Publicly accessible
URL: http://www.nzetc.victoria.ac.nz/collections.html
copyright 2016, by the Victoria University of Wellington Library
All unambiguous end-of-line hyphens have been removed and the trailing part of a word has been joined to the preceding line, except in the case of those words that break over a page.
Some keywords in the header are a local Electronic Text Collection scheme to aid in establishing analytical groupings.
In order to make new content available faster this work has been uploaded but does not have comprehensive name authority mark up for sub-works and corresponding authors. We will endeavour to add this mark up as soon as possible.
As the Education Fightback campaign, and those involved in it, wind themselves up to fever pitch in preparation for the climax on July 26, editors can sit back in the comfort of their swivel chairs and centrally heated offices and somberly evaluate the campaign to date.
At Victoria the campaign has been quite out of the "traditional" mould of VUWSA's past campaigns. Not only has it appeared to have gathered the grudging approval of the student body, but it has succeeded in involving "ordinary, non-political students" to an unprecedented level.
By achieving this involvement, the Fightback campaign has laid down the foundations for a truly successful campaign. Not only do more people learn that more activities can be planned and run, but any campaign spreads most effectively through personal contact. People involved in the campaign discussing things with those around them, persuading them of the importance of the issues, and answering questions students may have is a vital aspect to a successful campaign. With the diverse backgrounds of those involved in the campaign as well as sheer numbers, this informal publicity is surpassing that of any other campaign run in the past few years at Victoria.
The other imporant aspect is actually bringing the issues to the attention of the students, and in doing this those involved in the campaign have been particularly energetic. Through articles and supplements in Salient, with leaflets, posters and pettions with large scale speaking to tutorials and lectures, I find it hard to believe that many students are unaware that there is a campaign on and that it is centering around cuts in education spending.
Whether all the presentation of material has been effective in terms of persuading people is of course a different matter, and one that it is hard to evaluate before July 26. However most of the feedback so far indicates that a majority of students support the principles of the campaign - not surprising as it would be hard to deny them. Certainly the response to the sale of buttons etc. suggests a strong measure of support — people giving money.
In terms of actual activity the campaign has not been quite as innovative as originally hoped. A variety of proposals for increasing both public and student awareness of the campaign have not come to fruition. Some of the ideas that it does not appear are going to eventuate are such things as advertisements in the daily papers. Coasters for distribution around the pubs (the idea of an air drop of biodegradable leaflets was never, I am happy to say, seriously entertained) and a whole host of other ideas, some of them gimmicky, others less so, have not seen the light of day.
Although the campaign has not been innovative in terms of these sorts of activities, by running in the way that campaigns are meant to be run, with many people involved at all levels, the Fightback Campaign could almost be regarded as a new thing in a student's association where activity has for too long been restricted to the few who seem to become involved in everything.
Nine days are left till Thursday July 26th which is a National Day of Action on the cuts in education spending.
Since the campaign was launched back in May, a number of things have been announced which are going to severely affect the education sector in the future.
First, the overseas students were clobbered with a $1500 fee to pay each year.
Second, the Universities themselves got clobbered, in the case of Vic, with a $400,000 cut to its budget.
Third, more students got hit with a new Tertiary Study Grant system with a basic rate of $23 per week, means tested for a supplementary hardship allowance, and payment of 25% of university fees next year.
Three good reasons for
All these are good reasons for
On Wednesday July 25th there
We also need a Tresurer — if you interested in this position call in at ass office soon.
The solution to the last problem is:
f4 (p × N)
Nf4(N — KB5)
f4 (p × p)
mate in two is unavoidable.
In the position below, white is to play and win.
The Chess Club meets on Tuesday evenings at Weir House and Thursdays in Rankine Brown (12.00 — 2.00 in RB880 and 2.00 — 4.00 in RB 821). All students are welcome to come along.
The bearded stranger stumbled along the muddy, rutted path. He winced as another lightning bolt flashed jaggedly across the sky, and he buttoned his coat against the rain that drove into his face from a purple sky. Dimly through the murk a cobwebbed castle swam into view. Turning his by now somewhat aquatic feet towards this vision of warmth and happiness, he soon found himself beating weakly on a cracked reinforced concrete door.
The door swung open on near soundles hinges to disclose, dimly illuminated by a guttering candle a ghoul of catatonic repulsiveness dressed in a faded wet suit. A luminous plastic name tag dangling from its wrist declared it to be Tori Quade.
"Who are you" it drawled in tones of the purest billabong. "My name is Geoff Adams and Tarn a stranger far from home."
"Won't you come in?" it simpered. With some trepidation our rather damp hero crossed the threshold. Ths first thing his battered sensory apparatus registered was Kathryne Fleming garbed in the costume of an emaciated nun, mercilessly shaving off Jessica Wilson's mustache with a blunt meat axe. Standing in the wings, Fergus Barrowman nonchalantly sharpened his teeth, and quietly stood on Mark Wilson's tail, which resulted in such a flood of ectoplasm that Grant Gillat was submerged up to the bolts in his neck.
Simon Wilson, unsuprisingly far from the action, plunged his teeth into Tim Rochford's neck, which proved to be constructed of such a revolting substance that even his battle-hardened inner parts proved unequal to the task. Disaster was averted by Lorraine Wilson's prompt action, swooping down on her persian rug, her echoing laughter splitting the silence.
Sadly, Andrew Beach got in
A great shadow, at this
Salient was, in the main, edited
The New Zealand universities are
Hart?).
And where does the Education Cuts Campaign come into all of this? The campaign is very much a part of the whole fight-back against the effects of the economic crisis. This is because the Government has cut it's spending on education precisely because there is an economic crisis. Their motive is not that there is "fat in the system", but that the Government's desire is to trim expenditure, in real terms, in non-exporting areas. The fact that this move is so damaging, in the long-term, to the people of New Zealand, does not impress the Government as much as ensuring that the interests of Big Business are protected. A touch of irony is introduced when we consider that it is the economic system that we exist under (that is, the representation of the interests of Business) that is the cause of the economic crisis.
Our National Affairs Officer has organised the "Economic Crisis Week" in order that we do not lose sight of the fact that the Education Fightback Campaign is irrevocably tied to the economic crisis, and by implication, to the fightback against falling standards of living by working people.
The highlight of the week will be the Progressive Student Alliance's forum this Thursday. Hopefully, there will be representatives from the National Union of Rail-way men, the Public Service Association and the Wellington Coachworkers Union. At this forum, many questions that have not been answered or raised here will be dealt with by these speakers. Why, exactly, do we have an ecomonic crisis? Is there a solution to the economic crisis? What does the Government's "reconstruction" really mean?
Come along to the forum (it starts 12 noon in the lounge and Smoking Room); listen to the arguments presented and put your own views to the meeting. You never know, you might enjoy yourself.
