"One recommendation was that a no-confidence take place in closed session. Closed session of Council bans non-members from attending, however any student who wishes to attend will still be able to do so unless they have opted out."
The editor is very sleepy having not had sufficient shut eye after running around Europe this week, juggling conferences, editing and centenary activities. A public flogging may be arranged for such a ridiculous case of brain fade. The lack of sleep will hopefully be corrected over the weekend, although it cannot be guaranteed.
Anyone wishing to ease the load is welcome to stand for editor at the forthcoming AGM, which shall be announced on this website in the near future.
HA HA HA HA HA!!!! John Collins wants to censor the student media? That is the BIGGEST JOKE I have EVER HEARD. Well done John, you made my day. What you doing for your next trick? Trying to nail jelly to the ceiling?
It's just as well they have a democracy and not a *complete* tyranny at ICU isn't it.
The no confidence is the only way you can get rid of a sabb. It means that position will be empty until July. You are firing an elected official, and you are saying: "We don't have any confidence in you." I think it's a pretty big deal.
I honestly don't know when a sabb was last successfully no confidenced, but it must be at least fifteen years - I guess I'll trawl the old paper archives of Felix to see if I can find one. Mustafa, of course, faced one, but that fell apart.
As Andy noted the position would be open until Juky. At which point surely we can have a look to see if the Deputy President (Graduate Students) position is actually required. Im sure that loads of Postgrads went to the speed dating night??
To be fair, John did not ask to be able to censor the media. I think he probably wanted to censor the discussion board ('cause as here, legally the union and hence he, is still publisher and liable or any libel, but has no control over content), and only in a very limited way.
Well, while the likelyhood of John being sued might be small, and the likelyhood of College not indemnifying him in that case also small, in my oppinion, he's far more likely to be covered if he follows the procedures layed down in the constitution.
Ironicaly, I suspect the court was more created with a mind to making it easier for council to vote in a no-confidence motion against a Sabb... it's supposed to make it hard for john, or any president, to simply do what he wishes and ignore everyone else, yet instead it is being viewed as the reverse. It seems a little unfair.
Incidentaly, I think the court only ever proposed giving him the interim power (until we spoke with the media editors) to remove stuff that was conjecture and speculation, or defamatory regarding the no-cofnidence motion. Not whatever he saw fit.