Cost Rationale

Your correspondent's comments on the catering operation (Salient 5, 'Non-Profit Money Making') [unclear: seems] to me not to state the situation accurately, he price of goods sold in the catering areas is [unclear: set] by the University Union Management Committee and not by Nationwide. In setting prices [unclear: the] main criteria is to provide cheap basic course [unclear: meals] for students. In order to maintain the [unclear: basic] main course price at 42c, prices of other items [unclear: such] as milkshakes, are set in order to ensure that [unclear: basic] main courses are at the lowest possible price [unclear: and] that overall the operation does not make a [unclear: loss]. In considering the price schedule, all costs [unclear: including] overheads, eg electricity, labour and the [unclear: cost] of materials used in producing the items, are [unclear: taken] into account in setting prices so that [unclear: overall] the operation does not run at a loss.

The cost of cheese segments is 6c, not 7c (6 segments costs 36 cents). As this is the case a segment of cheese is cheaper in this operation than buying a packet of six from your local grocer (38c).

Your correspondent is right to query the meal [unclear: content] of large rolls at 15c. The specification [unclear: given] by the caterer to his staff is for ham to be [unclear: the] filling. Due to a mistake by the staff, lunchon sausage has been the filling in some rolls, There will be ham in all rolls in future.

As to the cost of small items (coffee, tea, milk), [unclear: we] are once again faced with a question of setting [unclear: prices] so that overall the operation does not run [unclear: at] a loss - that is some individual items being [unclear: priced] higher and others being held low in order [unclear: to] provide the poorer student with a nutritious [unclear: meal] at the lowest possible price. I have no idea [unclear: whether] the Post Office Cafeteria prices some [unclear: of] its other lines at a higher price than those sold [unclear: in] the Union catering areas. If it does, then this [unclear: is] answer enough for your correspondent. There [unclear: has] always been an extra 2c payable for gravy on [unclear: a] pie. The size of a slice of bread is larger than [unclear: he] size under the previous contractor and it is [unclear: not] possible to sell this item at a loss. The [unclear: division] in price is such that 3c is the nearest [unclear: rounded] price. It is the requirement of the operation to [unclear: break] even. As the finance for the catering [unclear: operation] is provided by the University it is essential [unclear: that] the operation does not run at a loss. Such a [unclear: loss] would affect the available resources for use [unclear: on] other areas of the University.

As regards roll-your-own tobacco, the original stock was Rothman's and was withdrawn at the request of the Students' Association, subsequently Management Committee agreed to this line of [unclear: action]. Non South African rool-your-own tobacco is now available in the shop. Matches ran out because the delivery firm failed to send them.

I would be happy to discuss any matters in your correspondent's article with him. If your correspondent has any further complaints he should check his facts first. There are a wide range of people he could see from the Caterer to the Managing Secretary to the President of the Students' Association if he has any complaints. It is no use crying in print without also making direct approached to the people involved.

Carnal Review

I saw Carnal Knowledge on Saturday night. Fine I've just read Rex Benson's comments in Salient No. 6 and I'm jelly. According to Benson the film has been hacked to pieces, (he mentions "lacerated, mutilated and decimated") Why? Simply because the censor had the good sense to remove eight (verbal) fucks and two (spoken) cunts? What petty quibbling bullshit. Do these words constitute reality, scream realism or cry fair play? They only illustrate how far under the belt the cinema industry has stooped in the interests of the purient minded (after masquerading in the quise of hip cinema-intellectuals). The roving eye of the camera, the dress and actions of the actors are the only tools needed to "tell it like it is" (for those of us who don't know). We don't need gutter language to show us we're walking in sewers, nor do we need reviewers to fill in the blank lines, "*!! *!!'s" and "Blatantly obvious" cuts that this film-goer missed.

Next year the censer will cut beastiality scenes and give on-screen fornication an R 18 rating. But Benson and Sympathisers will have to fly to Scandinavia to catch the originals. Who knows, once there they might even let you make your own.