At last, the opportunity for regular closet contributions to Salient. Still flushed with the success of last years full-page graffiti article, Salient has decided to select and publish the best 3 or 4 examples of the wittiest wallpaper in Wellington, on a weekly basis. The whole project is to be regarded as the ultimate attempt to illicit grass-roots student participation in the magazine; all campus toilets will be personally inspected each week, at great cost to the health and social life of staff - so get out there and w-rite something funny! No amount of painting and re-decoration can stop us!
N.B. The views expressed on the toilet walls around campus are not neccessarily those of Salient. Al though often they are.
"I'm a presbyterian. We worship frisbees. We believe that when you die, your soul goes up on the roof and you can't get it down."
"Michaelangelo would have made better time with a roller" (not necessarily - ed)
To be or not to be - Shakespeare
To be is to do - Aristotle
To do is to be - Sartre
Do be do be do - Sinatra
Do do do do do - Marx
"I'm into flagellation, bestiality, and necrophilia; am I flogging a dead horse?"
Do not be deceived by his pretty face. Our Minister of Education has a mind! Rattling about in those fertile acres of cerebral cortex is a veritable Pandora's Box of ideas on how to reduce spending in Education. One of these ideas was released on an unsuspecting public last week.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, it was an idea of pre-Cambrian simplicity. Starting at the beginning of next year, every school pupil in New Zealand will be required to nominate a "classless day". The chosen day will be designated by an appropriately coloured sticker the pupil will wear plastered to the bridge of his/her nose. Exemptions will be allowed for those students who can prove to the Minister's satisfaction that the course they are doing is essential for their future career. A nod's as good as a wink to an english student, and english rolls are expected to drop drastically, accompanied by a commensurate increase in students taking technical drawing.
The Minister explained that this could lead to a saving of many thousands of dollars, as schools would no longer have to buy so many copies of the Merchant of Venice. One interesting feature of the scheme, is that New Plymouth Boys High is exempt from the plan. Instead it will be converted into a re-education centre for students who fail to display their stickers. These people will be forced into the school cricket team, and once they have attained the rank of captain they will be released on society as worthwhile rehabilitated citizens. The Prime Minister is thought to be extremely interested in this aspect as a potential source of future Ministers.
There was some opposition to the scheme from within the National Party. New Kid in town John Falloon was concerned about the nomenclature. "Classless days" rather stuck in his craw. "Sounds a bit bolshie, doesn't it?" He was eventually convinced that it didn't represent an attack on free enterprise, and the party ranks closed to present a united front against the Labour Party.
The Labour members maintained a spirited attack, saying that the plan was an unwieldy attack on everyone's basic right to an education. Their alternative was a school rationing system, where students would be allowed only a limited amount of learning every day.
Actually, both plans are equally silly, but don't worry. Merv's lots more ideas.
Handbook; (or, if
This position is a full-time job. The editor is responsible for the overall content and presentation of the paper.
(Remuneration this year is $80 per issue; not bad for 100 - 120 hour week!)
Please supply curriculum vitae outlining experience, degree of literacy, qualities, ideas, etc to;
Publications Officer Helen Aikman by Monday 6th August.
Appointment(s) will be made on Wednesday 8th August.
A very controvesial speaker was heard in the Union Hall last Tuesday, Michael Lapsley, a New Zealand priest who has lived in South Africa for the last 6 years and believes that armed struggle is the only solution to the problems faced by the Blacks of South Africa.
Michael Lapsely went to South Africa in
According to Lapsley New Zealander have trouble making up their minds about South Africa because they hear contradictory opinions. We hear plenty from the South African government through their consulate which New Zealand continues to harbour. Seldom do we hear the voice of the black people in New Zealand.
When Lapsley went to South Africa he believed the most important thing about himself was that he was a human being. In South Africa he was treated not as a human being but as a white man. The colour of his skin determined what university he went to, what suburb he lived in, what movie theatre he went to etc.
When he arrived in South Africa he believed there could be a peaceful solution to the injustice of apartheid. After the bloody suppresion of the Soweto uprising in
Lapsley told us how he had to sit with both Black and White mothers as they were told that shock treatment had been given to their children — to their genitals and ears as a means of torture.
The Soweto uprisings dramatically changed the conciousness of the Blacks in South Africa. The liberation movement has a long history of peaceful opposition to apartheid through leaflets, petitions, strikes, etc. Many abandoned this method atter the Sharpville massacre in
Lapsley said that South Africa belongs to all that live in it, Black and White. The whites in South Africa that realise that their freedom is tied up with the Blacks freedom are seen as brothers by the Black people.
Lapsley holds that there are two ways to destroy apartheid; one is the armed struggle, the other is the economic boycott of South Africa. People say that they are racist because they don't like Black people, but the real reason Blacks are oppressed is so they can be used as cheap labour.
Most of the economic activity in South Africa is undertaken by foreign companie. The real beneficiaries of apartheid are in Britain, United States, Western Europe, Japan, Australia and even New Zealand. Two New Zealand firms, South British Insurance and New Zealand Insurance, operate in South Africa, despite continued opposition from the New Zealand anti-apartheid movement. The Black liberation movement called for an economic boycott saying that although it would hurt them, it would underpin the whole foundation of apartheid. The west has claimed thay they couldn't support armed struggle on moral grounds, but their refusal to support the economic boycott exposes their very real support for apartheid.
The economic basis of apartheid is obobvious when one looks at the governments "homelands" policy. The government has removed thousands of Blacks to reservations (homelands) on barren waste lands. The homelands are for the people who are of no use to the South African economy -mothers, children, the elderly, and inform. The young, healthy (well, healthy enough to work) Blacks live in cramped single sex hostels in the towns. When they grow old, or become sick they are returned to one of the homelands to die.
Lapsley then turned his attention to New Zealand saying that it was interesting to note signs of fascism in New Zealand - the eviction of the Bastion Point protestors, the accusation of treason against
Lapsely claimed that there is
Lapsley claimed that you can
Lapsley quoted Thomas Burke
After his address the inevitable
The liberation movement in South
The forum was organised by the
Who is responsible for discipline in our society. Many people might say the judicial system. Surely however the family is society's most important disciplinary institution. Discipline is an important part of the development of a person's character from childhood to maturity. Society appears to be intent on eroding the position of the family. Two airy-fairy minded psychologists from Hamilton are trying to get the law changed. They want the law exempting parents and teachers from assault charges if they hit children to be repealed. The law restricts such punishment to 'reasonable force.'
The two Psychologists say that parents and teachers can't hit each other but they can hit a child who can't defend him/herself. They say the rule of law allowing such punishment is outdated and teaches the child that "might is right'. No doubt there is a reasonable case for both sides. It appears to me however that physical punishment of a reasonable and moderate nature is the most productive form of punishment. It teaches a child that it has done wrong and does not involve drawn out punishments such as being shut in a room which may have for worse mental ramifications than being smacked.
