Viewport width =
September 17, 2007 | by  | in Features | [ssba]

The Official Salient Presidential Debate 2007

In this year’s Official Salient Presidential Debate, Salient Feature Writer and Political Reporter Rob Addison talks with Victoria presidential candidates Geoff Hayward, Lukas Schroeter and Joel Cosgrove on Voluntary Student Membership, the A-Team’s proposal to cut the student levy and reduce student funding and what Victoria University may become if they were president.

LAST Wednesday afternoon I sat down with the three candidates for the VUWSA presidential election, to adjudicate the official Salient presidential debate. Armed with only a voice recorder to defend me from the ensuing war of words, it soon became clear that this year’s presidential election was going to be quite different from all the prior elections.

This year’s candidates have set this election alight. Joel, a devoted campaigner for student issues, claims to be the most experienced candidate. As a member of the far left Workers’ Party, Joel makes no secret of his political ties, saying that his party backs his candidacy with pride. On the other hand, Geoff, the current VUWSA President, takes a more moderate standpoint. As a member of Young Labour, he has worked hard to improve the relationship between VUWSA and the students. While Geoff is a popular President, he is no position to rest on his laurels yet. Finally, there’s newcomer Lukas. As leader of the now-notorious A-Team, Lukas’s brand of politics is typically associated with the far right – although this is a link that he denies. Having led a professional and smart on-campus campaign, Lukas and the A-Team have managed to inject a sense of spirit and importance to this election that has been dearly missed from student politics. Quite frankly, if there were ever a student election in which to vote, it would be this one.

Salient: Geoff, what have been your achievements this year as President?

Geoff: I can honestly say we can back a balanced budget. But also re-engaging with our key groups again and rep groups are certainly an important part of that. But also, working with the larger associations as well – working with our fellow associations across the country as part of NZUSA.

Salient: Lukas, what have you thought of Geoff’s presidency?

Lukas: I think it can be summed up in a few words: slack leadership this year.

Salient: Joel, same to you – how has Geoff been as President?

Joel: I think really what you’re seeing is the fruits of Nick Kelly’s presidency from last year. And you look at that in terms of the achievements, and I played a key role in that. And the finances: that was something myself, Nick [Kelly] and Alexander Neilson really played a key role in. The groundwork was really set last year.

Salient: Lukas, what are the major issues that students will be facing next year on campus?

Lukas: I think the big issue facing students will be educational quality. Students have to borrow a huge amount to study at Vic and they have to know that when they leave, they’ll have a degree that is in demand because they come from a top-class university. Now, jumping around the country, urinating on pavements, defacing the Students’ Association, nobody ever holding anyone – diminishes the reputation of Victoria and the quality of our degrees, and we see that when the antics of this year’s Executive have been planted all over this country’s newspapers and radio stations repeatedly, and it’s embarrassing. One policy we have in particular is to make sure that lecture evaluations are published for all years, not just first year students. We need vibrant clubs, and we’re going to support them to do that. Clubs won’t have to affiliate anymore and go through all the bureaucracy attached to that, but every student will get a $25 refund and we will focusing on obtaining more sponsorship income from outside of university, and that means that clubs won’t be affected but we’ll have a more vibrant environment and an association that students can be proud of. We’ll do a survey next year of all students and we’ll pledge to achieve the three top issues that the students bring up. The bus is another issue, and our Environment Officer will be fighting to get students better access for less money to buses.

Salient: On the subject of the $25 refund – what are the details of that?

Lukas: If you look at our budget you’ll see exactly where we’re going to make savings to be able to afford that, and we’ll give every full time student a $25 refund on their levy. It’s completely do-able, enough money is there, and there are no legal issues. There’s been some rumours that it’s legally not possible but those are rubbish. What the incorporated society prohibits is profits from businesses that are run by incorporated societies being paid out to its members at dividends.

Joel: There are constitutional requirements on where that money goes. The building levy is not VUWSA money, it is students’ money that goes into the VUWSA Trust for the building fund. The idea being put forward is the $50 million Campus Hub Programme – that’s $280,000 that they can’t legally touch because it’s not VUWSA money, [and they then need to give] $80,000 to NZUSA but they need to give a year to pull out. If we pulled out this year, we’d still have to pay next year’s levies. They know about it but they’re still putting it forward.

Lukas: I guess Joel hasn’t read our budget because we’re not pulling out of the NZUSA and we haven’t affected their money at all.

Salient: So is the A-Team planning on pulling out of NZUSA next year?

Lukas: We’ve not budgeted to pull out of NZUSA next year; we’re going to review the relationship.

Salient: Is the A-Team planning on cutting any funding at all?

Lukas: Yes, that’s how we’re affording the refund. In regard to the VUWSA Trust payment, we’re going to change the constitution to make it possible for us not to pay that. We don’t think it’s fair that we have a trust which has over $5 million with no concrete building projects to spend that money on. We’re going to reduce clubs’ funding and rep group funding to zero. We don’t think it’s fair that all students have to pay for clubs and rep groups when most students choose not to be members of clubs and when most students can’t even be members of a rep group because membership is exclusive to fitting a certain criteria.

Joel: Like being disabled. Can-Do is a rep group for disabled students, we provide them with funds to advocate and we provide them with support. And I’m quite happy to put a few extra bucks into that to make sure that disabled students don’t have a hard time at university. Queer students are four times more likely to commit suicide because of all the stress of coming out and we’ve got to be up there to back them up. I’m happy to provide a group to support queer students and lessen the chance of suicide. One of the things that VUWSA does is make sure that clubs are on a level playing field; that their accounts make sense and are accurate, and that students who are putting money into these clubs are getting a good deal out of it and aren’t losing money, which is where Lukas wants to go back to.

Salient: So Lukas, do you realise that these organisations may very well just disappear?

Lukas: It’s certainly not our objective that they disappear. As we’ve said, we’re giving students a refund, they can give it to their rep group or their club and we’re going to be encouraging them to do that.

Geoff: I believe quite firmly that we’ve got to support minorities and I also believe that clubs are in the same boat as well. We, as a group, can fund those groups where clubs and rep groups can not fund those groups elsewhere. And what the A-Team is proposing is to strangle them fiscally so they’ll never be able to survive. The solution isn’t about less money; it’s about more money. My presidency is about trying to focus that money on clubs and also to the rep groups.

Lukas: so you’ll be raising the levy again by $5 per student next year, Geoff?

Geoff: That’s the real costs of students. It’s negligible compared with the $40 fine that you’re going to give students when they receive their $25 cheque. So when they receive their $25 cheque, they’re going to have to fork out over that and the $15 back to the government. They won’t actually receive that rebate – that’ll just go straight to their student loans.

