price gets upgraded from 1st Year Rep to full member and also Pete Harris in his return appearance from Canada.

Next up are the "junior" positions on Finance for full time students. Winning this are Guy Bromely on a massive first preference lead, followed by Monisha and completing the trio is Jonathan Hogg who had a massive battle with Ondrej Nenadl, with the 3rd position swapping between them.

And then comes Committee of Management. Winning here, with the largest first preference vote is Tim Goodwin, followed by Rosy Burgess and then Tim Gee - although the process was quite slow with a small amount of transfers each time. I'm thrilled Rosy is on CoM, and I know that as Bar Staff she'll make a great impact.

Still to come SRC Ordinary and VPSA.

Thursday 1 March 2007

Live Results - VPS

The election has been one of the dirtiest on record, and now comes the fun - the election of the VPS.

So after 3 schools, Stuart leads Tom then Chris 140-79-46
So after 6 schools, Tom leads Stuart then Chris 188-183-82
So after 9 schools, Tom leads Stuart 333-251
So after 12 schools, Tom leads Stuart 696-416
So after 15 schools, Tom leads Stuart 939-531

With 5 schools remaining, Tom leads Stuart 1303-770
With 4 schools remaining, Tom leads Stuart 1370-809
With 3 schools remaining, Tom leads Stuart 1442-842

After Round 1, Chris - 739; Tom French - 1777; Stuart - 995

Tom French elected as the next EUSA VPS. His song is Chumbawamba's classic hit about getting knocked down ....

The nightmare scenario - Tom French & Josh MacAllister elected.

A very interesting and very long speech, in which I, Adam Ramsay and half the P&P people got thanked. He even suggests that Adam Ramsay should be the next President, which is booed out. He thanks Anna Davidson for winning "for being the right person to do the job". To a chorus of boos and slow hand claps he refuses to leave the stage.

A Tim Cobbett-esque speech. EUSA should be warned. The Unions should be worried. Oh dear.

LIve Results - SRC

A few school reps have been announced including Ben & Camilla in History, and Rosy & Naomi in BioSci - I've got to say how pleased I am that Rosy has been elected!

Coming up - VPS

Live Results - VPAA

Now the VPAA results,

After 3 Schools, Anna is leading Kwan, 25-15
After Law & Medicine (5 Schools), Anna is leading Ben 169-144
After 9 Schools (inc Vet & Politics), Anna is leading Ben 353-239
After 12 Schools, Anna is leading Ben 493-325
After 15 Schools (inc BioSci), Anna is leading Ben 726-473
After 18 Schools (inc GeoSci), Anna is leading Ben 938-647

With 4 remaining, Anna is leading Ben 1275-854
At the end of Round 1, Kwan - 715; Anna - 1359; Bruce - 401; Ben - 941
At the end of Round 2, Kwan - 767; Anna - 1467; Ben - 1049
At the end of Round 3, Anna - 1771; Ben - 1239

Anna Davidson is the next EUSA VPAA

Congrats to Anna - no idea what her song was!

Live Results - SRC Officers

After the Debates Committee, the SRC Officers.

First up, Accommodation Officer, where Greta Dargie (of Grant Management GM Motion) narrowly lost to Sam Hansford. Greens win this from the independent.

Next up, Community Officer, where Jude Harrison takes over from Joe Calvert, who lost in the first round. Labour win over the Greens here.

Final Officer, is the Equal Ops Officer, and that goes to Nahuel over Kiril, both after spirited campaigns. One for the Greens.

VPAA now coming up.

Live Results - President

This is it the big one ...

after Bio Science, Josh is leading Adam 375-229 (3 Schools)
after Education, Josh is leading Adam 550-351 (6 Schools)
after Health & Wellbeing, Josh is leading Adam 891-580 (9 Schools)
after Infomatics, Josh is leading Adam 1162-181 - Chris Williams is on 197 (12 Schools)
after LLC, Josh is leading Adam 1571-1148 (14 Schools)

With 6 Schools remaining, Josh is leading 1598 to Adam's 1175
With 5 Schools remaining, Josh is leading 1696 to Adam's 1231
With 4 Schools remaining, Josh is leading 1807 to Adam's 1281
With 3 Schools remaining, Josh is leading 1943 to Adam's 1391
With 2 Schools remaining, Josh is leading 2291 to Adam's 1651

Josh MacAllister is the next EUSA PRESIDENT, winning 2471 votes to Adam's 1809 and Chris Williams's 470

Congratulations to Josh. His winning tune was D:Ream's Thing's can only get better as used in a certain election in 1997 by a certain red party. Glad that I had some hand in choosing that music!

Live Results - SRC Exec

Live blogging from the corner of the debating hall.

Turnout is up by some 62% according to Tim Goodwin, with 5442 people voting. First result was out at 2120, some 50 minutes later than originally scheduled.

First elected was Emma Chapman who won the T&L race over two rounds - I appear I was wrong, and Leah Volger didn't attract nearly as many votes as expected.

Next up was the hottly contested Welfare battle with Nick Ward romping home over Adam Knight. First blood to Labour.

SRC Editor next with Guy Bromley taking the win over Ross Cullen. Second Blood to Labour.

Ellie Price wins Societies Secretary. One for the greens.

Finance Senior Member has also been announced - Neil wins over Tim, in a battle much closer than anyone in the hall expected with 1015 votes playing 969.

And the big one is about to be announced. President coming up.

The Home Run ...

The final fences are gone, and all that is between the candidates and the 1900hrs voting shut down is the home run. Traditionally this is when nearly every candidate campaigning enters Pollock for one last try at getting votes out of the Freshers ... but it appears quite in Pollock thus far, and from speaking to the candidates earlier today, it appears most aren't going to come down to Pollock, citing the fact that many got a bad reception last night.