The pschologists say that physical punishment leads to wife and child beatings and other violent offending. Surely such offences only result from the failures of society, and children and wives are the victims of frustrated violent outbursts.
Physical punishment should be part of a planned, programme of character development. It should not be indiscriminate but it should not be done away with. Physical punishment should be seriously considered for mature offenders especially violent offender. The incredible savagery associated with assaults, rapes and like crimes, warrants an appropriately savage punishment.
I do not advocate legalised thuggery by the police and their associates. Nor do I advocate random use of physical punishment with children. However it has it's place in any disciplinary system. It should be associated with affection and responsibility in the family anyway.
The psychologists say that such punishment is heavily used by families in New Zealand and this is probably true. If the family went back to responsibly bringing up perhaps there would be no need for any suggestion of physical punishment from the courts.
If this law is repealed we may well live to regret it with Courts over-worked with violent and undisciplined criminals in the future nor do we want a society full of walking zombies hammered into the groove of unquestioning obedience. What we want surely is a society where people have a realistic sense of civic duty where we can bring up our children in a normal responsible manner.
The Executive were understandably distressed about these allegations. Not only did they damage the reputations of a number of executive members, who by no stretch of the immagination could be accurately accused of having "left-wing" leanings (Peter Edwards - former Treasurer of VUWSA and Phil Sowman - Sports Officer - in particular), but the allegations reflected very poorly on the Association on the whole. By distributing the leaflets to all the media, and also through Michael Carr-Gregg speaking on Radio Windy espousing similar sentiments, some members of the Executive felt that the leaflets had brought the Association in to public disrepute.
In an attempt to undo some of the damage that the leaflets might have done to VUWSA's public image, particularly with those bodies that we regularly make representations to, such as the University and various educational groups, the Executive proposed making a press statement denying many of the claims that had been made.
In the discussion that ensued, Mr Tees several times expressed his view that certain aspects of the leaflets had elements of truth in them. Much discussion followed over whether the leaflets were in fact true, either in substance or in fact. A question which was inevitably, left unresolved, as it depends primarily on individual personal opinions.
Other Executive members however took the view that the mandate they had required them to represent the Association as effectively as possible, and that the allegations prevented, or restricted, them in performing this function. As the Association had not adopted any policy or expressed any views that were consistent with those of the individuals who had created the leaflets, their responsibility towards the Association required them to endevour to rebuff the claims. By the same token, if the Association had resolved that Salient, for example, had conducted a smear campaign against the President, they would likewise be required to publically support that view.
By distributing the leaflets far wider, than around the campus, the Executive felt they were placed in a different position from the one they would be in had it been a purely internal matter. This did not of course alter the rights of those who distributed the leaflets to act in that manner, if they believed the claims to be true, but many on the Executive felt that the wide distribution put them in a difficult position.
After much discussion, much of it in closed committee, the motion calling for the press statement denying the allegations in the leaflets to be published was finally put and carrsed without a dissenting voice. The statement was drafted, similarly given a seal of approval from the Executive, and duly printed in Salient. At that stage, it seemed the whole matter had been sorted out and would end then and there. In view of all the rumours that were circulating at the time about votes of no confidence in other members of the Executive as a result of the SGM, this may have seemed to be an optimistic hope. As it happened, the issue did resurface, but not for the reasons that most expected.
In the aftermath of the SGM Salient interviewed Andrew Tees about VUWSA in general, the direction it should be taking and where it seemed to be going. In the course of this interview the shit really hit the fan. Among a variety of other comments, Mr Tees commented that he thought there was some truth in the allegations contained in the leaflets. In the face of it quite a reasonable comment, but it had the effect of a fox in a chicken coop.
The first problem that arose was the contrast between this statement and the one issued in Salient two weeks previously, which refuted the allegations in the leaflets. The official statement was carried under Tees' name, as official spokesperson for the Association, and likewise the interview stated that it was with Andrew Tees, President of VUWSA. In the (long) meeting which discussed the issues that sprang from these contradictory statements, two important principles emerged for debate, and, like most of this business, was left unresolved. The first issue was what power the Executive has over the President, the second was the responsibilities of the President (and the Executive members in general) to the Association.
The control that the Executive can exercise over the President is one of quite fundamental importance in the VUWSA Constitution. The structure of the political officers in the Association is, without exception, based on the principle of accountability. The SRC reps are accountable to the SRC, the Executive members accountable, initially to the SRC but ultimately to an SGM, and each individual memeber of the Executive accountable to the Executive as a whole.
The underlying implication of the system is that if a decision is made by, for example, the Executive, the members of the Executive art-obliged to act that view out. In this particular occasion, Mr Tees even voted for the motion, and it becomes even more difficult to justify a backtracking.
The President argued that this whole affair was no concern of the Executive. He had been interviewed in a personal capacity and had expressed his personal views. He went on to claim that there was no way the Executive could make him alter his personal opinion. He said that he felt he would be acting irresponsibly to the students if he did not make his reservations clear. Other members of the Executive however felt that by publically criticising the Association's policy, the President was not ful-failing in his responsibility as a representative of the Association.
This debate was clouded by a great many other related matters, which in retrospect seem relatively minor. One question that occupied a great deal of time was that of whether or not the President is entitled to publically express a personal opinion that runs contrary to the Association policy. This was argued on the basis that the views that Andrew Tees expresses are given a credence beyond those of any "ordinary" student, by virtue of the office that he holds in the Student Association, and that he should take notice of this when making such public statements. Mr Tees disagreed, stating that he felt he had the right to publically express his personal opinion, because he was an individual.
This debate seemed to grow and grow, even to the extent of requesting a legal opinion from the Association's lawyers. The legal opinion, in the nature of such documents, offered no definitive answer, and the matter is still quietly bubbling away in some people's minds. The point is, though, that such a matter is not one that can be effectively provided for through the use of sanction or constitutional provisions, it depends on the particular person who holds office and his/her attitudes. An elected representative who believes that his/her primary function is to represent student opinion will not issue statments that run contrary to Association policy. A representative who believes that a representation position is granted him/her so that s/he can express personal views will not All that the exercise seemed to show is that it is not possible, in practical terms, to compel an officer to consistently represent the views of the body s/he is an officer of.
What the whole business taught me was that I wanted my representative to at all times represent the Association, and have resolved to vote accordingly at elections. I think a question that should be asked of all candidates seeking office in the Association is: "Should the Association's policy come into conflict with your own beliefs, will you consistently and unequivocally, in public, support the Association's policy?" I would require the answer "Yes" before giving any candidate my support. And I recommend that you all consider this is a reasonable request of officers.