Salient: Now, moving on slightly… Lukas, will redundancies be downstairs if you are made President?

Lukas: We haven’t touched anything that has come to staff.

Salient: Don’t you think you should have?

Lukas: Of course not.

Salient: It seems fairly likely that, under an A-Team Executive, there would be redundancies, doesn’t it?

Lukas: None of our cuts to funds affect any staff salaries. In the VUWSA budget, there’s a section on staff salaries. We’ve stayed well clear of that; we’re not affecting staff salaries or staff incomes.

Geoff: So you’re going to have someone sitting there for 40 hours per week doing nothing. And without the subsidies and the support that VUWSA gives in so many different ways, there will be no Victoria Team [to enter the University Games]. I’m sure the A-Team’s principle is that you shouldn’t be subsidising anything in principle, and perhaps that means we should be going back to $90 tickets for O-Week.

Salient: Lukas, how much funding is the A-Team expecting to cut?

Lukas: It’s going to be about $512,000.

Salient: Okay, I now want to go on to Geoff. What are your policies for 2008?

Geoff: My policies are quite simple. When it comes to clubs and rep groups, less money’s not the solution, more money is. And I’d like to see a focus on clubs and rep groups. I’m not asking for an extended increase above what is already constitutionally set in terms of the levy. I think we can look at being modest in our approach with sponsors in terms of helping out these groups. The other part is that it doesn’t matter if you elect me in or somebody else in. You can elect one bunch of muppets or another bunch of muppets. The thing is it’s a cultural shift that needs to be required at VUWSA and part of that is to fix the constitution.

Salient: Lukas, I want to talk about the code of conduct that the A-Team has proposed.

Lukas: It’s the basic principles of being accountable on the exec – how you spend money, financial policy, those kinds of things.

Salient: Can you give me any more detail than that?

Lukas: I don’t think it needs to be much more complicated than that.

Salient: Do you have a draft code of conduct, or have you just proposed the idea of setting one up?

Lukas: We have the draft meetings of a code of conduct; we don’t have one that’s ready yet.

Salient: So you don’t have a code, you’ve just been talking about it.

Lukas: We have a draft code of conduct. But if one of the members of our Exec misbehaves like the ones this year, they will be accountable. We’ll call a Special General Meeting, we’ll go to students and we’ll say, ‘sack the person, or sack us’.

Geoff: The thing is though, you can already do that. The second part is that you should be very careful to empower the president with the power of firing students. But when the president is asked by the media to defend the actions of the executive, there’s an expectation on the president themselves to go and discipline the executive.

Salient: Shouldn’t there be an expectation to do that?

Geoff: The constitution has deferred that responsibility to either the students themselves or to the university.

Salient: So Geoff, you as president, take no responsibility for the psychic hotline incident or the defacing of the Student Union by members of the Executive earlier this year?

Geoff: I’m President of the Association, not President of the Executive.

Lukas: This is why I’ll be a real president for the students next year. You don’t defend, justify and defend actions like what happened this year.

Salient: So how can we reverse the perception that student politicians abuse their positions?

Joel: That’s up to the people elected themselves – no one else can control that.

Salient: But the fact of the matter is that those incidents earlier in the year should not have happened. But you seem to be excusing it.

Joel: We got the money back – $6000, but everything else has been the personal decisions of people. That’s their call essentially.

Geoff: I think every person should be personally responsible.

Salient: Lukas, how do you think we can change the perception that Executive members abuse their positions?

Lukas: The biggest way is with the people you elect.

Joel: I’ve had law students state that Lukas Schroeter has questioned that illiterate shouldn’t be affected under the Contracts Act. There have been allegations that [A-Team Environment Officer candidate] Cameron Cotter has been racist with his question that Pacific Islanders are let into the country to support the Labour Party.

Lukas: [Giggles]

Geoff: There is this considerable fear of hidden agendas. The A-Team has got a proven track record of wanting to deconstruct VUWSA as quickly as possible.

Lukas: There is no A-Team hidden agenda. We’ve been very open about our personal and political views and we’ve put all our information on our website from day one.

Salient: Joel, what is the future of compulsory student membership under your presidency?

Joel: Voluntary student membership would cost students more. The university will charge an extra $60 on top of the student levy, VUWSA will continue to do what it’s done, it’ll just be heavily constrained in what it can provide.

Geoff: I have commitments to CSM.

Lukas: It’s not an issue for us next year.

Geoff: I charge all of my contenders right now if they can say that as long as they’re members of the Executive, and as long as they’re a VUWSA president, that they will never support or endorse anything other than CSM.

Salient: Joel, I’ll put that to you first.

Joel: Hell yeah!

Lukas: Completely depends. I’m not going to pledge that I’m not going to give students a choice in the future. It’s not on the agenda for next year.

Salient: But is it something you’ve considered?

Lukas: It’s not on the agenda for next year.

Salient: So it’s something that the A-Team has considered.

Lukas: We’ve made a pledge that we’re going to be committed to CSM for next year.

Salient: Would the A-Team organise a referendum on CSM next year?

Lukas: There will not be a referendum next year.

Salient: But you wouldn’t rule out the possibility for following years.

Lukas: I can’t look 100 years into the future.

Salient: How about in two years?

Lukas: The A-Team is standing for next year and there will not be a referendum next year.

Geoff: If we’re going to get unclear language on where the A-Team stands on VSM beyond 2008, I think students should be very worried about that.

Joel: Lukas has got together a team of vandals and racists. Good statements, that’s all their campaign is based on.

Geoff: I’ve made comment comparing the A-Team to the Exclusive Brethren. The questionable budget is basically a half a million dollar bribe.

Salient: Lukas, is the ACT Party involved in your campaign?

Lukas: [Laughs], no.

Salient: Is any party?

Lukas: No.

Salient: How are you financing your campaign?

Lukas: We’re paying for it by ourselves with overdrafts. My grandma sent me $100, which I’m very grateful for. I’m sure she’ll get a nice Christmas card from me this year.

Salient: Seeing that next year’s president is going to be a man (or at least someone who identifies as one, thank you Joel), how then will you represent women?

Joel: I’ve had close involvement with the women’s group; I’m a gender and women studies student. My policies are free internet and free photocopying – those are broad general policies that will affect everyone. If you look at women, Pacific Island and māori who have less of a disposable incomes, moving away from a direct, overpriced user- pay system will affect them in a large way.

Salient: Lukas, how will your policies represent the interests of women?

Lukas: Our policies are going to represent the interests of students. It means they represent everyone’s interests.

Salient: Lukas, are you opposed to the concept of minority representation?