So with the clock running down, the runners and riders are approaching the finishing line - but let's not forget that in the Grand National, that last bit of the run in has been the undoing of many - anyone remember Devon Loch?

75 minutes to go ...

Edit (@1830hrs): I was wrong - the last minutes of the campaign brought out Anna, Stuart, Josh and of course this year's election couple - Adam & Tom. I suppose its ironic that having seen them start their campaigns together, they are ending it together.

Who Wins? You Decide ...

Big Brother-esque, it might sound, and that's what it is. In under 24hrs a new EUSA President will have been announced, and EUSA will have a new team of elected representatives to take on the views of 25000+ students and Life/Associate Members.

The choices in the Sabbatical elections are quite stark: there are candidates at opposite ends of the spectrum; there are candidates selling their soul; there are "ordinary students". The question now is, what will people decide that they want. People have asked me to state on this blog who I think would be right for EUSA: I don't believe I should say - people can work it out from my posts above what I think about the candidates, and people who know me, know I have the bad touch when I sometimes publicly support candidates, so I won't do that here.

Democracy is a dangerous weapon - and the people have it.

As a footnote to the democracy point (and in the interests of accountability ...) those who know how NUS Delegates work will have noticed that two of the Presidential Candidates already have seats on the bus to Blackpool, and will have also noticed that the President-elect also gets a seat. As such, should either Josh or Adam win, their elected NUS Delegate seat would go to the next highest losing candidate on the NUS election list from last October ... which irony of ironies would be me. Funny how these things work.

Wednesday 28 February 2007

Clock's Ticking ...

As the candidates bed down for a bit of sleep, and as I start knocking back the coffee for the essay all nighter that lies ahead, a quick commentary on Day 1 of the election itself. With most people now thoroughly shattered, thoroughly exhausted and - quite possibly - thoroughly beyond the point of caring, the voting started.

According to sources over 2300 people had logged on and casted at least a vote for a candidate in a category by shortly after 3pm. How this compares with previous years is difficult to estimate. Who does a high turnout favour? What does this mean for voting through the evening (traditionally the busiest time) over night, or throughout day two? Will people actually care by the end of day two, or will they just say "I've already voted" to every leaflet they are offered tomorrow?

Lunch time outside the main library brought a real host of candidates - some in differently coloured T-Shirts, some who weren't. Also on offer was this year's best campaign gimmick - Will Searle & Frankenstein. This really brought something different to the election. Also amusing that Gordon & Ben chose the same coloured T-shirts from the many on offer; H&M must be doing very well from the many T-Shirts bought, and I'd be surprised if you could get a yellow one anywhere in Edinburgh!

This evening, Pollock Security decided not to allow any flyering outside the JMC, so it was door-to-door knocking for all the candidates, including Stuart, KT, Anna and various members from other campaign teams. How effective is doorstepping? We'll wait and see.

So the questions begin - will MyEd run ok tomorrow, or will the servers crash? If so, when? Will the Registry problem that plagued last year's Sabbatical results happen again? What results will come first? In fact, what time will the first results appear?

Debating Hall, starting sometime after 8pm, is where you'll find out first. And if you're really lucky, I may do some live blogging of the results, and quotes that start coming out.

But that depends on this essay going well ...

Voting Open

Whilst the talking continues for a bit, the polls are now open.

Go to https://www.myed.ed.ac.uk and VOTE

Turning for Home

Having negotiated the Presidential Debates, the candidates have less than 36hrs to convince the electorate that they are indeed the right people for the job, as they turn for home in this marathon race.

First off - congratulations to Tim Goodwin and the current Sabbs for a very successful Presidential Debate: the Debating Hall was full, there was something of an atmosphere, but the one problem that still remained was that the majority of people in the room already knew who they were going to vote for. The question remains, how to get "non-hacks" involved and interested.

So what happened at the Debates? Well to be brutally honest, not much. The debates lacked the fiery passion and biting comment between the candidates that one might have expected. In fact only one particular thing stands out - Tom French admitted that he cannot deliver on his manifesto: after being questioned by Tim Gee about the promises he has made (many of which are already being delivered), Tom said that his manifesto was more or less undeliverable. It's a statement like that, that the electorate should know about, and it is a shame that the majority won't.

The other candidates last night all performed, but special mention must go to Chris Williams: I came to the Debates not knowing much about him, and quite sceptical about all he stood for - but the way Chris spoke last night about certain issues, put him far ahead of Adam Ramsay & Josh MacAllister. Chris realised that standing is not about being a EUSA Hack, and that it is about getting involved and getting "ordinary students" involved. Adam, however came across as rather patronising and attempted to put Chris down at every opportunity.

In the VPAA battle, you still couldn't separate them with a cigarette paper - all have very similar policies, and their performances last night were all very similar and I for one can't call the elections.

So, the candidates have negotiated the "country three" fences, and there don't appear to have been any real fallers (other than maybe Tom French) - six fences out, and the long home run in, its going to be an interesting race.

Tuesday 27 February 2007

Rocky Territory

You should always know where you're standing, but it seems Anna Davidson made a slight error on this part yesterday, a source has told me.

In a Geology Class yesterday, she said "As most of us here wont be working with our degrees i will campaign for transferable skills"... unfortunately for Anna, Geology is one area where most people do work in their degrees - according to the same source, "90% of 2:1 or better and 75% of 2:2 students work in postgrad, the industry, teaching or other related industries".

Dodgy ground it seems for Miss Davidson.

Something Bigger ...

It appears the elections may have taken a turn for the larger scale, if the story in the link below is true. Commentary on this issue to follow.

http://www.holyrood.com/nav/news/stories/story.asp?story=elec1187

Sunday 25 February 2007

Boring Husting ... Exciting Debate?