Returning to the history of the troubles, we next come to the motion of censure the Executive passed in the President for his statements in the Salient interview. Following a claim by Alan Philips that this motion was ultra vires (outside the powers of the Executive) a legal opinion was sought.
Although at the time it seemed a sensible idea, the lawyer's reply indicated that it was not so. It now seems inevitable that a legal opinion could not have solved the issue, as the dispute was in essence political. Not political in the sense of left against the right, but political in the sense that the Exe-
As the President was not prepared to us-sue any such statement, the lawyers opinion was useless, and the matter remained unresolved. By convention, Presidents have in the past been scrupulous to follow the Association's policy and the Executive's directives, regardless of their personal opinions. Mr Tees is not prepared to do this. Following the SGM, the members of the Association clearly indicated that they wanted him to remain President, they are obviously satisfied with this attitude and there is nothing the Executive can do about it. Those of us who hold differing opinions of a President's obligations can only hope that Mr Tees' successor is one who strives to represent the views of the Association rather than using the office as a platform for expressing his/her personal views....
In the debate on the censure motion Mr Tees made a particularly serious allegation. He said that the motion was pissed in "bad faith and with improper motives." Unfortunately he did not follow up this claim, as I believe he should have. If the Executive are acting in bad faith and with improper motive" they have no right to remain the Executive and should be dismissed. That Mr Tees did not pursue these serious allegations was deplorable. Either he believed they were true, in which he must have felt them incompetent to do their job. Or he did not believe the charge true in which case he should never have made it. By making the charge and not following it through, he must have done the Association a disservice.
The question that must be asked is why this whole business took up considerable portions of the Executive's time for a full two months. There can be no definitive answer of course, but in part, I think, some of the blame must lie at Andrew Tees' feet. Throughout the whole debate he seemed reluctant to commit himself to one view or or the other. During the debates, he spent much of his time doodling or reading the newspaper, giving no indication of any interest in the proceedings.
In the last two months, many of Mr Tees' attitudes to the Presidency have gradually become clear. However at no stage has he ever said: "'I believe the President's responsibilities to be................" When asked straight questions, he refused to answer, when asked to comment he often refused to Comment, Had he stated clearly at the beginning what his attitude was, it would not have lessened the magnitude of this dispute, however it would have got the whole matter over and done with, rather than dragging on for two full months. He gave the impression of being either a man who had not made up his mind, or who was not prepared to state clearly what his opinions were.
But the really vital question that has not yet been resolved, and the one that may very well pop up again in the remainder of the year, is the one I raised at the beginning of the article. How should the disagreement within the Executive have been resolved? Right throughout this debate a minority of one (sometimes two) refused to take cognisance of the decision of a majority Until Executive members resolve what they are going to do when they are asked to act against their personal beliefs, the VUWSA Executive is going to continue to stumble along, interspersed with tortuous arguments, that hinder them in their task of administering the Association.
This article arose from my discussions with different women in the Womens Action Group as a result of protest about the "Women Only" criteria of the group and some of its events.
This is an attempt to give some of the reasons why I and some other women believe there should be women only groups. There is sometimes disagreement over the reasons different women support women only groups but no disagreement over the need to have women only groups. The emphasis is on what women only groups achieve rather than the exclusion of men.
The two words 'women only' appearing at the bottom of a leaflet or a notice in Salient have a greater effect in provoking discussion than any of the issues that may be under discussion like 'women in the workforce' or 'women's sexuality'. For some reason the words 'women only' arouse more indignation from people in general and men in particular than anything else the Womens Action Group is doing or trying to do.
Some of the comments have been 'but that's sexist not letting men go", 'the world's 50/50 isn't it', 'that unfair, what if men want to go'. The emphasis always on the rights of men, to do what they want, when they want to. Few people ask why do you you have women only, or what our reasons for excluding men are. The exclusion of men men from women's groups is not a reasonless anti-male stand. Men are excluded because women believe there are valid reasons for having women only groups and events.
We live in a society that is a patriarchy, that is a male dominated society, where men by virtue of their sex recieve relative advantages and priviledges. These relative advantages and priviledges are maintained through the discrimination and disadvantaging of women. While it is true that some men do not consciously choose to oppress women, they do benefit from their relatively advantaged position at the cost of women's disadvantaged position in society.
Both men and women are conditioned into accepting this status quo. If change is to be effected we must first throw off the conditioning. To throw off the conditioning many women believe that it is necessary to question all aspects of the existing status quo and our relationship towards it. This questioning can take place at many levels, some that will obviously include men but others that do not. Women's sexuality, their relationship to their sexuality, their relationshp to other women and themselves are all levels at which I believe women must have the freedom of choice as to whether men are included or not.
In addition to this freedom from men if it is desired, women only groups give women the opportunity to develop non-patriarchal, structures, that is, structures that do not rely on the domination of men or accept such domination. In a women only group women do not have to play the patrairchal game, they may do so still, but they are not constrained by men to do so. This is regardless of the expressed sympathies of men.
Women only groups can help, and allow women to develop and become confident as individuals with individual skills in an atmosphere of freedom that is denied them in our present society.
It is important for women to be self defined rather than defined in terms laid down by a male dominated society. To do this women only groups are crucial. For it is only by ourselves and as we see ourselves in other women that we can hope to achieve a full awareness of our own potential as women.
The reasons and opinions of three other women in the Womens Action Group follow.
There are several basic reasons in my opinion for having women only meetings and activities. The first of these is that discussion revolves essentially around issues that affect women only and of which men have a very limited appreciation of, if any.
Secondly if men attended women's discussion groups and meetings their never ending desire to be heard and dominate would be excercised and the women's p spective would be diluted if not lost sig of altogether.
Thirdly, many women feel inhibited talking about issues that affect them as women in front of men, and if they are to discuss and share their ideas, they ms have the opportunity to do so in the pr sence of women who are sympathetic to greater or lesser degree with their feelin.
It would at first appear to many peo that the restriction of men to some won organisation meetings and discussions o campus is somewhat against the spirit o equality between the sexes, which wh women's liberation is fighting for. But one considers the oppression of women our society it can be justified, in my op ion.
Women are conditioned to be submi to men; the word 'submissive' when ap ied to the conditioning of women enta a number of restrictions — 'women are natural as leaders' — 'women should no be of an agressive, organising nature' — 'women should consider themselves fit fulfil their role of obedient wife, mothe and household worker before anything else".
These stereotype roles are what the men's liberation movement is fighting, breakdown. To do this women must fi be able to communicate freely and a e with other people about their own pers al confrontations with sexism in our so for from my experience, the majority o women have not got the confidence (fr social conditioning) to do this freely if are present. (Have you ever been to sh forums etc and actually noticed that by far more guys get up and speak to the r ing, ask questions etc?)
