Assuming Francis' views are described accurately above, his gall and stupidity are breathtaking. Now, I'm not a maths student but according to my arithmetic a staggering 76.2% of people who didn't bother to vote would have to support the NUS to make any difference to the result, even with 100% turnout.

Also, checking our loverly regs and so on, the constitution states that "only full members of the union" (constitution part 8.1) may vote in referenda. Does this equate to "ALL full members of the union (including those having membership by virtue of their part-time studentiship) may vote" . If not, then presumably we could go on and on having constitutional referenda in the future that wouldn't satisfy the NUS' bizzarre criteria. How's that for a "no" strategy?

Best gag I've heard all year.

If you do have another referendum, it would be interesting to see if NUS can keep to the same story [c.f. Stephen Byers].

Like I said, I'm no maths whizz and I think the right number may be 68.6%. Still reassuringly unattainable.

This "information" you claim to have found couldn't possibly have anything to do with pages 6-7 of today's London Student, would it?

;-)

...and part-time students are *not* Full Members of ICU. Neither are external or distance learning students.

This means they cannot take part in the governance of the Union (e.g. by voting in a referendum). It also means that the Union does not represent them in any way.

DF checked this with the Rector and College Council Chair a few weeks ago, and it was confirmed that there is no appetite in the College (or indeed Union) to change it.

Which means...

We will never ever ever vote to join the NUS in a way the NUS will accept. Oh dear, what a pity. I'm crying all down myself.

Whatever happened to the "no referendum on an issue decided at a referencum in the current or preceding year" provision? Did it fall to the Common Review, or is NUS lover Francis just going to try to have it ignored?

Referendums on affiliation to an external organisation can be held once a year.

I am very sceptical about Mr. Francis reasons for wanting to join the NUS. The last person person to take Imperial into the NUS promptly became NUS president, and then a

Government minister. Does he have political aspirrations. We deserve to know.

Also, most students who voted no will still be at Imperial, so it would seem stupid to have another Referendum so early. Perhaps it would be better spending a fraction of the ?2,000 on advertising the fact that you can buy an NUS card from ULU for ?5 (or am I wrong). Also, it would be better spent advertising stores that give Students discounts without an NUS card. What was the name of that Website Andy. Net Result, no boring Referendum to further alienate students from the Political process of the Union, and a net saving of ?35,000 (in the first year). Any further suggestions on how to spend the ?2,000 + ?35,000 on more useful things than the NUS please give.

There is plenty of information on student discounts available at http://union.ic.ac.uk/no2nus/

Congratulations to all the wonderful campaigners who got their picture in London Student, even the ginger whinger got her pic in.

I only mention it because i picked a copy up in the union earlier because we're running low on toilet paper, and i quite fancied being that disrepectful to some former sabbs in the picture ;o)

The referendum rule was changed from a minimum of a two year gap to a one year gap for external affiliations (i.e. NUS) becaue the Education Act says so. Previously ICU would have broken the law. Any other referendum now has a minimum three year gap.

And I'd love to know how the hell it cost ?2000 to run.

?250 for each campaign and ?1500 for Crispy.

If you're referring to section 22 (2)(l)(ii) of the Education Act 1994, which says:

"at such intervals of not more than a year as the governing body may determine, a requisition may be made by such proportion of members (not exceeding 5 per cent.) as the governing body may determine, that the question of continued affiliation to any particular organisation be decided upon by a secret ballot in which all members are entitled to vote"

That would seem to apply only to a situation in which the Union was already affiliated.

There is no provision that I can find in EA94 governing referenda on affiliation, only on disaffiliation.

[[This]|http://www.legislation.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts1994/Ukpga_19940030_en_3.htm] is your essential link...