By this point on the Sunday before election days, two hustings would have come and gone. This year its different. In a bid to "bring some excitement" to these elections, Tim Goodwin and the other Sabbs are having an "Presidential Style Election Debate".

Hustings are not places where you can win elections, but you can lose them - so I was once told by a EUSA hack, and I remember Ruth Cameron doing exactly that on her VPAA election campaign three years ago. The Presidential Debates could revolutionise this, with real debate between the candidates. It could also be a complete flop - but things must be tried if progress is to be made. I've made comments before about the need to get your questions in beforehand if you want them asked - e-mail president@eusa.ed.ac.uk - but I am also disappointed that the event has gone upstairs to the Debating. Last year's event lacked atmosphere, and was a real poor show compared with the more intimate and more exciting Underground venue, where a bar and the gallery really enhanced the event.

The Debate has the chance to be any of the three "country" fences in this race: it could be the point where a tired candidate has his (or in Anna's case, her) head down and falters, a la Beecher's Brook; it could be a simple and easy jump in the path to the electoral results (with the occasional falter), a la Foinavon; or it could be the turn for home, a la Canal Turn.

Which is it going to be for the 12 candidates come Tuesday night?

Another Day, Another Flyer

The Sunday before election day brings out its usual round of "Pollock Drop" campaigning. With Adam & Tom (the usual double act/couple) already staking claim to the JMC on Saturday Lunch (and with rumours now circulating of them breaking the rules to go canvassing on Saturday), a number of other candidates were also seen out and about in Pollock - all armed with the trusty flyer, and the spiel to give to candidates.

I ask one very important question: this evening, Tom French claims to have visited each and every room in Pollock. Thus far he has had three hours of campaigning/door-to-door time in the blocks and there are over 2000 rooms in Pollock. Either he is super human or he has broken the rules: which is it? Yesterday Adam & him were in the JMC flyering, and had to be removed ... will Graham Boyack finally act and do something decisive about this rule breaking?

Also seen on site were KT, Ben and Anna in the VPAA battle and also Chris Arnold in the VPS race. With less than 4 days left til the polls close (and I'm beginning to think that it can't come soon enough), its beginning to hot up another notch.

Saturday 24 February 2007

New Circuit ...

To continue with the analogy (and to somewhat stretch it), having completed the first circuit of the course, navigating through the water jump that was the Fresh Air interviews on Friday (the smallest fence of the course, but the one likely to cause the odd problem), the candidates head out for the second circuit of the course.

This morning sees Tom French & Adam Ramsay (are they really a couple? - you see one, you see the other!) giving out leaflets to first year voters on their way out of Brunch in the JMC in Pollock Halls. An interesting take on these two candidates - has anyone else noticed that their posters don't appear to be pasted onto cardboard, but on plyboard. Now as election rules prohibit candidates from purchasing materials to put their posters on, you've got to ask - where have they got the wood from? And so much of it too? And both candidates have the same wood it appears ... more questions than answers.

Speaking of Adam, he too has a YouTube video. At nearly 4 minutes, its much longer, has some cringe worthy "endorsements", and I question: will 'ordinary' people sit through it all and watch it (yes, I know I have, but then I'm a bit of a hack), whereas Will Searle's video - albeit for a different position - is a great deal shorter and much snappier. Thoughts, as ever to the Comments button below.

A number of posters from the other candidates also look to be suffering - but that was a result of the constant rain on Thursday rather than any other reasons. However, this weekend will see a renewed effort with no doubt even more posters going up - the question is (especially in Bristo Square): where are they going to put them up? Photos to follow.

Friday 23 February 2007

Fresh Air - VPS

And onto the Vice President Services candidates ... well two out of the three of them. I don't know if Tim Johns forgot about Chris Arnold, but he wasn't there leaving Tom & Stuart to answer the questions. Irony of ironies, he asked them if they came from different part of the political spectrum - which neither could answer ... because they've both been members of the Labour Club.



Usual bank of weird questioning - including one about Rust. And Tom admitted to smacking children with a paddle ... again make up your own minds.




So Arm Wrestle time ... and Stuart was victorious ...


And that's that ... obviously the VPAA candidates are of no interest to Fresh Air, because it seems none of them were invited ... or Tim forgot! Still, he has been up for the better part of 24hrs.

Do donate at www.freshair.org.uk and www.myrednoseday.com/radioday

Fresh Air - VPSA

After the President candidates (excluding Chris Williams), it was on the VPSA Candidates - Gordon & Will.



More slick questioning for Tim & his team, with some really rather issues surrounding cheese on a stick & the Potterrow Shop, and what piece of meat they'd rather be.

Then came the obligatory arm wrestle - with Gordon apparently victorious.

Fresh Air Showdown - President

Live Blogging - across on Fresh Air Tim Johns is doing a 24 hour radio day for Comic Relief. Some people may have heard me making a fool of myself on air yesterday for charity on Blind Date, which was a good laugh. So please, go to www.myrednoseday.com/radioday or go to http://www.freshair.org.uk/ and donate.



This morning, as part of his final three hours he has the EUSA Candidates on. Listening online and watching the webcam has proved for some very amusing moments. First off, congratulations Tim - you've got Josh & Adam in a room together. That's worth a donation itself.




After some 'interesting' questions (including one I got posed on Blind Date about rubber chickens, washing up liquid and a screw driver - which Josh answered much better than I did), we had an arm wrestle - make up your commentary, it was just very funny.


Thursday 22 February 2007

News, Gossip and Rumours

A quick posting before I sleep, nearly 5 posts in one day should keep all those who read this blog happy!