It is imperative that women only me ings continue to do the essential jobs o building up confidence to those women are sick of being treated as second class izens; of being chattels in a patriarchal iety; of not being able to fulfil their po ential as people.
Men have never been excluded from fight to attain equality for women — bl if you are a sympathiser to the women'. movement this important aspect must n be overlooked.
To finish up — a quote from the wor movement which applies to all people w in some way are oppressed — whether it because of your sex, colour, religion—
following article appeared in Issue 2 Pink Triangle, magazine of the NaGay Rights Coalition.
Fairly soon after the splits and factions formed there began to evolve organisational umbrella groups such as the National Gay Task Force in New York-and the National Gay Rights Coalition in New Zealand. These organisations evolved to provide co-ordinated action from many different groups, so that there was little wasted time and energy put into duplicating effort. Now we also have the International Gay Association which co-ordinates actions at an international level.
What has been gained in ten years? In New Zealand it seems at times that there has been very little change. If we look at law repeal, then yes, this is so. However, we can take a much wider perspective than that. In terms of social inter-relationships with the rest of society it is certainly much easier to 'come out' now than it used to be. Also homosexualtiy is talked about much more than it used to be. People are far more aware of homosexuality and aware that stereotypes are not necessarily true. We have magazines like The Listener taking us seriously — even the Tablet takes us more seriously than it used to do.
Public opinion polls taken during last year's election campaign have given us tremendous support and while very few people will come out in our support at least attitudes are slowly changing. It will probably take a few more generations yet before we can say that Gay Liberation groups are unnecessary so there is still a lot to be done.
We cannot, however, take for granted that it is going to get easier to be openly gay. As has been seen in the United States gay rights have actually lost ground in certain areas. This has been when laws or by-laws have been changed to suit the Anita Bryant type of moralist.
While change in the law against male homosexuality may be important for gay men, in New Zealand, it is by no means the only issue affecting all gay people. Besides any law that is changed can be re-changed by pressure put onto Parliament. One example we can see is the law ending capital punishment could be re-introduced in Britain. An example closer to home is that of the abortion issue.
A much surer method of affecting social change, albeit slower and perhaps less exciting is through public education. Public education of course begins with one's own family. It was noticeable that in the Papanui survey those people who actually knew there was a gay person in their family, were far more likely to be in favour of law repeal and extension of the Human Rights Commission Act than those who were either uncertain or else positive, that there were no gays in the family.
It follows from this that coming out is not just a personal step towards one's own freedom, important though this is, but is also a very definite political thoight the freedom of all gay people. One only has to read articles in papers like the Truth or The Tablet to realize that these people consider homosexuals to be an outside threat to their families, and themselves. They do not yet realize that we come from their families, that we are the cuckoos in the heterosexual, nuclear-family nest!
Remember that "We Are Everywhere". This fact is slowly filtering through into the minds of the populace but it has only been done by the major
Student Tour to the People's Republic of China.
This year's student tour to China (for up to 20 students) departs Sunday 12 August and returns to Auckland on Monday 03 September.
The all inclusive tour includes a 3 day stopover package in Hong Kong and 17 days in China, visiting the following cities, Guangzhou, Beijing, Changsha, Shanghai, Suzhou and Juilin.
The inclusive tour cost is NZ$2000 (Subject to amendment due to devaluation of the N.Z. dollar).
Applicants immediately contact:-
The Minister of Foreign Affairs is conducting a seminar on wednesday 18 July. 1.00 — 2.00pm in Cotton 114. Bruce Brown will talk to interested students of nay dicip.
Dr Feelgood play Wellington
What promises to be the most exciting concert to hit Wellington so far this year takes place tommorrow night (Tuesday 17th) when British rhythm 'n' blues raver Dr Feelgood struts the stage of the State Opera House.
Formed in
Dr Feelgood's musical energy and Skid Row stage appearance not to mention their ferocious impact, has been described as being vital importance to the emergence of punk/new wave which, considering their, first album was released in
The band's original line-up was Lee Brilleaux on lead vocals and harp, Wilko Johnson on guitar, John B Sparks on bass and Figure Martin on drums, but after the fourth album, "Sneakin Suspicion", axeman Wilko left under less than amicable circumstances and formed his own band. The Solid Senders.
The remaining Feelgoods recruited John Mayo to take over guitar duties and rushed out "Be Seeing You", a lack lustre album which lead many to believe the magic had left with Wilko, but they returned to form with the release late last year of "Private Practice."
The band's Wellington concert is part of a whirlwind week-long tour of Australia and New Zealand. To miss them tomorrow night would be to miss probably the most energetic concert since Graham Parker and the Rumour. The sweat will be pouring by the time these boys leave the stage and the strength of the Opera House roof will be well and truly tested.
The concert, which starts at 8.30 pm will be opened by Wellington's own Medusa, fresh from the recording studios where they have been laying down tracks which will hopefully end up on a debut album. As one of the more promising up-and-coming bands on the New Zealand rock scene they are well worth getting there early to check out.
Dr Feelgood members John Mayo (Left) and Let Brilleaux (right). The Feelgoods play their one Wellington concert at the State Opera House tomorrow night.
Write a letter to Merv Wellington asking him to explain something (like how come he's cut $3 million off the universities when they are already skinned back to the bone; introduced a new bursary system that won't work and is a lot worse than the last one; refused to appear on campus, etc.) or telling him about education problems that you are facing because of leak of adequate finance. Make it a letter he has to reply to.
Postage to Ministers of the Crown is Free
Make sure you send us a copy of your letter or tell us you've written it.
Remember : all those people in Auckland and Dunedin can't be wrong!
We still need help on the campaign.
Speaking to tutorials. A great way to meet people. We'll fully brief you first, and send you with someone else who has done it before. This is probably the most important of the campaign right now. Even if it's only your own tutorial you want to speak to, come and
Campaign Room: Middle Floor, Union Building (Just Along from the Lounge)
What's up with the Library? Salient sent Lindy Cassidy to interview the Head Librarian, John Sage, to find out. Unfortunately, the first part of the interview has proved untranscribable. Even from what is left, though, it is clear that the prospects facing the university's central resource asset give no cause for complacency..........
Mr Sage: The unresolved question as far as as Victoria is concerned is whether we are doing enough to educate the public. I do not think it is any use getting up on soap boxes about the cuts for this year, Those decisions have been made and we have simply go to live with them, but educating the public about the consequences to the university of continued reductions is very important.
Salient: The next quinquennium is going to be fairly decisive for Victoria. If these cuts continue, particularly considering the already lean situation that Victoria is in, what do you think will be the future of the University and the Library?