Lukas: Not at all.

Salient: Can you appreciate that some minorities require distinct representation?

Lukas: Of course.

Salient: So how do you plan to cater for those distinct interests in your campaign?

Lukas: Quite simply – by selecting high quality candidates.

Salient: High quality candidates that can do what for minorities?

Lukas: High quality candidates that get in touch with their constituencies and will work their butts off, if I can use that term.

Joel: Oh, you’re pushing the language barrier.

Salient: Geoff, how are you going to represent minorities?

Geoff: From my personal opinion, I am male. [Lukas laughs hysterically, but Geoff is not amused] And as such, I will never understand the inequities that face women nor the plight that they face everyday. And as such I think I would be arrogant to think that I could lead that charge, and that’s why we have a women’s rights officer and a women’s group.

Salient: How do you plan to represent māori on campus, Geoff?

Geoff: I think it’s the same way as I answered the last question. As far as I can tell, there are organisations that do that job. Let’s not denigrate them; let’s give them the support they need.

Salient: Joel, how will you represent māori on campus?

Joel: There has been a quantum leap in the relationship between māori and VUWSA. And Nick Kelly and I built on that and we signed a two- year document last year and that was on the backs of me and Nick.

Salient: And finally, why should people vote for each of you? Geoff, I’ll start with you.

Geoff: It’s a consistency issue. I think a cultural shift has to happen and if we keep changing around during the process it’s only going to lead to a system that’s disjointed and we’ll only go in circles.

Joel: Ultimately, it’s about student life getting harder and harder every year and I want to make a difference with that. Ultimately, students will vote for me because they see the unfair costs students pay for internet and the unfair way the government sets its student allowances.

Lukas: They should vote for the A-Team because they’ll get a united team which will be able to deliver on the promises we’re making and because they’ll end up with a Students’ Association that they can be proud of.


About the Author ()

Comments (94)

Trackback URL / Comments RSS Feed

  1. bloggete says:

    Totally biaised bullshit.

  2. question says:

    How is this biased? It is a transcript of what happened? It’s not anyone’s fault that Lukas looks like an idiot, it’s his true colours coming out.

  3. Michael Oliver says:

    I thought Lukas sounded a little too short here, which was unfortunate given that he was given plenty of question-space to expand upon the A-Team’s policies and offer some clear direction on why he would make a superior alternative. What I got out of that was “I wasn’t on the exec this year. Vote me in!”

    All I really know about this Lukas kid after reading this is that he’s going to cut costs and… that’s about it. I’m by no means against the idea of an inexperienced candidate running the exec, so long as he or she have some definite, wide-ranging policy ideas and are prepared to offer significant explanations of them.

    Geoff was also pretty quiet as well, which was surprising. He’d be the first to admit that this hasn’t been VUWSA’s finest year, so this would’ve been the perfect opportunity to offer some thoughts on how he would improve upon the less than satisfactory performance of the exec and look to redeem it in the eyes of the student body. Quite surprising from an incumbent, really.

    I thought Joel didn’t do too badly, and he appeared to have a pretty good grasp of VUWSA’s role what it has to offer the student body as a whole. Probably could’ve done without the digs at Lukas. Play the issue, not the man.

    I have a feeling that the fact both Geoff and Joel are running will have sort of a “Ralph Nader” effect, in that those who oppose the A-Team will split their vote between the two. It looks like this could be tight.

  4. blogette says:

    actually think geoff looks like an idiot;

    look at the questions asked, “question”.

  5. Michael Oliver says:

    I don’t really want to read that again, to be honest.

  6. question says:

    Lukas has to be asked questions, considering that students have the right to know, since the A_Team or going to try dramatical change the way vuwsa works. What has he got to hide? This is not bias, Lukas is just an idiot, and it shows it through this article. Don’t try argue otherwise.

  7. blogette says:

    i think i can safely say lukas has more brains in his little finger than you, “question”, you fuckwit

  8. question says:

    I think that you don’t think, blogette.That is obvious from what you post. ‘Fuckwit’, that is so funny. Please don’t have a cry, did I hit a nerve?

    The fact that the students are starting to see the A-Team for who they really are, a bunch of whining go nowhere losers. They are the real Muppets.

  9. kate says:

    LOL f***ken hell that was a laugh! Lol Geoff and Joel obviously care about what they are doing whereas the A-Team guy was giving one word answers…hahaha. A-Team guy (i can’t be bothered looking up and finding his name) obviously didn’t know what he was in for. The VUWSA people take what they do very seriously and if your not gonna come to the fight with your arms swinging then don’t come at all poindexter. lol i just used the word poindexter. But in all seriousness students aren’t stupid and they will vote for the most geniune and intelligent person and that is obviously not you lukas. And i think i can quite safely say that not many people are gonna care about 25 dollars! What the hell kind of campaign is that! At least make it $50. Well I’ll stop raving now.

  10. question says:

    “Joel: I’ve had law students state that Lukas Schroeter has questioned that illiterate shouldn’t be affected under the Contracts Act. There have been allegations that [A-Team Environment Officer candidate] Cameron Cotter has been racist with his question that Pacific Islanders are let into the country to support the Labour Party.

    Lukas: [Giggles]”

    So Lukas, you are a bigiot and Cameron is a racist, and you just laugh it of. Do you still think that the environment and racism has nothing to do with each other? Do you still think that the A-Team will support minorities, even with that attitude. You guys are so sad, please drop out, before you lose so badly.

    Come on, I know your are reading this, give me an answer (not you Peter)

  11. name says:

    They are cutting the food bank, as it “is not VUWSAs job to provide food”. Not explicitly, no, but VUWSA is supposed to support students, and if a student is struggling so financially that they have to face the shame of going down to VUWSA and asking for food, why the hell shouldn’t they be able to eat a decent meal?

    The new welfare person will ‘direct needy students’ to the right place. whatever, that’s just what I need, spending several hours trying to get something out of studylink when I have assignments to do.

    “Heaps of students get food, just because it is free”- then they could enforce stricter regulations on deciding who gets food, but taking it away completely is just bullshit.

    PS I know the stuff in “quotes” isn’t in the article, that’s the gist of what I got from talking to one of the A-teamers.

  12. Craig D says:


    Actually most students by far don’t vote. Maybe apathy, maybe (like me to date) because I enjoyed VUWSA being shown for what it was- a self-important cabal that no-one cared about or voted for [yet had to pay for].

    VUWSA this year can hardly be described as serious or intelligent.

  13. Tushara says:

    Craig D, I don’t think you know what you are talking about. As you say, you have been apathetic to date. I believe that the voter turn out will be in large numbers this year, thanks to the A-Team, and their clubs policies.