Instigators Get Results

I have several complaints to make about one of the many anonymous articles that have appeared in Salient recently; namely the review of the Anti-Apartheid Conference by the "Instigators". It is distinguished by lies, smears, avoidance of the issues, and cowardice.

The "Instigators" say that the Socialist Action League tried to "take over" one of the Conference workshops. The fact is that there were about 100 people present at the workshop on sporting contacts, including about a dozen SALers. Two of the SALers briefly outlined their opposition to the tactic of "disruption" as being counterproductive, and proposed a strategy of mass demonstrations instead. How can this be called trying to "take over"?

The review also states that the SALers walked out of the Conference after the defeat of a motion which they had supported. This is an outright lie; they remained until the end of the Conference.

The "Instigators" also try and smear the SAL by suggesting that it is "dominated" by some sort of family group, simply because two members of the SAL are Fysons.

Instead of replying to any of the points raised at the Conference by the SAL, the "Instigators" smear the SAL as being "elitist". In fact antielitism is one of the main reasons why the SAL opposed the tactic of "disruption" - because this tactic restricts the movement to the "committed" elite, and inhibits the involvement of thousands of ordinary people who will want to demonstrate opposition to apartheid and the tour, but who will be put off attending demonstrations if there is a possibility of getting injured or arrested in a violent confrontation. Disruption of football matches, also reveals an arrogant, elitist attitude on the part of the disruptors against the people who want to watch rugby matches, who are not necessarily "racists" but who do not yet see how the Springbok tour supports apartheid. Disruption will not help change these people's minds in the right direction.

Why should the "Instigators" or anyone else have the right to spread smears, under cover of anonymity, in Salient? I suggest that if only signed reviews of this sort were printed, they would contain fewer lies and distortions requiring refutation in letters such as this.

Salient should devote itself to discussion and debate on issues of interest to students, and not become a forum for smears and petty personal attacks of this little group versus that little group. Such gossip does nothing to clarify the issues, and can only harm the anti-apartheid and radical movements.

Teaching Lecturers

Through observation I found out that lecturers must possess one vital element besides just being qualified — that is they should be Teachers i.e. possessing teaching ability. For one of the most frustrating things in the process of learning is when one's initial interest and aspiration are being pushed down the scale by a mere bad presentation. Is it not, after all, the prime object of lecturing to promote learning in which understanding and interest unfortunately both play a very significant role.

I hope that the Student Association of this University would look into students interest by considering this matter, so that attending lectures would be something more of interest rather than of necessity. And besides, napping with one hand under the chin, while the other holding to a pen I can assure you, is not very comfortable.

Racist Bikie

Of all the things that piss me off, nothing bugs me more than the lack of consideration shown to bike riders from those fuckwits known as pedestrians.

Also, cars parked immediately outside reduct my exit speed by 15-20 m.p.h. I don't mind dinging a few cars but it tends to lower the air pressure in my front tyre

Finally, Kelburn parade makes a shit hot drag strip. Why pedestrians persist in crossing at any and all points is beyond my comprehension. The bloody pricks think they have as much priority here as anywhere.

The next goon who gets in my way will find a layer of rubber one inch thick from his coccux to his cranium.

Chaplaincy

In reply to Simon Rougham and the contraceptive machine proposal, my apologies if I sounded as though I was speaking for the whole Chaplaincy Board rather than just myself, as Student Rep. However since I was the only member of the Chaplaincy Board to speak, I cannot be held entirely to blame if it seemed my perspective was that of the whole Board. Considering the proposal carried important religious and moral implications, as was pointed out by the speaker featured on the front of last week's Salient, the silence of my colleagues on the issue is perhaps more reprehensible than my attempt to put a viewpoint from the Board.

Remainder

Whitcombe and Tombs Remainder on page 7 Vol. 35. No. 6 April 11 inst. certainly is very cheap, judging by her appalling grammar - but other than that she could well be no different from anyone else. And, as she should have said in the fourth sentence - the only difference from any other book is her price (the ambiguity is excusable). for Remainders future reference one says: better than, different from similar to.