Thu 22 Feb 2018
- The award-winning student news website of Imperial College

Know something you shouldn't? Tell us, using our quick, 100% anonymous tip-off form!


Heeps on Friday

The comments below are unmoderated submissions by Live! readers. The Editor accepts no liability for their content, nor for any offence caused by them. Any complaints should be directed to the Editor.
Jun 01 2001 16:45

You thought he'd gone - but he's back! Be afraid - be very afraid!

Jun 01 2001 17:18

There is certainly room for a helipad, which College would very much like to build so as to make South Ken a much more effective nerve centre of Imperial's conquering (sorry "merging") operations.

However, I suspect College are still incompetent at obtaining planning permission.

Jun 01 2001 19:13

Some have suggested that early plans for a heliport have been abandoned in favour of turning the whole of Exhibition Road into a runway to launch the soon to arrive 'IC 1' 747...

3. anon   
Jun 03 2001 15:02

So these are the words of the sage Mr. Heeps? Compare and contrast the above (Guilds-centric) meanderings with his most recent Council paper ( and draw your own conclusions.

P.S. Andy, if it really is your own column, follow the Ted Heath comparison to its logical conclusion.

Jun 03 2001 15:52

While we have a rather liberal policy on allowing journalists to use pseudonyms, we do not facilitate impersonation.

So, if it claims to be written by Andy Heeps, it was.

5. stef   
Jun 03 2001 20:32

Despite once again being referred to as a minion (that Hamish/Tasha pic - what would the head look like on Andy's body? I'm thinking about the pic from a previous Slave Auction here:)) I do like the column. Why on earth did Andy stop writing for London Student?

Obviously the rumours of Andy leaving the medic ship for BaME was true....

Jun 04 2001 00:27

Anon, declare yourself! It is indeed me. I don't consider my article above to be "guilds-centric" - any I don't know what you are inferring about my "Education" paper - if you're going to be so ambiguous, I would suggest you keep your own counsel in future...

Or are you John Clifford in disguise?

As for the Ted Heath comment, I'm trying to see what the logical conclusion is - he's left the Commons, I've left ICU Council - we'll continue to hear from him, and by God, you'll continue to hear from me!


Jun 04 2001 10:24

This "muppet" word seems to be catching...

Jun 04 2001 11:32

I first heard that word being used in a Union context by Richard Taylor,... I believe it is his favourite description of most of Council

Jun 04 2001 12:08

Well, I guess he IS member of Council himself, so that would be fair. Otherwise, he's just a hypocrite.

10. jon   
Jun 04 2001 19:56

What is the point of this stupid clubs + societies policy anyway? Look at it from the point of view of the punters. No ordinary student is actually going to care. It just makes u sabbs look like beureacratic timewasters.

Jun 04 2001 21:13

Actually one of the advantages of the Clubs and Societies policy is that it unifies several different policies that affect clubs into one policy, making it easier for Club Chairs to actually read it.

12. jon   
Jun 04 2001 21:22

Why not just srap ur beloved policies. They r just a waste of paper.

Jun 05 2001 10:40

Taylor and council...interesting thing that. You can view him as a member but you can also view him not as a member...I find the whole situation most ironic

Jun 07 2001 11:56

Heeps on Friday to become Heeps on Monday next week! Like you care... :-(

15. stef   
Jun 07 2001 17:26

Andy, I care, trust me

16. Adrian   
Jun 08 2001 06:02

Whether or not you view Richard Taylor as a member of Council, one Richard Taylor is now a Member of Parliament, as an independent MP for Wyre Forest.

That was a bit of a shock for a second or two!

I bet you would love that, wouldn't you Andy? ;o)

Jun 08 2001 15:10

Richard Taylor an MP?


We could call him "Kinnock" - lost twice in a row!

Jun 08 2001 19:10

He didn't lose the second time - he was disqualified - for putting up posters in the wrong place...

Jun 09 2001 14:43

Yes, but he still lost if you look at the numbers...

Jun 09 2001 15:08

What numbers? His votes weren't counted! Several Union Hacks, later put about the myth that Sen would have won anyway - but the fact is no-one knows... which would help to explain why Council disqualified him, they just didn't want to risk him winning...

Jun 09 2001 18:08

If you look at the number of people who voted - 1115; and then the number who voted for Sen - 611, it gives you a fair idea. I'm aware that Richard Taylor's 2nd, 3rd, 4th preference votes will have been re-allocated, but frankly, most people don't use them. Bearing in mind that the other candidates failed to break the 200 votes mark, I think it was unlikely that Sen lost that election.

Jun 13 2001 22:50

Of course Sen didn't lose that election... you should have seen the number of DoC students in the computer labs who were co-erced into signing away their proxy votes!

Closed This discussion is closed.

Please contact the Live! Editor if you would like this discussion topic re-opened.