    I have been both serious and intelligent in my role, and have gained many successes for students in the last two years. I really doubt that, if Cameron Cotter got in, he would not be able to match what I have done. Most of the other exec members have exceeded what is required of them.

    Don’t be a hater Craig, just because you are stuck in one form of ideology. Educate yourself, come down to VUWSA, and ask any of the exec what we have done. Please don’t write something back, attacking me, cos that would just be pathetic, and would say more about you, than myself.

  14. Craig D says:

    My comment wasn’t particularly directed at you.

    I haven’t been apathetic, I imagine I care more about student politics than a lot of people who vote. I’ve decided not to vote because there’s never been something I’ve thought worth voting for, and as a protest to the immoral system.

    If we’re talking about ideology, lets ask why a bunch of extreme leftists can use VUWSA, its name and its [read: our] money, as a political vehicle for their own ideologies. I may be distant from the average student ideology, but I’m pretty sure that most students aren’t communist/marxist.

    To be honest, I don’t know you, so I hardly “hate” you. But by supporting a system that forces people to give up their money to support ideologies and organisations they are opposed to, you are helping violate freedom of association.

    Perspectives and opinions are broad, there is no “student” view. So no-one can claim to represent all students. Yet you (all VUWSA people) are willing to take money from all students, knowing that many of them oppose your principles and actions. So VUWSA is all about forced redistribution of wealth, from some students to others, and its not like we all have money to spare…

  15. Craig D says:

    I assume that Joel is a member of “The Workers Party,” considering his involvement with Nick Kelly and that “Joel” is listed as the Wellington contact for that party (it could be one big coincidence).

    Their website has plenty about class struggles, anti-capitalism, marxist theory, profits are bad, etc etc..

  16. Bob says:

    In regards to the whole minority representation, it doesn’t look particularly good for the A-team. All their candidates are white, and only two are female. Their international officer is a white male from Lower Hutt for goodness’ sake! How can he adequately understand and represent the views of international students?

    And their website is not transparent – despite saying that all the candidates will declare their political affiliations on their personal profile pages, I haven’t found anyone who actually does.

  17. Craig D says:

    I see from the last meeting minutes that the Workers Party has now been affiliated as a VUWSA club.

    So your money is now being forcibly taken, and some of it goes to a Marxist organisation, some to a conservative organisation, some to a greenie organisation, etc etc…

    And to subsidise a bunch of peoples personal interests (pity mine aren’t covered and my money is taken for other people’s leisure activities).

    Remind me again how freedom of association doesn’t need to apply at student body level?

  18. Joel Cosgrove says:

    Marxist and proud.

  19. As for the bias issue, this interview may have been biased, but not intentionally. Giving such space and high prominence to this interview overstates the role of the Presidency. While important, the VPs and treasurer also play key roles in VUWSA, and their importance shouldn’t be underestimated. Also, the General exec will be crucial this election, not only as the A-Teams best chance of getting people in, but to make up the numbers needed to get their policy through.

    The interviewer did ask far more questions to Lukas than to the other candidates, partly because Lukas was being a little evasive/ could have been more concise in his answers, leading the interviewer to press him, and the interviewer got a bit carried away into disscussing the A-Team and what they would/wouldn’t do. For instance, the interviewer pushed the (false) idea that ACT are behind the A-Teams campaign, and asked how they were finiancing it, without asking any of the other candidates how they were financing ther campaigns. the interviewer should have asked geoff about his free internet and printing policy, and what Geoff wanted to achieve in a second term. These points weren’t pressed on by the interviewer. I’ll give the interviewr 4.5/10, good atempt, but could have done better.

    all the candidates preformed alright in the interview. lukas gort given a really tough run, which wasn’t helped by the other candidates criticising the A-team, but did reasonably well in defending off acusations. the VSM issue was handled badly, a simple “while i personally favour VSM, not all the A-Team does, and I relise the duties of my role as President, so we will not push the issue next year” or something down those lines. Instead, it looked like he had something to hide. made some points about the bad preformance of the exec, but missed their targets I’ll give lukas a 5/10 for his preformance.

    Joel showed some knowledge of VUWSA, and claimed wityh soem justification that geoff was reaping the friuts of work by him and Nick Kelly, but was quiter than the other candidates, which didn’t help get any message across. 5/10 will be a little generous. The candidate who preformed best in this interview was Geoff who got his attacks on the a-Team on target, his call for the candidates to set their positions on VSM was a good example of setting the agenda. by calling for more funding for clubs, and his open pro-CSM position wil help with the left wing vote, and the attacks on the A-Team the centrist. Didn’t do too well defending his 2007 presidency, and was fortunate the interviewer didn’t press the issue more. Still solid preformance 7/10.

    These marks are tough, as the interviews are spontaneas, you can’t spend long periods of time carefully planing your answer, and have to think on your feet. Still interesting reading, and it was good to see a interview of this style (rather than the Q&A format for the candidates pages). Hopefully Salient can do more interviews of this type in future.

  20. Rob Addison says:

    Nicholas, how fortunate we are to have received your critical analysis. Marking schedule and everything? Well, you’ve really out done yourself. I give your analysis a 9/10. Give yourself a pat on the back – you’ve earnt it!

  21. peteremcc says:

    I give Rob’s review of Nicholas’ a 7/10 – it could have been more detailed.

  22. Craig D says:

    I’ve said it a few times on here now and have had no answers.

    Why is it ok, because we’re students, that our money is taken from us and used to support a range of groups, many of whom we don’t support?

    My money is being taken to support Marxism, Greenies, christian clubs, young nats, etc etc. If I weren’t a student, forcing me to contribute to such societies would be considered a violation of freedom of association. Forcing me to contribute to a Marxist organisation, which believes in subjugating the individual to the collective, is morally wrong. Similarly for religious persons who are being forced to contribute to religions they vehemently oppose.

    Beyond freedom of association, why, because we’re students, is our money taken away from us to subsidise the leisure activities of a few small groups? I have a number of different interests, all of which I have to pay for out of my own pocket.

    There are no valid reasons why we don’t have the right to freedom of association, just because we’re students.

  23. Craig D says:

    If you needed a reason not to vote for Joel, this is how his friend and party comrade Nick Kelly saw himself as representing all students:

    “What things did VUWSA do to oppose the invasion of Iraq?