The Library should be able to support the University's teaching and research programme. However, the University will become quite a different sort of place — more functional. Whether the cuts will be sustained by reducing student numbers or by reducing areas in which the University teaches, it is hard to say, but either of these will, of course, directly affect the Library and it will respond.
Could you elaborate in some detail about the cuts to services which might eventuate if in the next quinquennium there were further cuts, particularly to students' ability to obtain books or seating places?
No, I think we are talking about services and books at the moment. The quinquennium grants don't directly affect accommodation. Victoria has, of course, serious accommodation problems, but these are dealt with slightly differently, by a different programme - block grants. There are a great many options as far as services and books are concerned. It is difficult to say that this option or that option will definitely be adopted, but some of these options might be considered. For instance, the supply of new books will obviously be affected. There also might not be enough books for students in some courses. The latest publications which keep people up to date in a subject on which the students are embarking upon research might have to be cut. Also some subscriptions might have to be cancelled, which will affect particularly advanced students and staffs research.
This will mean that the Library will change to be more like a small college library. Now that's on the books side. The effect of a reduced grant on the research side is fairly obvious. The question of how long we stayed open would be under discussion - whether we could continue to maintain the various service points in the Library; we operate, for instance, 3 closed reserves. Can we continue to maintain the inter-loan service which is growing all the time. We had something like 10-12,000 interloan transactions last year. It's a very expensive service.
The maintenance of an adequate catelogue record is very important. We try and offer a subject way into the content of each course, that is "course titles"; that is just the standard practice but it is cery costly. However, I emphasize that these are just possible alternatives, rather than saying that this is going to happen.
Do you think that there is any specific way tha University could be fighting back against the ge merit cuts to funding?
I'd like to see very formal statements as to
What do you think of VUWSA's call for a Nativ day of strike action on July 26th?
I don't know about strike action but I must
Any further comments?
I think there is a lot of support around the
An education forum was held in the Union Hall at lunchtime on Tuesday July 10th. Owing to the unavailability of the intended speaker (the Vice-Chancellor had only returned from the States the day before and was attending a meeting of the Vice-Chancellors and Dean's Committee), we were treated to stirring tirades from our very own President Andrew Tees, and the Fightback Campaign Organiser, Simon Wilson.
Andrew Tees spoke first, warning the meeting of the dangers of passive acceptance of the education cuts. "I see a double threat" he said, "The spectre of restricted finances to the university system, and the ramifications of the new Tertiary Study Grant."
He went on to speak of the tightening of criteria for fees bursaries (those BA students re-sitting courses will have to pay the full fees for their 'extra' courses), and the clampdown on supplementary A and B bursary entitlement. There is to be a 5 year restriction on the new TSG, and this will clearly disadvantage those students wishing to take double degrees, or to undertake postgraduate study.
"The university will eventually be forced to raise it's fees" he predicted, and pointed out that those students presently on the abated bursary who were smugly anticipating a rise in income (from $19 to $23) would find that fees increases would result in a real income drop.
Tees finished on the note that "education is vital to everyone in the Community, and must be treated with the respect it deserves", and urged all staff and students to support the activities planned for July 26th.
Simon Wilson then took the stand and informed the meeting of campaign progress to date both in Wellington and around the country. "Our campaign is not simply a university campaign" he said, emphasizing the vital need to arouse public awareness and support for the Education Fightback.
We were reminded of the media coverage which accompanied the student protest in Auckland when 58 students were arrested, and that given to a similar protest in Otago, when 400 students staged a sit-in in the central City. This was contrasted with the lack of coverage given to the VUWSA march on Parliment steps last Wednesday, "It's a sad indication of what makes news in this country" he contested, the
Simon then moved on to inform us of the
Simon then outlined the plans for July 26th (see elsewhere in the supplement) and finished
The main thing to emerge from this forum You! Become involved education fightback Now!
You might think the Italians would want to keep their heads down, to avoid any whirling axes. But that's not a very Italian way of doing things.
The situation is at least refreshingly clear. We are a staff of three teaching a major in Italian and a 6-credit course in Spanish. If the departmental grant is further reduced (the annual grant to Italian is now less than $400, that is less than $5 per student per year), if tutorial assistance is further cut, and if Lawrence Simmon's junior lectureship is frozen next year, Italian will cease to be a majoring subject and Spanish will possibly disappear altogether. (Particularly from talking with teachers in schools, I am convinced Spanish is, with Maori, potentially the biggest growth area of any language).
Students might vote with their feet that Italian and Spanish should close (so far they have voted the opposite); or the university community, after open and democratic debate of its philosophy and priorities, might take that decision. We shall see. But the intervention of the Minister of Education, directly naming Romance Languages as an area for "rationalisation", would be seen in other countries in which I have taught not simply as another inexperienced minister shooting off his mouth, but as an outrageous violation of academic freedom.
I admire the energy and vision of the Education Fight — Back Committee in organising a day of protest coupled with constructive, critical debate about the university in relation to the whole pattern of New Zealand education. Students and staff in Italian have resolved to meet with our collegues in the Department, to invite collaboration in the activities of July 26th. Coincidentally, we shall have in the Italian section, for the week of Education Fight — Back a on universities in Italy in the
I am quite aware that it is the New Zealand
We've been saying a lot of things about what's
Because it's an inner city school there's a floating
.e buy coloured chalk, cellotape, paper,aste .... soap, towels, cleaning materials,u -tack, cooking materials, you name it.That's if we want to have a programme that'sive and relevant to the children's ages andeeds
.There's no gym and no money to repair out-door equipment when it breaks, it just getscotched and we do without
Even from the point of view of physical fitness: it would be fabulous if we had a gym. But there's no gym and no money to repair outdoor equipment when it breaks. So it just gets scotched and we do without.
Then there's the medical area. Some children have a pretty rough time at home, and of course there's never enough money to provide adequate cotton wool, plasters. . . that's another area where teachers dip into their own pockets. You can't watch a child bleeding and not have something to put on it.
In this school we deal with quite a bit of scabies, lice herpes, that sort of thing. Yet there is no hot water in the toilets. For staff or children.
Also you might help some children with their lunches. If they're not getting fruit or something. You do it unobtrusively, because it's not charity. But then teachers needn't do that, need they?
Wouldn't you say that there is a kind of in-built responsibility to do that? Teachers are more than teachers, aren't they?
I think this is becoming more and more obvious. Teachers have to be more. I think they get more job satisfaction out of it.
Do they get the recognition for it?
No. Teachers are very looked down on in the community. I don't think they have the standing the had, say, 40 years ago. I don't know why.
In rich suburbs, the parents get together and have fairs etc. We have the will, but. . . . Anyway, why should education be run on charity?
What about support from the Education Department?
They just haven't got the money. For example, I've got a record player which I should really use. But it was broken, it got old, and I just don't have the money to have it repaired. So we just don't use it.