Regarding student discounts, one key thing to remember is that even if they initially say that they only give a discount to NUS cardholders, this is frequently not true. As an example, I went to the Warner Bros cinema in Hammersmith recently, and was rather disheatened to see several posters saying "We will only accept NUS cards as proof of student ID" or something along those lines. I decided to try it anyway was was turned down by the trained monkey on the ticket gate. I explained to him that Imperial wasn't in the NUS and so I didn't have an NUS card, but he just replied robot-fashion that that was the rule, and I would have to pay the extra two pounds to get a full-price ticket (?7). I went down to the customer service booth and told the supervisor the situation, and she said that I was entitled to a discount, signed the back of my ticket, and radioed up to the monkey to let me through. Success!

The moral of the story is to be persistant, especially by talking to someone in authority, even in the face of apparent hard-and-fast rules against you. I think that more should be done by the President to resolve such issues. They seem willing to give all students discounts, there just remains an ignorance of the NUS situation. I think that they were requiring an NUS card just to prove you were a student, not actually to prove you were a member. Also, it may be best to use your swipe card rather than your union card, as it looks more official, especially in borderline places such as WB. Perhaps the union can run it's own online register of ICU friendly local businesses? This would actually be a useful service for the students.

PS. no offence to Munkey, who is clearly more highly evolved than the grunt staff of WB cinemas.

I almost forgot, does anyone know whether or not the no campain's assertion that it is illegal for companies to give discounts to NUS members but not to non students? I know that for instance people who opt-out of ICU still have to be given equal access to its services/facilities (those provided by that insitution), but what about services provided by external institutions? Also, as the NUS has a rather different leagal status to ICU, does this rule even apply to them at all? Can, for instance, someone from IC go for training by the NUS on the same terms as someone who is from a member insitution? If not, is this illegal?

**Woops!**

That should of course read non-members, not non-students.

Take 'referendum' out of the title and you've got it in one.

my understanding is that if someone advertises 'Student Discount' any form of student ID which is valid for that year should be fine. For a company to advertise as such and then only accept certain forms of ID such as only a ULU card or only an ICU card then its dodgy - false ad., misselling etc

If they advertise 'NUS Student Discount' they accept NUS cards only or a non-NUS card which has the NUS logo stuck on it (such as the CArdiff Student Union one which I got given). They can should any other card. In essence the 'NUS Student Discount' is not a student discount but a discount for NUS members.

Much as I wholeheartedly admire your ability to twist things for the benefit of your own argument, London Student only described NUS conference as a waste of money. Not the whole of NUS much to your disappointment, who do achieve quite a lot of good work on behalf of millions of students rather than sitting around emailing facetious comments to each other in attempt to keep each others egos propped up nicely.

Or perhaps they do.

I feel I should point out to the London Student Editor that the article does not state that all students think the NUS conference is a waste of money. The article merely states that the IC "No" campaign believed the conference was a farce and waste of money, and that London Student agreed with this fact.

...as opposed to London Student which decides that the fair way to report a defeat for the NUS at Imperial is to quote the losing side and not even attempt to contact the victors for a comment or quote.

And unless I'm mistaken, you used that picture in London Student without the permission of the ICUNo2NUS Campaign Chairman...

Sorry I fail to see where the proof of the statement "rather than sitting around emailing facetious comments to each other in attempt to keep each others egos propped up nicely" comes from. Maybe the London Student Editor can explain.

I have only just realised a photo taken with my camera has appeared in London Student. Thank you for pointing this out Mr Heeps. As you correctly say, the copyright of this photo is held by me and the No2Nus campaign at IC, and it would be nice to be consulted before it is used by other publications.

And how many student publications in this country do you know of that every pay any attention to copyright?

Perhaps London Student, and most importantly, Fiona, could actually highlight exactly what the NUS has done in the last five years that is worth the millions of pounds of affiliation fees?

Well Rob,

I think the fact they have stayed out of my college is worth millions of pounds...

oops, but they wanted in, didn't they! my mistake!

i'm such an old cynIC.

Re. Rob's comment of May 25:

The silence is deafening.

Still, which is the more farcical: NUS Conference or ULU Council?

c.f: my previous article

The silence is breathtaking - nothing is the response so nothing is what the NUS has done. Sorry, endless political correctness, paperwork and upping of membership fees... oh and don't forget they rolled over on tuition fees - remember students approved it!