    We managed to start the year off by making opposition to the Iraq war student association policy. More significantly we managed to recruit a number of students not only to the anti-war movement but also to progressive politics. Whilst this was a strong start to my time on VUWSA the bureaucratic forces soon began making themselves an obstacle. After an anti imperialist wreath was laid at the Wellington cenotaph on ANZAC day one Labour careerist described an anti-war activist as a “Nazi sympathiser” for making a political statement on ANZAC as it was disrespectful to those who fought against the Nazi’s in World War 2…

    The pro-Moscow Socialist Unity Party used to put all their energy and effort into gaining and maintaining control of trade unions to the neglect of other vital party work. Other parties did the same with student work. By contrast various other socialist organisations have and do take the attitude that it’s pointless to get involved with student or trade union politics because they are too bureaucratic and prefer to avoid them. Both of these extremes are roads to failure. It is important for Marxists to stand and if possible take on leadership roles within student associations and trade unions. What the last four years involvement with VUWSA have shown that pretty significant things can be achieved by members of what is a fairly small revolutionary organisation. However this cannot come at the expense of building a strong revolutionary organisation.”

    Well I’m sure glad my money was extorted from me to pay for this person to “represent” me.


  24. Clive says:

    We should put the lot of them in the polo field and let the hounds on them! Good riddence!

  25. Eugene Black says:

    Why does Lukas not answer the questions he is given? Is that because he does not want to tell us the truth? Is it that he is a bigot and is more concerned with taking control of the students association than actually providing services for the studnets that pay money each year to belong to VUWSA?
    And how is it that if elected you plan on commanding a “United Team” when you could likely be the only A-Team member in VUWSA because all the focus of the “A-team” campaign was on you and you didnt give your other candidates a fair share of the campaign budget?
    Perhaps Lukas you could apply for a position in the WCC, in the land transport safety department, because you seem to be very good at diverting and not much else ;-)
    cheers scrotum, you’re a bit of a laugh.

  26. Jessica Larson says:

    A-team you are putting everybody off by being so in their face!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! SERIOUSLY!!!!!!!!!!! I was just standing there with my mouth wide open as one of the team (i wont name them cause thats mean – even though i know you guys are for accountability) basically shoved a pamphlet in my face (not into my mouth) and began saying “are you voting for A-team?! Vote for A-team?! You have to!! Oh im **** by the way, running for ******** heres a [million] pamphlet[s]”. But i already have a pamph…i tried to say but in vain. im a reasonably friendly person, but this was TOO MUCH!

  27. Eugene says:

    Wrong approach to campaigning=wrong candidates? Maybe there should be emphasis on what the Association will do for the students [except the shady $25 refund which no-one seems to be clear on except petey “the mc” c who is a mindless puppet] and less emphasis on the moments of stupidity of last years exec?
    Where is Lukas I want to have an argument with him…
    Lukas I had your mum last night and I’m afraid to say she was a little disappointing!

  28. Jessica Larson says:

    Im not sure about the $25 refund, because no substantial information seems to be coming out. i mean, it might just be the information HAS come out and i just dont understand it…im not sure. I read and re-read salient (not really) but i couldnt find anything that really smacked me in the face and went “THIS IS WHY WE ARE DOING IT AND IT IS GOING TO WORK BECAUSE…”. lukas is not a bad person Eugene, and his heart seems in the right place. some people are just not that good at executing (and that is not suppose to be a pun for hahum).

  29. Eugene says:

    Na he’s just a misguided wannabe ACT member from what I’ve seen, I’m sure he’s fine I just don’t think he could handle running the VUWSA imho.
    And nice pun i think if you applied it somewhere it could be very effective :-D

  30. Jessica Larson says:

    he’s young. if he doesnt get in, theres always next year. if he’s smart he’ll learn something from this election. joel cosgrove (is that how you spell his name?) is a bit pompous for my liking and jeff disappointed me with the whole “brethren” thing. If anything was like the bloody Brethren campaign it was the anti A Team anonymous posters. remember the brethren didnt put their name behind the leaflets, where as A-team has been upfront with all their dissing, even though not entirely accurate. Jeff can be a bit of a twat. over all i dont think any of the candidates are much to my liking – ah well, you cant have your cake and eat it too. not sure if that really fits with what im saying but oh well.

  31. MC says:

    You are perfectly entitled to your views Jessica. It is good to see someone apply scrutiny equally across all candidates. You have obviously found that no candidate represents you entirely (or even remotely). Could I suggest that if you feel the same next year that you consider running yourself.

    Also just because elections only happen once each year don’t let that be a barrier to making YOUR opinions heard in between times. The muppetry exhibited this year would have been a lot more difficult had there been much less apathy.

  32. peteremcc says:

    Check out the website for the info Jessica.
    Just because Salient failed to print much other than attacks against the A-Team doesn’t mean there isn’t any policy – everything is up on the site.

    You can also come along to one of the BBQs next week and actually meet the candidates and ask them questions.

  33. Jessica Larson says:

    did they not print the live interview presedential candidates word for word? I thought they did. Lukas was directly asked – and that is where the confusion came from.

  34. Bogan says:

    Joel has my vote.

    Being a marxist is just one other ideology, being involved with the worker’s party is no worse or no better than being involved with Act/Labour as Lukas & Geoff are respectively…when it comes to working on the VUWSA exec….

    From what I’ve seen, Joel cares the most about the “underdog” out of all candidates, which is essentially (in my view) one of the most important things about a student association- providing equity and representing minority interests…

    Also- people have posted pictures of Joel getting arrested- but from what I gather-this was actually at a STUDENT protest. Who else out of all the candidates is willing to put his neck out in this way?

    Good luck joel!

  35. Peanuts says:

    I think in the end, Joel is the only one that would go the extra mile to get students what they want. ie. Getting arrested, as the photo shows.
    This shows that Joel is not afraid to stand for what is right. This in it self is more than not what just Geoff and Lukas can offer, but a large number of people.

    From what i have just looked at, it seems that the other two ‘guys’ are just trying to get in ether for personal gain or the sake of getting in.

  36. peteremcc says:

    Who cares if it was a STUDENT protest (not that it was) or if he’s not afraid to stand up for what is ‘right’.

    You’re both assuming that ALL students agree with Joel’s point of view.

    I have no problem with doing whatever he wants for himself in his own time.
    But if he is MY president, representing me, then he should speak for what I think and what I believe!

  37. Bogan says:

    So peteremcc, you’re saying that you don’t care about Students living in poverty and John Howard’s racist policies? Because that’s what Joel was speaking out AGAINST.

  38. Just to clarify. I was protesting (not a student protest per-se, uni hadn’t started) outside government house because I didn’t (and still don’t) support Howards troops in Iraq and wanted to voice that.
    The police surged forward, knocked me over, they turned around, I was lying on the ground and they arrested me. I hung around in jail for 4 hours and then they released me with breach of the peace, one of them muttered a sorry as I walked off.