Posters are coming up ... and down: Lots of candidates had their posters up today, including the first major tranche of posters from Kwan Ting Chan, Bruce Golding & Josh MacAlister, and a second batch of posters from Adam Ramsay. Photos to follow. However, the afternoon brought more disconcerting news as it appears that Josh's posters have come down in Pollock, whilst all the posters on the West and North sides of George Square suffered the same fate.

The Anti-Labour Webpage seems to be causing a stir, but at the same time are people just not bothered?

Manifesto Detail: One sources has told me that the reason that Josh is delaying his website's detailed manifesto because Adam hasn't been bothered to launch a proper website yet. However, this evening brings signs of a manifesto on Josh's site. Is Adam really bothered by a website or is he just relying on a P&P vote?

Real candidate gives his views: In what is surely a first in the EUSA Elections, Will Searle has decided to go with a web interview on YouTube (and syndicated through his website and Facebook group) to explain to people who is really is. A really new an innovative idea and something no other candidate can do without just seeming to be copying. No doubt this is a vote winner. Kudos where its due for the new idea.

Funny story of the day: I was in Tesco's this evening, which is itself not unusual. I was recognised by the check out assistant who thought I was standing in the elections - after I had corrected her (and told her she was a year late), she asked for my thoughts on this year's race. After mentioning some of the candidates she asked me about Tom & Adam .... asking if they are "always together" and if they are "together". I asked if she meant that they were working together on the same 'team'. Apparently not - she was asking if they were an item, because people only ever seem to see them together. Seems EUSA has its latest couple ...

Wednesday 21 February 2007

Election Debate

I don't think the following has been made clear by the current Sabbaticals, and so I'm posting it here in the hope it can reach more people ... and if all the candidate put this in their respective Facebook Groups, then maybe it will have an impact.

Unlike in previous years where you could turn up and ask questions to the all candidates on the night, you can't do that in the debate, which quite frankly is a big loss. Instead you've got to think about your questions before you've heard any of them and then e-mail them to president@eusa.ed.ac.uk who will pick the best and use them in the questioning of the candidates.

A change ... now lets see if it is a good one.

Poster Politics (2)

Later on I'll do a serious post about posters. For now, the funny side.

Adam Ramsay's poster campaign hasn't moved on from when I last crossed the subject, but clearly there are people who think its worse than I do (for those who can't read it clearly - let me introduce Harry Potter & The Bad Election Campaign):


Better still, is Tom French. Tom's being supported by P&P in these elections, which makes this poster - seen outside Teviot - on Saturday night even more amusing:



Yes, P&P managed to stick one of their own posters on top of a Tom French campaign poster. Better still, the posters have "Defective by Design" in the top corner ... that's irony.


And a final point - don't annoy Johnny. Our resident Quiz Master likes keeping Politics out of the quizes:


With any candidate being persecuted for flyering during the quiz, there should surely be a Life of Brian joke added in here ... unfortunately, I'm not witty enough to make any.

Manifestos In

And so, with the manifestos in, the runners and riders have taken Beecher's Brook on the first circuit. (Admittedly this was at 4pm on Monday when the manifestos were published). For those who aren't fans of the Grand National, Beecher's Brook is a large fence, where the landing is upto 2 feet lower than the take off: for the horses its a leap into the unknown ... and for many of the candidates waiting to see what the opposition has put in as their pledges is that same leap.

Over the next few days I'll be reviewing the manifestos, comparing the content and giving my thoughts on what I feel is good ... and not good, about them. There'll also be more commentary on the websites.

Negativity & Labour

It had to happen at some point, and its a commentary I've been noting in my previous posts. Ruth Cameron noted on the EUSA Forums that a website has been set up with its explicit aim of "Stop Labour in EUSA": http://www.freewebs.com/stoplabourineusa

At this stage, I'd be interested in seeing what kind of momentum such a site will generate: the Stop People & Planet website got a real backing behind it and was clearly used by a number of people to influence the vote. Negative campaigning is here to stay ... one wonders if Ruth Cameron's decision to kick off the Anti-Boris/Anti-Tory campaign (notably supported by Josh & Adam) is where this all started.

One big can of worms opened ...

Looking at ... The Unions

After a three day hiatus in the posting on this blog (for which I apologise, but hey, this is my blog...), I'm back with more comment. Continuing the final bit of the triple post from Saturday, I'll take a look at the Unions - I'm not going to look at Manifestos in this post, that'll come later.

First up is the Senior Member. After last year's interesting race between Steven Hill and Peter McColl (8 more votes anyone?!), this year sees a three way race. Ben McNab is a regular to the Unions having spent much time in the last few years working on nights such as the Indie Club's Something for the Weekend in Teviot Underground. Up against him is the current incumbent Iain Murray. Iain's been on Committee of Management for the last three years, and apparently he was involved in the Unions before that. A stalwart of the Committee, Iain has seen it all before and maybe this will provide the crucial edge with the electorate. The third candidate is Paul O'Neill - his simple no nonsense approach to a website is very refreshing and might actually engage the voters. Paul comes with hands on Union experience as a bar staff in Pleasance and has worked two festivals. Each candidate has an edge - what makes it difficult is to work out which one will win.

Union Executive is a really quite tight battle. With originally 8 candidates going for 3 seats, the field has been slimmed down to 6, with Nick Ward & Ondrej Nenadl withdrawing. The 6 who remain will be involved in a slug fest: top of the ballot is Pete Harris - returning Sabb from Canada, who apparently wants your votes to secure his release from the mounties. If anyone has any sense, they'll give the mounties an award and leave him locked up! Stewart Martin is a perennial candidate, and his website isn't up as yet - my best guess would be more of the same.