And it won't be repaired until you can find the money yourself?
Or until a grant falls into my lap. The School Committee hands out as must as it can. They're very well aware of all these things.
This is the money the School Committee gets from the Board?
Yes, In rich suburbs, the parents get together and have fairs etc. We have the will here, but .... anyway, why should education be run on charity?
What about curriculum development?
Science units don't come through as quickly as they did. Basic equipment. . . We still get our newsletter. But you know the booklet "Education". 10 years ago there was one for every staff member. It's very valuable, very useful. Now we're lucky if there's one for every department.
What about New Zealand books, for use in the classroom?
The Department has done some work. There's an awareness that we should have such books, but there's never enough money.
Are you saying that from an ideal point of view, or are you saying.....
No. There is not enough money put aside for books.
Are you discovering new areas where the school is having to cut back on activities?
Yes. We used to regularly hire buses, to do visits. Now we really have to think about that. It's a luxury. And it's very hard to get phys-ed equipment: balls etc.
It's the Year of the Child. I think children are the nation's resource, and I think they are being sold down the drain.
In other words it's the things that might be seen on paper as peripheral, but are in fact quite essential?
Absolutely. That's if you believe that in a school with lots of problems, with language problems — and language is learnt developmentally — you can't just sit there and lecture, you've got to be out and actually doing. Language is learnt in operation, not by dummy runs. That's a quote; I think it's excellent.
All these things are necessary. They're not just fancy bits of some teacher's programme. They are absolutely necessary for the children if they are going to learn. It's not just a question of "teaching". The children learn, by doing.
And education, in terms of official spending, isn't keeping up with that?
Goodness no. How can it? The costs are rising so much. A little packet of paste we use cast 35c about two years ago (out of the teacher's pocket, but that we nothing once a week), now it's over a dollar. Books are the same.
How do you see the future?
There will be more problems — there are more problems, learning problems — just because there aren't the facilities to set out a good learning programme for children. It's the Year of the Child. I think children are the nation's resource, and I think they are being sold down the drain.
These days, the schools are really copping it. Secondary teachers are fed up and leaving the service (1000 by the end of the year). Primary teachers have decided they may engage in unprecedented stopwork meetings if negotiations with the Government don't turn up something decent. Kindergarten teachers also threatened unprecedented action earlier this year.
Hear representatives of all these sectors and the Teachers College explain the issues.
Forum: Wednesday, 12 Noon, Union Hall.
To all Students!—
The letter from the Minister of Education dated
As President, I went to the Minister's office and spoke to Paul Plummer, the Minister's Private Secretary. He told me that I could not speak to the Minister, nor would the Minister agree to speak to the students s assembled on the steps of Parliament.
While speaking to Paul Plummer, I observed Mr Wellington come out of a door across the other side of the Secretary's office. At this stage, I would like to make it clear that the only untoward action I took in the office was to raise my voice in calling to Mr Wellington by name in order to speak to him.
During my brief conversation with the Minister, and his Private Secretary I issued an invitation for the Minister to speak to the students outside and also to come to a student meeting at Victoria to explain the rationale behind the latest bursary announcement.
I would apologise to Mr Wellington for any undue inconvenience caused to him by my visit. However it is important for everybody to realize that it is not the manner in which a student President seeks to approach the Minister in this instance which is important, but why. As President I have a duty to represent students in this matter and make strenuous efforts to obtain an explanation for students about the recent bursary announcements. To this end two letters have been written to the Minister and one interview sought (successfully).
For two years working parties of all the concerned groups including the Education Department, Students's Associations, and others have met to discuss financial assistance to students. Out of the blue, the Government has introduced a substantially different form of bursary assistance which was never discussed by this review for Financial Assistance for Post-Compulsory Study. There was no prior consultation with students or tertiary institutions over the new system in advance of its announcement.
Now the Minister seems reluctant to even explain his decision in public to student leaders at Victoria.
Hopefully communication will improve in the future. As students make renewed approaches to the Government about this very vital issue, which concerns not only the very future of marry students at this university, but that of the University itself in the years to come.
The following academic staff members have donated a total of S232 to the campaign: R. Ferrier, M. Clark, M. Crozier, M. McKinnon, D. Carnegie, J. Holmes, G. Orr, K. Wodzicki, A. Sullivan, D. and K. Walls, B. Mo- I rris, H. Tippett, J. Dale. M. Nielson, D. McKenzie, M. Cresswell, V. Ullrich, D. Groves, J. McCreary, M. Pearson.
We are extremely grateful for your support.
Now, what about the other 380 of you?
It is not enough that people don't like what is happening. They must be seen to not like it. And they must be seen to be doing something about it. That is why we are running this campaign.
The academic staff are in the privileged position (relative to students) of earning money. That is why we are asking you for money. There are many reasons why students can do things that staff think they cannot. But if you support our attempts to fight back against education cuts, we would like - in fact, we need - you to put your money where your mouth is. As they say.
It started this week without Andrew
i or
The last motion condemned the
Next, Geoff Adams, Education Officer,
National Affairs Officer T. Rochford reported that next week was Economic Crisis Week, and that there would be a forum on Thursday 19 July, 12-2. See elsewhere in Salient for more details.
Simon-Education Fight back-Wilson outlined planned activities for the campaign: July 26, 11 am: Boycott of lectures and a rally in the quad, then the march to Parliament. $700 has been raised so far, 550 people have signed the petition, 495 buttons have been sold. People are still needed to speak in tutorials and in schools. On Sunday, 15 July, there will be a jazz concert in the Union Hall, featuring Colin Hemmingson. Please, we need all the help we can get for this campaign.
Brian Pike Commerce Faculty rep reported that the faculty restrictions would continue next year, which really came as no surprise.
Our erstwhile President then told us that the Union had been asked by the University to make more cuts. Formerly, the University and the Students Association shared the running cost of the Union 50% each. But now, with increased costs, the Union has to find $15,000 - the difference between the $168, 736 budgetted figure for
Lo, and behold! We are now up to the agenda. Again the proverbial fight to fill vacant positions. For now, we have no treasurer. However, Helen Aikman was elected for a two year term onto Council and the vacancy on the Commerce Faculty was filled by Brian McCulloch, a stage 2 Accountancy student who's "done all the faculty courses." Ah, but has he passed them.
Motion 6, (moved; Worth/Tees) established an SRC Officers Committee, with the SRC Coordinator as Chairperson, meeting at least three times a term and with the provision that failure to attend three consecutive meetings by any officer results in that officer forfeiting his/her position.
Much time had been wasted discussing the ambiguity of the motion as originally worded, and finally, "consecutive" was added in an effort to clarify this ambiguity.