    Not as glamourous as geoff makes out. Sorry bout that.

    //I have no problem with doing whatever he wants for himself in his own time.//
    Uni hadn’t started.

  39. RAWIN JUNE says:

    Ok, im kind of juggling between Joel and Geoff
    This is the first time ive ever given a shit about voting, probably because of the ATEAM and the fact that if i dont vote I WONT BE ABLE TO COMPLAIN NOR REST EASILY IF THOSE MUPPETS GET ONE OF THEIR GREMLINS INTO VUWSA!!!!! WHEN MY ONE VOTE COULD HAVE MEANT THE WOOOORRRLLLDDD..

    At the moment im thinking Joel because hes a white guy who grew up in Canons, which is amazing that he even survived and is roaming the aisles of OUR DEAR VIC UNI, BIG UPS MAN FOR MAKING IT THIS FAR!!! Plus the PIGS shoved him and then arressted him and still no harsh feelings.

  40. Tushara says:

    To quote you Craig D
    ‘VUWSA being shown for what it was- a self-important cabal that no-one cared about or voted for [yet had to pay for].

    VUWSA this year can hardly be described as serious or intelligent.’

    I am part of VUWSA, so this is directed at me. Calling VUWSA Muppets includes all exec members and staff.

    “Why a bunch of extreme leftists can use VUWSA”, a bunch? Who are these people, Nick Kelly, Joel? Who else? I think your generic statements are bullshit.

    It makes as much sense as me calling the A-Team a bunch of racist, far-right wing, pseudo intellectuals, who are hypocritical, lying bigots.

    If you make grand statements on VUWSA, back them up with some proof. I tutor a first year course, and would fail them, if them made statements like these, without proof. You make support the A-Team, Craig, but I would give you a D for poor effort.

  41. Craig D says:

    Firstly, I don’t really support the A-Team. They haven’t had the balls to stand for VSM and don’t seem too coherent with what they want. Regardless, I’d rather have a group supporting a smaller VUWSA and less extortion than a Marxist in power again.

    I’m not saying that all VUWSA people are useless – to be honest I’ve never heard of you before or anything you’ve done. Yet, as I said in my previous post, anyone who believes its ok to take money forcibly to represent a certain view is violating my freedom of association. You might do a damn fine job – in which case, convince me it’s worth paying $125 to have you around, don’t just steal my money and assume you represent me.

    Ok, here’s a more specific statement: A previous VUWSA president (Nick Kelly) and current Welfare VP Heleyni Pratley both used the VUWSA name and money to lay communist wreaths on the basis they represent all students. Previous VUWSA president Nick Kelly has written an article on how he used his presidency to further the cause of communist revolution in New Zealand. Presidential candidate Joel Cosgrove is a member of the same party, and likely to be more of the same.

    Another more specific statement: Turnout for VUWSA elections is extremely low. The number of students required to pass motions is even lower. A very small group of students can pass motions forcing the whole student body (of thousands) to pay a higher levy. The low participation is a good indicator in the general apathy towards VUWSA, hence the “self-important” comment. Perhaps “protection racket’ would be a better descriptor than “cabal” – as you say our money is a contribution to our protection from the big bad world, yet it’s not exactly our choice whether we want such protection.

    How’s my mark doing now? ;-)

    I note that STILL no-one has answered why it’s ok to force people to support an advocacy body and several partisal organisations, just cos we are student. Do I only get freedom of association when I grow up and leave uni?

  42. Craig D says:

    That reminds me – I WAS a voter for the past few elections! No confidence for every category that allowed it.

    I mean seriously, you have got to admit VUWSA doesn’t exactly achieve the mandate of the students to operate at all, let alone to raise the levy and extort even more.

    1042 votes for president in the election last year. Geoff got 472.

    Joel Cosgrove was the only candidate for EVP, yet there were almost as many votes for No Confidence (419) as there were for him (629)

    So Geoff is operating on the mandate of under 500 students and 40% of students who gave a crap said they’d rather have no-one than Joel for EVP.

    Yet you think it’s ok to keep taking our money, to increase your levies, and to claim you represent students?

  43. peteremcc says:

    I wouldn’t hold you’re breath for an answer Craig!

  44. peteremcc says:

    Oh and Joel, I don’t have a problem with you protesting in your own time – as I’ve already said. But you want to be VUWSA president and represent students by doing the same thing.

  45. Alice says:

    A-team why did you have to cut clubs out? apparantly only $7 from our student levy goes to clubs out of the $120. why not say: we’re going to cut $2 per student (giving clubs only $5) and offer students a $20 refund. Of the $120 (is it $120 or $125?) i give to vuwsa, the money towards clubs is the only thing that i feel truely happy to give up. I know your counter argument is that when we get the $25 back we can donate the whole thing to clubs if we want, but thats not really the point. People wont give that money back because they are too narrow (hahem!) minded and can only see five steps ahead of them which is usually the local bar or a cafe. They dont see the big picture which is that by supporting clubs, essentially you are upholding the true ‘spirit’ of the university. i dont look at it as ‘why should everybody pay for a few people to join a club”, but rather as a ‘tax-like’ input so as to make clubs more accessable to students (money wise etc).
    By the way this conclusion has been reasoned in my head by considering both the arguments for club funding and against. I have no political affiliations as i have only been introduced to the idea of them this year, and my judgement was rather the result of an instictive valuing of organisations that support cultural expression, physical excercise and most inportantly, sociability.

    Becoming a well rounded and educated person is not just about getting a degree, its about groing up and gaining experience. it is for this reason i do not support Lukas even though i know he has worked very hard on this campaign and would make a good president – approachable and all.

    Its easy to say its the clubs ‘problem’ if they dont get their funding and that they have to take ‘responsability’ rather then relying on ‘stolen’ money. But shouldnt we, as students all take responability for it? no pain no gain right? the general interest of the university? has any of the A-team actually done a pole to find out WHAT students views on clubs are?

  46. Alice says:

    By the way i’ll guess we’ll find out whether (at least some) students want clubs or not in the election results! no pole needed lol

  47. Alice says:

    and as to clear up some confusion over ‘pole’ lol, its poll. although pole-dancing is a hobby of mine

  48. Dave says:

    Alice – I doubt the A-Team did a poll. But in their defence, they have put more work in to this election and educating themselves on how things work than I’ve seen in a long time.

    Don’t vote for them though. They’re just puppets for the ACT Party who are trying to get rid of students’ associations. If they get in, they’ll just go straight to a VSM referendum regardless of what they promise. A leopard doesn’t change its spots.