Take out Ondrej, and you have Ellie Price - a returning candidate, elected as the first year representative in the by-elections: she's got a strong P&P background, which may explain why she is allegedly the founder of the paraody of this blog. Katherine Sellar - the newly returned Societies Convenor - also provides for an interesting element in the election: as President of FilmSoc she no doubt has some name recognition, which can't hinder her. George Thomas steps up to the plate as a first year and as the new Freshers' Week Co-ordinator ... rumours are abound about why he chose to stand, especially as his forms went in so late in the day. Completing the revised line up is James Wallace. As has been noted before, the much touted VPS campaign was pulled, and James is standing on what will no doubt be a mini-VPS ticket. Nick Ward has also decided to downsize, and is no longer contesting this one.

Committee of Management is a larger beast - 12 candidates, 3 positions. With Stewart Martin, Katherine Sellar & James Wallace both double ticketing (standing for this position & the one above), the field begins to shrink. I've said before that I'm not a fan of the current Sabbaticals returning to give the new Sabbs hell, and I'm also concerned about the possibility of them limiting the other candidates to even fewer seats and a smaller chance of election: Tim & Tim (Gee & Goodwin) obviously have a higher than normal chance with the name recognition alone. Tom French too will have a very large VPS campaign to support him in this in case he loses - but then I lost the CoM race in the final transfer despite being a Presidential candidate.

That leaves us with 6 candidates - topping them is Rosy Burgess. A very good friend of mine, Rosy is bar staff in Potterrow, and could bring a different spin to the 'politik' of the members of CoM that has taken place over the recent years - the amount of arguments I've lost with her over things, means she'd be no push over and the variety of different views means that it'd shake up the Committee. Stephen McFadden's candidature is an interesting man - also standing for T&L Convenor (like Ondrej) means that there could be a claim against them all of splitting their energies and focus. I can't claim to have heard of John McQuade and look forward to reading any interesting policies he has. The remaining two candidates are both "EUSA hacks" - Alasdair Thompson (taking the step down from Union Exec) and Nick Ward. As if tipifying the elections - one is Green and from the Adam Ramsay camp (Alasdair) and the other is Labour and from Josh's camp (Nick). Maybe that's where the battle will play out.

Rounding off the Unions are two elections in the Debates world. The staff can't remember the last time Debates Convenor was contested and the contest between the two - Ed James and Silviu Tanasie - could be a hard one to call. In the Debates Committee its 7 into 5, so election addresses will be the key point, as none have websites.

More commentary to follow.

Monday 19 February 2007

Updates

I know that this blog has achieved quasi-cult status in some quarters, and so I'm loathe to disappoint people with a lack of updates today (Sunday 18th). However, I'm wading through a pile of Uni Work (and other things ...), so some more posts will follow once the work is cleared later today and I've had some sleep.

Yes, sleep. I do in fact need some ....

Saturday 17 February 2007

Looking at ... The SRC

Continuing on the theme of looking at the bits of the Students' Association, next on the ballot paper is the Students' Representative Council. Starting on a very poor note is the fact that three of the convenorships are uncontested.

Whilst I'm not surprised that Postgraduate Convenor (or the Maggie Chapman Memorial Seat as I've called it before) is uncontested. The fact that External and Academic Services are unchallenged bothers me. Had I not been graduating, Laura Baker would have faced a fight on her hands from me. I also struggle to believe that AS has no competition, whereas Teaching & Learning has 5 people standing - I realise the two are not equal, but it is a shame that possibly so many good candidates may miss out. I'm disappointed that Thomas Graham has got the job. As far as I'm concerned, he has shown a great deal of arrogance at the SRC this year (not least with his very personal attack on me in January - both uncalled for and unnecessary) and I worry how this will translate onto a role on the Executive of the SRC. Both Thomas & Laura are 1st years, and so how this will translate to a stable SRC Executive waits to be seen - and both (interestingly) are aligned with the Labour Students group: it's a point I'll come back to later.

The Teaching & Learning race is surely going to be very interesting. Emma Chapman (the current incumbent) who has done a job this year that was always going to be hard in the wake of Ross Neilson and Tim Cobbett, takes on four young pretenders. Leah Volger - despite only being a candidate for two days - is the one I have heard the most chat about. And despite us all wanting to be an issue about the issues, all I have heard so far is about her looks - even Emma commented that this what she had heard. Clearly it is going to be a vote winner with the men, and noting how few female candidates there are this year, this could be a focal point. Still looking beyond Emma & Leah, the three candidates are all well versed in EUSA. Stephen's (also coming from the Labour camp) website is straight to the point, as is Ondrej, whereas Stewart's site is still to come. With so much at stake, one of these candidates will be looking to step forward soon.

Welfare Convenor is also looking like a very messy race. On the EUSA Forums there is plenty of discussion and mud slinging going on. It appears that Nick (Labour camp) and Adam are taking pot shots at each other through the medium of their supporters. I can't claim to have read either websites in detail or the forum thread, but Adam's simple snappy website (complete with requisite puns) takes on a very airy fairy website from Nick - he seems to be more interested in photos that policy. SRC Editor is an election between SRC stalwart, Guy Bromley (Labour camp) and Ross Cullen. I don't know anything about Ross, and the lack of website plays very well for Guy - although his site is just a shell currently. It'll need more progress from both candidates before people will really care.

In the officers section, Accommodation is a three-way battle and includes Greta Dargie who went up against Grant Management. Simple name recognition could do the trick here, although it has to be noted that her two opponents - Sam Hansford and Fiona Jarvie - both have websites to help their support and campaign.

Community Officer - well I've mentioned that I think Joe Calvert's candidacy is a joke, because people who haven't done anything shouldn't be re-elected. Joe hasn't done anything and it beggars belief that he's standing again. With both Jude Harrison & Sarah Nash, I simply don't know enough about them. I've heard that Jude either sits in the Tom/Adam camp or the Josh/Labour camp, but I'm not qualified enough to say which - although I think it may be the later, as Joe seems to be supporting Tom, and I doubt Tom/Adam would allow two of "their people" to stand against each other. Either way, manifestos will be important.

