SRC Report

The storminess of the last few SRCs meant that the prospect last Wednesday of a brief fairly uncontroversial one was very appealing to most. Apparently, though, it did not appeal to all. At least one person, Paul Norman, couldn't face the possibility of a (choke, gag, I can't say it!) short (yuck!) SRC and so singlehandedly went about making it a long one. I really did get the impression that Paul had got out of bed on the wrong side that morning.

Before all that started though, Anne Riddel, language and literature faculty rep, reported that a meeting of the faculty committee during the August vacation had been informed of the possibility of a resignation in the Italian department. With the university currently trying very hard to cut its spending, thanks to the Government cutting its grant, the person resigning probably wouldn't get replaced. There's only three of them anyway, so that could mean the Italian department will be "completely wiped out", said Anne. She asked anybody concerned about this prospect to express that concern to her.

Mr Norman then entertained the masses with a report on two meetings of the University Council's committee on site and building development and utilisation which recently discussed the fate of the Hunter Building. This report was in fact brief and informative. Paul said that the plan for retaining the building now involved bolting the outside wall to the back wall, unlike the previous proposal of "using all sorts of funny cements".

A lot of concern was expressed that the building would still be unsafe in an earthquake or high winds even after the reinforcement work had been done, he said, but it became apparent at the meeting that "a lot of the concern for safety was being used to discredit the proposals of the Friends of Hunter". Paul added that students should oppose plans to hold a competition to find a design for a replacement for the building unless a study, costing $30,000 is carried out to find out the cost of retaining its facade, so that entrants wishing to do so in their design can put in the costing.

Reports from Council

Reports from delegates to August Council followed, with Caroline Massof saying that on the whole she had been "quite disappointed" with it. "It certainly didn't try to keep the spirit of the education campaign going. The campaign isn't over yet and we're still going to fight. We'll be encouraging as many students as possible to apply for hardship grants," she said.

Commenting on the non-election at Council of Colin McFadzean as General Vice-President (see full story in last week's Salient), Caroline said that the Victoria delegates, on the grounds of Colin's expressed sexist attitudes, did not consider it responsible to elect him as a national officer.

Finance and Administration delegate, Peter Beach, reported that the only outstanding feature of that commission was the decision to raise the levy to $3.53. This increase was mainly because of "skyrocketing administration costs, which are going up In leaps and bounds," said Peter "any one for a mixed metaphor" Beach. (another reporter for the blacklisted.)

Women's Commission delegate Virginia Adams expanded on Caroline's comments concerning the non-election of [unclear: Co] McFadzean. In association with the [unclear: great] condemnation of sexism at Council [unclear: s] said this was the most significant thing [unclear: the] happened for that Commission.

Paul Norman must have been [unclear: gen] restless by this stage because the [unclear: silling] started. He asked Virgina what [unclear: Bl] "particularly sexist behaviour"[unclear: she] said had marred previous Councils." [unclear: dgg] the past at Council dinner there have [unclear: been] quite a few sexist jokes and that," [unclear: m] replied. "Ooohhh," Paul said [unclear: ridicul]

About Colin, Virginia said he [unclear: ll] "touching women when he had no [unclear: jfl] to". "Oohhh, shame," came the [unclear: com]

"I find it appalling that people [unclear: can] laugh at this," said Virginia, and a [unclear: sa] section of the meeting broke into [unclear: juv] titters. The fatuous questioning from [unclear: pa] continued, in fact it got more and [unclear: more] obnoxious, and then he ended up [unclear: tryil] justify himself by saying, "I think you [unclear: B] see what I'm getting at" to a sea of puzzle faces. "The report system simply [unclear: do] work."

Welfare delegate Bob Wallace was [unclear: wa] next to get the third degree from Paul [unclear: will] a series of bloody stupid questions, at [unclear: tl] end of which somebody wittily asked [unclear: ic] what size shoes he wears. I'm not [unclear: blan] anybody, (heaven forbid), but I had [unclear: ioc] around at this stage and there weren't [unclear: man] people left.

Out of Reports and into the World

Anyway, once all the reports had [unclear: been] given, the meeting moved onto [unclear: gafif] business, and Grant Gillat moved a [unclear: mapo] calling on VUWSA to condemn [unclear: J41] Remuneration Act and to recognise it as a attempt to control wages and depress [unclear: litio] standards. The motion also said that [unclear: the] SRC direct the National Affairs Officer [unclear: I] initiate a campaign against the Act and [unclear: a] part of it to invite a representative from [unclear: the] Trades Council to speak at a forum.

Grant said that the Act "put [unclear: more] control in the hands of the Government [unclear: f] industrial disputes" and that the [unclear: whol] thing was "an attack on the [unclear: negotiate] rights on unions".

Seconder Tim Rochford said that [unclear: dl] campaign would be mainly an [unclear: educid] one, so it wouldn't cost a lot. He then [unclear: fl] on to urge students to make sure they [unclear: join] unions when (of if?) they got a job [unclear: duf] the summer vacation. After Paul [unclear: Nor] (who else?) had inflicted everybody [unclear: one] again with the sound of his own voice, [unclear: the] motion was passed unanimously.

Abortion Debated

Virginia Adams then moved a [unclear: mot] condemning the recent interference in the medical profession by the [unclear: Abo] Supervisory Committee and its attempts to impose a repressive policy on doctors [unclear: and] women that denies women their [unclear: democ] right to control their reproductive lives. [unclear: she] said that the reaction of the committee [unclear: to] information that it was easier to get [unclear: an] abortion in some areas of the country than others was to accuse doctors of interpreting the law too liberally. The committee [unclear: told] the doctors that if they didn't tighten [unclear: up] their interpretation they wouldn't [unclear: be] reappointed as consultants. "This is [unclear: blat] interference by the Government in to women's lives and the work of the medical profession," she concluded. Seconding [unclear: the] motion, Robyn Wood said that [unclear: the] inadequate abortion services in some [unclear: areas] meant that getting an abortion was "just" [unclear: a] matter of chance".

Paul Norman, displaying the sort [unclear: of] pedantic attitude that had pervaded [unclear: his] comments and questions throughout [unclear: the] meeting, argued that the motion didn't express its true spirit and moved [unclear: an] amendment that VUWSA call for the replacement of the committee's members by ones sympathetic to the needs of women The amendment lapsed for want of a seconder.

Patricia Crowther spoke against [unclear: the] motion, on the grounds that it claimed [unclear: taht] abortion was a women's democratic right but it was passed anyway though with [unclear: three] very loud negative votes.

The meeting should have come to [unclear: a] speedy end at this stage but, you guessed [unclear: it] Paul Norman dragged it out. I hope you'll excuse of my not detailing the various comments he made but quite frankly they weren't worth noting down and even less worth reading.

Mark Wilson.