What is Being Suggested?

Craw maintains that "a 'participatory democracy' system stifles rather than encourages debate." He later says that "SRC in fact docs not allow for 'the right to informed debate' because speaking rights and the content of speeches there can be, and often are, ruthlessly controlled by a variety of procedural motions." (SRC operates under more or less standard meeting procedure, which is designed to obstruct only those who would obstruct the meeting itself.) Craw also argues that Forums, as "an institution of free spoken expression" would solve all our problems.

Why does he like Forums and not SRCs? Is it because Forums, where policy is not decided, are a side issue in determining the action of the association and would therefore often have less people attending? How can he possibly argue that participatory democracy stifles debate? Contraversial matters, properly advertised, always receive extended debate at SRC and bring along large numbers of people.

My conclusion is that Robin Craw would like us to have a system whereby students were no longer encouraged to participate in the affairs of the association, both its policy making and its activities.

It is no coincidence that victoria, with its system of SRC and SRC officers, also has a long record of being able to involve large numbers of students in mass activity on issues to concern to them. Many students may feel isolated here, but this feeling is nowhere near as widespread as it is on those campuses where the Executive accident or design, really does rule the roost.

Kathy Jamieson.