Equal Ops Officer - a position that was to be done away with in the Constitutional Amendments that have twice not been passed by a quorate General Meeting - is also a three-way contest. All seem to be supporting the same sort of ideals and I'd be interested in anything any of them can say which is fresh and new.

Down the School Reps list, elections are taking place in Biological Sciences (only two candidates have website, but all are in the same year), History & Classics (with Ben Politowski putting in his parachute here), Law (with a massive 5 candidates), Management & Economics (with an even more massive 6 candidates), "Philosophy, Psychology & Language" (with 5 candidates) and Social & Politics studies (with Josh MacAllister also putting in his parachute). Pleasingly, every school bar one has a representative.

The real battle will be in the Ordinary member elections - inevitably with such a large field (some 30 candidates), there is a lot of double ticketing. A quick glance of the candidates show that something like a third of them are standing elsewhere on the SRC ballot, which dramatically shrinks the voting field (obviously something we will only find out post election). Also in the mix are four current/past sabbaticals, which will have its own dynamic on the electoral result.

With so many elections, Thursday 1st March's count looks to stretch long into the night.

Looking at ... The Association (Sabbs)

So with the nominations closed, and whilst the candidates are furiously working away touching up their manifestos before the Monday deadline, and everyone pouring over the details in everyone else's battle plans, now is the time to consider the election at hand. Who's standing, what does the initial out look mean, and the rest.

So President first. Well, whilst I'd like to suggest it would be a three way battle, Adam & Josh do have the front running ground. Josh's teaser campaign might leave it late for him to show who he really is, but I've no idea if there are sufficient hits to his website to make up for this. Adam's website is "still coming" (I was in this position last year, so won't throw too many stones), but it does currently look like an extention of the Mark Ballard factory. It looks tacky, and compared with what has been so far a very poor poster campaign (more of which later), it must be hurting. Chris Williams - well, who is Chris? No website. No posters - although there are some rumours circulating about why. Chris however has one key advantage - no political slime that comes with Josh or Adam. If he can get a message out to the voters that he doesn't have the messy political background of the two "heavy hitters" this may play well with people who are sick of EUSA hacks.

Vice President Academic Affairs comes next. It is still very difficult to split any of these candidates. KT's website is now online, and is looking very smart and sleek. No posters are up as yet, but the website makes up for this - especially a very interesting section showing his comparative perfomance against the other candidates. Anna's site is more bare bones still - flash driven, it'll no doubt annoy a few people, but it does lack in content. Bruce's site is also now online, and is very simple, but very effective. There's a lot of stuff about Bruce and its presented in a simple easy manner (like KT's) which will make a lot of people a lot happier. Ben's site is moving slowly, and now includes the yellow used in the Joshesque Teaser posters.

Vice President Services - well this is where it gets dirty. Tom French seems to be having a go at anyone and everyone on the EUSA forums, and whilst this won't play out on a larger scale, the more people that become interested in the elections the more will find out. His website is up, and it is already causing controversy. There is so much on this that needs discussing, I'm not sure where I should start, so this time round I'm going to simply say that using photos of Tom and current Sabbs almost seems like endorsement from them (especially on the front page), and that using supporting quotes makes it seem like the hard sell. I'm not sure. Stuart on the other hand looks to be winning a softer kind of vote, with his interesting slogan. I've seen some of the forthcoming publicity, which does look interesting and could be a vote winner - how good it is can't be judged yet, and if it really will engage people at all is more difficult to guess. However, Tom & Stuart are ahead of Chris Arnold, who's website isn't up as yet, but is promised by this weekend, along with a manifesto thereafter. However - much like the other Chris - if it is a non-political student people want, then Chris is the choice. However much Tom bleets on about not being a Labour member, the choice is stark between "Green-Labour" (Tom), "Tory-Labour" (Stuart) or something non-Labour, non-party poltical.

Vice President Societies & Activities is probably the most difficult to really work out. Gordon's website is still coming - all we have is all we've seen for nearly two weeks with "Flash Gordon". Will Searle may have stolen a slight lead with a fresh looking, very different website. Although not much is there, it looks a lot cleaner, and I can imagine some content will bring it to life.

Societies Convenor has been returned unopposed, which means Katherine Sellar won't have a tough race like Tom French & Steven Lauder did last year. That means no surprises either.

Finance Committee is a mixture. For the first time in years, there is an election for Senior Member of Finance Committee, and with the previous post holder no longer able to stand, the man who took his place at the Bye Elections will face off against the Sabbatical who is probably disliked the most in recent times. Neil versus Tim Cobbett will be interesting - as I've said before the influence on "Diana" on this election will be a deal breaker. What is really disappointing is that for the Finance Student Members, there are only 5 people standing, compared with 10 last year. There's a distinct lack of Sabbatical candidates taking this as 'fall-back' option and so this will be a tight race.

This being the top of ballot, there's going to be an awful lot of development and it will no doubt happen very quickly.

And the tape's up ...

So the field has been finalised, the starter has let them off and the tape's up as the runners and riders head off "into the country" on the first bit of this marathon race. (I promised a Grand National analogy every now and again - if anyone has any ideas how I can work in 'Open Ditch', 'Beecher's Brook', 'The Chair' or 'The Water Jump' let me know ...).