  49. Alice says:

    Im pretty sure they’re more then act puppets, but they are people and people have flaws. They wont go to a referendum either, its too risky. Nice conspiracy though! way to get the commies chum chummin along lol! Nick Kelly will be pulling out his hair in tufts…and i dont feel sorry for him one single bit. A-team seem to be genuine in their campaign – however just because they really want something to happen, it doesnt mean that it can actually can happen. Overall id be more worried about the cutting of clubs then vm if i was you.

    Oh yeah, what if the the leopard was in fact a chameleon in disguise, could that be counted as changing its spots?

  50. peteremcc says:

    Sorry Dave, wrong again.
    The Exec has no power to call a referendum for VSM.

    Please read the law before you comment on it.

  51. Alice-I agree with what you say. The A-Team clubs policy is very unpopular with most students. it will cost them a lot of votes this election, and could make them unelectable. Even I don’t like it. Whats more, there are plenty of other areas to cut instead of clubs, where VUWSA provides even less value for money.

    Dave- the whole hiden agendas thing ihas no truth behind it. Anyone could easily write something similar aboutJoel Cosgrove and his membership of the radical socialist group, the Workers party. It is sad that you don’t trust the A-Team and see them and other right wingers as liars with hidden agendas. I hope the following facts will reassure you.

    The A-Team isn’t all ACT. Although many, if not the majority of its mebers are ACT members or supporters, it also includes young Nats and people with no political affiliations. What really matters is not the political beliefs of VUWSA candidates, but instead how they will reconcile them to their job. The A-Team has promised to make VUWSA a-political.

    On VSM, I am unashamedbly pro-VSM, and I know most of the A-Team, including Lukas support VSM, but there are some members who oppose VSM. However they have promised not to organise a petition for a referendum next year, and won’t advance the VSM cause while part of VUWSA.

  52. Phil says:

    //The A-Team isn’t all ACT. Although many, if not the majority of its mebers are ACT members or supporters, it also includes young Nats and people with no political affiliations. What really matters is not the political beliefs of VUWSA candidates, but instead how they will reconcile them to their job. The A-Team has promised to make VUWSA a-political.//

    The A-Team can’t make VUWSA ‘A political’ Because VUWSA executives are democratically elected on platforms therefore making them inherently political in their nature. Isn’t that student politics? ie students cast an opinion a political opinion threw voting ….

    VUWSA candidates can run on any political platform they wish Act, Workers Party young National and win! Because It’s up to the individual student to grow up and make their own decision as to whom they vote for.

    Personally I will be voting for Joel because (encase you haven’t spoken to him) He actually knows and i mean KNOWS what he’s talking about when it comes to VUWSA he has heaps of institutional knowledge and that’s crucial to running an association as far as I’m cocerned

    And to be honest i have grave fears of Geoff being in charge again, since he doesn’t know how…

  53. Tai says:

    I would like to remind everybody that if you have a student loan like the huge majority of students, having a POLITICAL students association has saved you thousands of dolars on your student loan. In the last election students recieved interest free loans after completion of study and before that students recieved interest free loans while studying.
    This can quite simply be explained by succesful POLITICAL campaigning by students associations and NZUSA as well as students of course.
    What would you rather?
    “A-policial” = $25
    “Political” = $1000 and up
    Thats not to mention that whether the A-team is bipartisan or not their attempts to destroy all collectives on campus (clubs and especially rep groups) and to introduce a market model are most obviously political and to be more to the point neo-liberal or neo-conservative.

  54. Felicia Jollygoodfellow says:

    Craig D are you the reincarnation of Joe McCarthy?

    The Workers Party are not a new Socialist Unity Party. Support for them, and or association with their members, does not make you a Communist.

    Being honest about your politics, being against racism, sexism and homophobia and working hard for students seems to me to be a good reason to vote for someone.
    I’ve meet many student politicians who lie about what they stand for. Then, when elected, they either work against the interests of students (they supposively represent) or do nothing useful.

    “Ok, here’s a more specific statement: A previous VUWSA president (Nick Kelly) and current Welfare VP Heleyni Pratley both used the VUWSA name and money to lay communist wreaths on the basis they represent all students.”

    To my knowledge Ms. Pratley is not a Communist. What exactly is a ‘communist wreath’?

  55. Craig D says:

    Felicia, open your eyes.

    “Activists within the Workers Party, who produce The Spark and revolution, treat Marxist theory as the analytical tool that underlies our assessment of culture, society, and economy. This helps us to determine the direction and activity of our organisation.”

    Can it be much clearer than that? “We follow Marxist theory and it determines our actions as an organisation.” Yet you contest that it is nothing to do with communism?

    Further more, Joel has said on here that he is a Marxist and proud of it. I’m struggling to see the basis for your statement…

    “The wreath was comprised of sunflowers, yellow, white and red roses and grass and featured the wording: “To the dead and the dying in the struggle against imperialism, victory shall be theirs”.”

    Workers party isn’t communist and its members aren’t using VUWSA to further their ideologies? Talk about having blinkers on.

    If you don’t think this is comprehensive enough proof, I suggest you read this article by Nick Kelly titled “Workers Party working within student associations
    (how to be a communist president)”

    How to be a COMMUNIST president. Uh, convinced yet?

  56. By “A-Political” I believe that the A-Team mean VUWSA should be A-Political on what it lobies on, so the A-Team wouldn’t lobby the Government on student loans. the A-Team have given mixed messages on how “A-Political’ thhey will be, with their talk of fighting for better quality education and more education advocacy.

    Tai-there is no hard evidence to show student associations political lobbying led to intrest free student loans. It can be seen (as I do, largely as an election bribe) and student association lobbying has not been successful in many cases. Still, the point has some validity, as student debt protest e.t.c help keep the issue in the public eye.

  57. Spangly says:

    So who are you voting for, Nick?

  58. Still to decide. I agree with a lot of what the A-Team says, and would like to see the VUWSA levy reduced, but strongly oppose the A-Teams clubs policy, and find the A-Team poicy in general poorly researched and thought out.

  59. The Candidates Forum will take place 12-2pm on Thursday at Union Hall. Please let people know.

  60. Spangly says:

    Seems Joel knows the most out of all the candidates, I’m also yet to decide however.

  61. CJ Hunt says:

    SGM and AGM’s have a quorum of 100. 2/3rd majority is required for constitutional changes.

    So, the bare minimum to change the constitution is 67 people.

  62. I’m not going to get into this any futher than saying that just because I identify as a marxist does not mean my girlfriend was, give her more credit than that! She’s just as independant and feisty as me, don’t assume that just because she’s a woman and goes out with me that she follows everything I say. It’s not the 50’s anymore…

  63. Nick Archer says:

    Good to see you are still around Jimmy, yes nothing much has changed, don’t worry Edge still comments from time to time…

  64. Nick Archer says:

    Yeah, what ever happened to Nagorcka?