Taking a look at the bare numbers makes for an interesting comparison:
174 Candidatures this year, down from 181 last year
109 Candidates standing this year, down from 110 last year
25 Positions Elected, equal to the 25 Positions last year
50 Seats Contested, up from 47 Seats Contested last year
31 Seats left vacant, up from 21 Seats left vacant last year

From this, it seems that not much has changed in the top few lines (in fact, considering I stood last year for 5 candidatures, the stats are near enough identical). The only real disappointment is the fact that there has been a 50% rise in seats left vacant this year, because there is more competition in certain areas than ever before. I'm sure the Association Exec (the Sabbs) will feel disappointed that so many more seats are left unfilled, but they can be pleased that involvement in the elections hasn't significantly dropped: after all, last year's election came on the back of a pretty divisive EUSA anti-Tory/anti-Boris campaign which enraged a lot of people to the extent they stood.

The list of extra candidates on the last day is too numerous to mention here, but its interesting to see that there are elections in areas where you wouldn't expect it - like Senior Member of Finance, Senior Member of Committee of Management, Debates Committee and Debates Convenor.

And for those of you who were trying to work out how many Ordinary Members of SRC were going to stand - the answer is 32 (although one is now elected elsewhere, and one has withdrawn). Time to start working out your top 30 in order ...

Thursday 15 February 2007

Top Gear Thursday - Hour One

Without a lecture this morning, I've just had a look at the EUSA Election Site, and it appears a very busy first hour this morning.

No new Sabbatical candidates, but there are some key additions to the field, as the candidatures pass the 100 figure. On the SRC Exec, the Teaching & Learning field becomes more crowded and even more competitive, by the addition of Leah Volger. Noting herself as the international candidate, the German-American lists her past times and a number of photos. The cynic in me says that this could be interesting for the male vote splitting between Emma and Leah. But then, I'm not that much of a cynic ....

Greta Dargie, who last week brought the Grant Management motion to the General Meeting (or the GM Motion to the GM, as one man from Student put it to me) stands for Accommodation Officer ... surely this is a sure vote winner, and this is someone who really is going to be getting involved.

Societies Secretary has seen it go from no candidates to two in under an hour ... but the issue on most EUSA people's mind is the return of Tim Cobbett. Standing for Senior Member on Finance against the current incumbent, this could be an interesting election. Anyone for the umpteenth Diana bid?

Election Distraction

For anyone who's reading this blog, and especially for the candidates - I spent two hours this evening laughing very hard at the new Simon Pegg & Nick Frost movie, Hot Fuzz. If you enjoyed Shuan of the Dead, its funnier. If you didn't enjoy Shaun of the Dead, its less gory and much more funny. Don't believe the Student review - its much better than the 2 stars they gave it ....

It is such a good film, and there are so many jokes - complete distraction and a good break from the heady world of EUSA Elections ... take a break and go and relax.

Closing Soon - Final Furlong (1)

With less than 10 hours til nominations close and the runners & riders are confirmed for the second part (lap?) of the marathon that is the EUSA Elections, I'll be genuinely interested to see if there are any more big name nominations, or just anything that will cause a stir. With James Wallace out of the VPS race (a fact that I was asked not to mention immediately, so that he could make the announcement first to his team/supporters), I wonder if there are actually going to be any more Sabbatical candidates.

Let's hope that there are more people standing, that the SRC seats get filled, and that we have some genuine contests in some areas.

Wednesday 14 February 2007

Improper Conduct - Update

I'm led to believe the investigations into the two candidates are ongoing, and as such I'm not going to comment on that. What I do want to say here, publically, is that I hope the Returning Officer takes a strong stance, and does his job properly. All too often there have been complaints of weak action, weak responses or just ignoring the problem.

If we are going to have a free and fair election, then we need a strong Returning Officer who isn't going to tolerate any rule breaking. And this must happen each and every time a rule is broken. Whoever the candidate is.

Quiet Wednesday

Traditionally the last day and a half of the elections is when it really hots up. Really really hots up. More candidates stand. More people are nominated. Not today however - just a mere 7 candidates.

The biggest news from today is Chris Arnold - http://www.freewebs.com/chrisarnold - standing for VPS. A Potterrow regular, Chris is someone I know very well from my work in Accommodation Services. VPS now has a "non-EUSA" candidate which will really shake up the elections. Tom French & Stuart MacLennan now have some opposition which 'ordinary, non-EUSA' people might well connect with and steal crucial votes. Chris can also tap into the lucrative 1st Year voting market, and this will be a shaping factor in the elections.

Elsewhere its been a quiet day, and I have to say I am really surprised at why people aren't standing. With nominations closing 4 hrs earlier than normal, are there going to be lots of seats unfilled in the SRC? That would really be a disappointment, and I hope that the push of me and others to get these seats filled does pay off.

A footnote to this is something that was pointed out to me by a friend. As things stand, there is only 1 female candidate for Sabbatical. Looking down the list, there are moderately few female candidates. Now, this isn't something that is going to deeply scratch my soul: I've always believed that the best candidates will make up their own decision to stand, and will do so regardless of gender or any other discriminator. I'm only mentioning this here, because someone else mentioned it to me, and it may spark some debate or interest.

The main message is this: if you aren't standing, and think you might want to, then do. You'll only regret not getting involved. The clock is ticking - forms are available online at the EUSA Election site, and nominations close at 12noon sharp. Get involved.

Tuesday 13 February 2007

Improper Conduct?

Didn't really take long did it? Just under a week and the first serious allegations are in to the Returning Officer, regarding one of the candidates. Apparently there has been a number of rules broken - and whilst the investigation against this candidate is ongoing, I'm not going to name and shame.

But those who've been involved in EUSA politics for a while will not be surprised that this candidate has broken the rules - I hear that odds were being quoted on the candidate being DQ'd.

Also (and as an aside), I hear that this blog is being parodied by a member of P&P who's not too fond of me ... any truth in this? Feel free to comment!