  65. peteremcc says:

    So how come Salient can leave up all their election related material – including nonsense accusational comments attacking the A-Team, but the A-Team have to take down their website where they explain their positions?

  66. Graeme Edgeler says:

    Peter – because Salient has editorial independence.

  67. peteremcc says:

    And the comments…?

  68. Tushara says:

    Any one who isn’t campaigning can comment… I can say that the A-TEam are racist (Lukas and Josh).. because it is true and I am not running. Are you trying to quash my FREEDOM OF SPEECH Peter? Really, you are a hypocrite

  69. Michael Oliver says:

    Oh, rampant douchebaggery – where would student politics be without it?

    I really wish that someone besides the three running for top office had run a campaign by putting up a series of posters made from bits and pieces of every other person’s campaign posters, but with the slogan “lmao student politics”, because I would’ve voted for that person in a heartbeat.

    In years to come, people will say “Remember that election campaign when everybody just whipped their dicks out and started pissing? Just fucking pissing everywhere?” and they’ll be talking about campaign ’07.

  70. Michael Oliver says:

    Also, calling a women’s rep victory for the A-Team, because she’s pretty and blonde and blonde and pretty and… pretty… and, uhnm something about being blonde and/or pretty? It doesn’t matter, because part of me really, really hopes she’s going to be VUWSA’s answer to Ann Coulter. Oh, the bike rides Salient will go on in 2008…

  71. Jimmy Southgate says:

    Michael: I doubt very much whether in the years to come anybody hearkens back to the long long ago just to talk about VUWSA elections in the year 2007.

  72. Michael Oliver says:

    Glad you got the joke, Jimmy.

  73. Tristan says:

    “VUWSA’s answer to Ann Coulter”

    Maybe she will invade Newtown and convert the immigrants to free market radicalism…

  74. poopoo2u says:

    $25? Who gives a fuck about $25!

  75. maggie says:

    My main problem with the wro candidate is that she drinks vanilla lattes! Spew!

  76. Antichrist Superstar says:

    OMG! have yo u seen her in the flesh? she is soooooo not hot!

  77. Sara R says:

    How is Lukas racist? Given your attacks on candidates in this election, i’m glad you will no longer be on our Exec.

  78. Sara R: Tush has alleged that two members of the A-Team used racial slurs against him last week. A story about it will be in Salient on Monday.

  79. Sara R says:

    Nice to see you are continuing with your policy of journalistic impartiality Laura.

  80. Rob Addison says:

    Sara, don’t accuse Laura, or any journalist, of being impartial without explaining why you think that is the case (this isn’t the first time I’ve had to make this point here). What is not impartial about running a story on those accusations? What is wrong with you people?!

  81. Chris says:

    It’s a breach of the VUWSA constitution, for starters.

  82. MC says:

    Yes but just because someone said something doesn’t make it true and/or reportable. If that were the case people could make up plenty of malicious rumours and circulate them.

    Given that some people have become very worked up in this election it is not inconceivable that these sorts of rumours can occur. I look forward to reading the article though. I hope the allegations are reported as such and not as fact. Also I hope that they are reported with an explaination of the context of the campaign to date – ie plenty of malicious rumours, slurs and lies.

  83. Rob Addison says:

    And what about editorial independnce, Chris?

  84. Chris says:

    What about it? You have it – to an extent – but you’re also subject to the VUWSA Constitution.

  85. Michael Oliver says:

    Don’t blame me – I voted for Kodos.

  86. On the fence says:

    Sara: I suggest you wait until you’ve read the story before you make public judgements. If it is a balanced story – as Laura’s have been relative to the rest of the magazine – you’re going to come across looking like a dick.

    I’m a little concerned that it didn’t take the A-Team very long to attack free speech.

  87. Lukas Schroeter says:

    Hi All,

    I would suggest that out of respect to the VUWSA Constitution everyone, including non-candidates, reads schedule 2, clauses 53 and 54. To my understanding 54 (b) pretty much prevents anyone at who is a member of VUWSA from commenting about anything to do with the election – or at least from commenting on anything likely to influence the election in any way.



  88. Michael Oliver says:

    This comment thread is now dedicated to how fucking terrible the All Blacks away strip is. Seriously, it’s awful, guys. AWFUL.

    But the Scots could’ve done us all a favour and worn something resembling their home jersey.

  89. Rob Addison says:

    Fair comment, Lukas. And I liked the strip, Michael.

  90. dre says:

    Lukas Schroeter
    September 24th, 2007 at 8:48 am

    Hi All,

    I would suggest that out of respect to the VUWSA Constitution everyone, including non-candidates, reads schedule 2, clauses 53 and 54. To my understanding 54 (b) pretty much prevents anyone at who is a member of VUWSA from commenting about anything to do with the election – or at least from commenting on anything likely to influence the election in any way.



    So lukas give this why would you had out flyers to students in the cafe today getting them to vote??

  91. dre says:

    My bad!! “Given this, why would you hand out…….”

  92. Lukas is allowed to give out pamphlets encouraging students to vote, but they can’t tell people how to vote a certain way. As for the election, I predict:
    President : Joel cosgrove, by a comfortable margin, close fight between lukas and geoff for second.
    VPs: Barnard and brown.
    Treasurer: neilson, win big.
    general exec: One, if not 2 A-Team, too dificult to tell from others, but won’t be mellissa barnard.
    all other exec positions: non-A-Team, probably Mark Wright for Queer. A-Team
    Uni council: maybe Bishop, likley to be close.
    Publications; don’t know
    turnout: slightly above 2000 (hint Joel told me 1900 voted on wednesday)

  93. Final turnout is close to 2 500. This is around 12%.

Recent posts

  1. VUW Halls Hiking Fees By 50–80% Next Year
  2. The Stats on Gender Disparities at VUW
  3. Issue 25 – Legacy
  4. Canta Wins Bid for Editorial Independence
  5. RA Speaks Out About Victoria University Hall Death
  6. VUW Hall Death: What We Know So Far
  8. New Normal
  9. Come In, The Door’s Open.
  10. Love in the Time of Face Tattoos

Editor's Pick

Uncomfortable places: skin.

:   Where are you from?  My list was always ready: England, Ireland, Scotland, Wales, puppy dogs’ tails, a little Spanish, maybe German, and—almost as an afterthought—half Samoan. An unwanted fraction.   But you don’t seem like a Samoan. I thought you were [inser

Do you know how to read? Sign up to our Newsletter!

* indicates required