Quirky Tuesday

If Monday was busy, Tuesday was definitely quieter. With the main 'action' happening in the Law Council, it was only the very end of the day that brough some 'real' action with a bit of a surprise.

Chris Williams (previously of Student Newspaper) fame, is standing for President. No website as yet, so a trip to the paper's website shows some very varied and quite interesting commentary on a variety of issues. Some of my sources are suggesting he is running as a joke candidate, but could this be the person that people who hate Labour, hate P&P/Green or hate "political students"/"EUSA Hacks", turn to? Or will there be another Presidential candidate? Word has it that there could well be - and I'm quite interested in what's still to come. Student issues have to come first, and I was worried that if it was just "Red" Josh v. "Green" Adam, politics would be the only thing discussed.

Finance Committee now has an election (including Guy Bromley now involved ... can he do better than his poor performance in this last year?).

The only two other interesting nominees are Peter Harris - who was promised yesterday - will be standing for the SRC Ordinary positions (further worrying me about Old Sabbs taking over the 'ordinary' positions) and Emma Chapman making a brave move for re-election. It's not often that you see Convenors take a second bite of the cherry (except Maggie Chapman, but that's a different story), and she is moving into a very crowded election. How many T&L issues are there?

Less than 12hrs of the EUSA office being opened before nominations close. What shocks are in store?

Monday 12 February 2007

Poster Politics

This year, the posters from two candidates have gone up earlier and at a speed I've not seen before. With 10 Sabbatical Candidates declared, I thought I'd have an early look at the posters.



First up the Presidential duo. Josh is running a teaser campaign - this evening saw his second run of teasers on red half (or third) A3. Simple posters, which now suggest Smart Thinking. Cheap Drinking going to be the next ones?

Compare and contrast with Adam Ramsay's #1 for something-or-other. Printed on white paper, I have to say they are a little dull, and I'm surprised Adam isn't going green with his Green Party Credentials to match Josh's Labour Red.

Adam's posters are a mug shot, and a bad one at that - much like my election publicity from last year. They also seem to suggest he is God's gift to the electorate by being #1 at everything. I do wonder how many of his posters there are. They also seem to be up everywhere, including in Pollock Halls where he covered every lamp post on Sunday late afternoon. They seemed to be doing less well in the overnight rain.




Anna Davidson has indeed gone for the pretty girl image on her VPAA posters - although they seem heavily photoshopped and the image quality seems to suffer from it.

Tom French - well his posters are across the whole of the central area and they seem to have 101 different pledges on them. For a VPS candidate, its interesting to see they are all set infront of the non-Union building that is McEwan Hall. I think people are going to get quickly bored of the posters, and I wonder if he's got more of them than he knows what to do with.

3 weeks is a long time in poster politics.

Busy Monday

The Second week of nominations seems to have opened with a big bang, with 20 candidatures from 10 candidates going in for a variety of positions across the scale. This first post will cover the new additions to the runners and riders (makes me sound a bit like Peter O'Sullivan before the Grand National - its an analogy I'm sure I can work in many times in the next three weeks).

First up, at the 'top of the ballot' Will Searle (VPSA Candidate) has a Website up - http://www.willsearle.110mb.com/ - although its currently a holding page, with the interesting slogan of Give EUSA the Searle of Approval. Opposite him in the 'red corner' is Gordon, whose Facebook Group (this year's must have accessory) tells us that his website is "nearing completion". More on Facebook Groups later.

Also near the top of the ballot is the first Finance Committee candidates. Traditionally a hot contest, this year its been a slow start but now there are two candidates - Jonathan Hogg (also standing for PG Convenor) and Ondrej Nenadl who's involved in a busy T&L race within the SRC seats. As we get closer to the close of nominations, I'd expect this race to become very crowded with Sabb candidates and other EUSA Hacks filling the spaces.

SRC Executive hasn't really moved on from last week, with the exception of Jonathan Hogg taking over the Maggie Chapman Memorial Seat as PG Convenor - I don't expect there to be a fight for this seat, but stranger things have happened. Time will tell, I suppose. Across on the EUSA Forums Tim Gee seems to have issued a flat denial that he will stand for SRC Editor, and I await with interest if that is the case when the fat lady sings at noon on Thursday.

SRC itself has a slew of nominations - with Rosy Burgess in Bio Science Rep & Ordinary Member, Stephen Allison in Law Rep & Ordinary Member, Hannah Crichlow for Ordinary Member. What is most interesting however is that Tash Shotton and Tim Gee have both decided to stand for Ordinary Rep. With the rumour on the grapevine that Tim Goodwin will be joining them in standing, the three Sabbs look likely to be returned to the SRC next year: and the debate continues to rage about Sabbs continuing to get involved post-term in Office. I'm more concerned that if they take 3 of the Ordinary Member seats, it leaves only 7 for other students, which is not ideal at all. Having said that, looking as things currently stand a number of the candidates would be returned elsewhere. With the number standing at 13, what's the latest in the sweepstake?

In many people's eyes they are the minor elections, and currently the School Councils have only attacted 4 candidatures from 3 candidates - whether this will pick up waits to be seen.

Down at the bottom of the ballot is the Unions, and here there is also looking likely to be more 'old-Sabb' involvement, because Peter Harris is back from his year in Canada (don't you wish they just kept him there?) and is standing for UnionExec. Rumour is that his 'election agent' is Tim Gee (conspiracy, anyone?), who is standing for CoM. I get the feeling that whoever next year's VPS is will have a tough time of it. Also standing for CoM is Rosy Burgess (who works at Potterrow) and for both CoM and Union Exec, James Wallace is throwing his hat into the ring. It is interesting to see how many people are 'double ticketing' for CoM and Union Exec, a point covered before and on the EUSA forums.

With 2.5 days left, its cetainly becoming more interesting.