Motion 7, proposing the establishment of two SRC reps committees was tabled. Not quite sure why.
Motion 8 was passed, supporting closer ties between VUWSA and the Wellington Trades Council, seeking ways in which VUWSA could pursue policies of mutual interest and benefit to both organisation, including making approaches for VUWSA to obtain observer status on the Council.
A procedural motion changed the order of the agenda and the meeting moved on to consider Education Fight back. Moved: Wilson/Adams (G) That this Association deplores the introduction of the Tertiary Study Grants system, which is both inadequate for student needs and rife with administrative problems; and protests the use of the Review of Financial Assistance for Post Compulsory Study as a diversionary tactic designed to keep students quiet about bursaries; and that telegrams be sent to the Prime Minister and the minister of Education informing them of this.
The "TSG", went the argument, "was something that emerged out of nothing, totally unlike anything that was ever discussed....." "something dreamed up and implemented without anybody knowing how it will work....." Administrative difficulties were such that if 2600 students at Massey University applied for the $17 hardship, it would take two and a half weeks full time interviewing; then all their applications would still have to be processed, and it would still have to be decided how much to give them.
Needless to say this motion was passed, as was Motion 1 moved Wilson/Adams (G) That this Association deplores the 10% cut in real terms in the Education Vote and the Minister's apparent unwillingness to make public the details of Government policy on how this cut is to be implemented and that telegrams be sent to the Prime Minister and the Minister of Education informing them of this.
Motion 12, Moved Morris/ that VUWSA sees the threat of the PSA De-recognition Bill as a savage attack on the freedom of association managed to survive accusations of irrelevancy and outdatedness and was eventually passed.
Support fo the University Creche was shown in the form of a donation of $50 to the Creche Parents Association to help cover the difference between their recent grant allocation and the amount asked for. The motion was unanimous in its support.
John Penny's motion that SRC reports be published in Salient, rather than be given at SRC was definitely the most controversial of the meeting. The situation became complicated when the Chairperson accepted an ammendment that was contrary to the spirit of the motion. Peter Beach, in his capacity as Salient editor, not in his capacity as a private individual, (although we all realise he is entitled to his private individual capacity also - who of us isn't)?! said that he would be prepared to accept such reports, provided they be handed in to the Salient office by 3 o'clock on Wednesday. The only problem was that the motion as worded, implied that the publication of reports in Salient would replace their being given at SRC, except when the matter was of direct and immediate concern or interest to students. Peter Beach had intended that the publication of reports in Salient would be in addition to their being presented at SRC, since SRC officers were after all elected by and therefore accountable to SRC. This seemed obvious to all. What was not obvious was that the motion and ammendment were in direct contradiction, but when this was finally pointed out, the amendment was withdrawn, and put in the form of a foreshadowed motion.
There were many speakers, against the motion saying all that was necessary to reduce the time taken by (and therefore reduce the related boredom content of) reports was an effective Chairperson, who could limit the speaking time if necessary, and bring speakers to the point if they seemed to be wandering. John Penny eventually withdrew his motion in favour of the foreshadowed motion, which was subsequently passed and on that cheerful note, the meeting ended.
This is a highly personalised account of
This is a humorous account of Malory's great epic 'Morte d' Arthur' written by a group of young English comedians and stars the up and coming John Cleese (recently on the 'Muppet Show'.) This film contains a 'zany' mixing of legends with modern social concerns. One would be a pedant indeed not to have one's ribs tickled by this amusing piece of celluloid.
I would like to agree with the comments expressed in Salient
The Department seems to operate by assuming all ACCY 101 students are studying to be Accountants (conveniently ignoring that the course is a core requirement for a BCA thus necessitating those with other majors to suffer through it.) At the same time, it attempts to motivate students by intimidating them with threatened changes to the pass rate, and by selecting students randomly from the lectures to answer questions and in this way 'motivating' them to become interested and do extra work, on top of an already excessive workload for 6 credits. As anyone with basic maths will know, a 12 credit course into a 6 credit course (with nothing subtracted) doesn't go.
There is a great divergence of lecturing quality. One lecturer seemed to have swallowed the textbook and in his section of the course (one-third) he did not give one decent Lecture. He merely gave a precis of the textbook in point form and quoted page references.
I am not a student who complains out of frustration at failing. I actually managed to pass, and quite well too, but I have no interest whatsoever in studying any further ACCY courses - for my own interest, not to add further to the accounting profession. The Department knocked all enthusiasm and intellectual interest out of me.
Pleased to be out.
This movie outlined the French Trotskyist movement's view of the developments within China from the revolution to Hua's appointment as the Chairman of the Chinese Communist Party. Unfortunately the movie was very badly put together and succeeded only in baffling people with a multitude of Chinese names. The view expressed by the movie is quite simple when put plainly.
The movie was saying that China is not socialist but is a bureaucracy. This is because it followed the Stalinist model; that of a communist party being in the vanguard of the mass movement towards socialism. Putting the party ahead of the masses (leading the masses) gives them the right to dictate the "correct line" without recourse to the actual views of the masses. This leads to a situation where the party becomes a seperate and bureaucratic organisation.
To support this rather simple theoretical model the film tried to show how all the major changes that have happened in China since the Revolution, can be explained in terms of personal power politics. Only if China was a bureaucracy would this be possible other wise some idea of the decisions stemming from below would be needed.
For instance, the film explained the cultural revolution not in terms of a mass movement, but Mao being edged out of power over the organisation that leads to socialism. An organisation firmly lead by the masses will always be right.
The film was demonstrating another explanation for events in China. It claimed that China has a communist party led by the inellectuals and that this is the wrong sort of organisation. A Stalinist organisation.
For the novice - falling frequently it part of the game. There are two types of falls - the anticipated one when you're out of control, and the sudden and unexpected fall.
Relax and become limp - don't fight it, and try to fall sideways. After a fall, take a rest. Avoid collisions at all costs, because all hell is let loose in the tangle. There are golden rules here. First, never stop immediately above a stationary skiier on the slope. Your stop may not be a stop, collision then is inevitable. Stop to the side, or swing below a stationary skiier.
Secondly - keep off the ski trail when you stop for a breather. If you are poised in the middle of a trail, just under the brow of a rise, or just around the corner, you'll cop it every time. Collisions can really hurt and its the stationary skiier who usually takes the injury.
Skiing is a vigorous sport, the unfit and more prone to accident and injury. If you're a fitness buff or play a regular winter sport, you're not -you are crazy not to do some pre-ski fitness work. It's simple. The great advantage is that your progress over the first couple of days is tremendous. You are not held back while unknown muscles are stretched and strengthened.
Keep out of high heeled shoes for a few weeks before you go up the mountain - you want your calf muscles stretched.
Run up and down stairs - don't use the elevators for a good month prior to the trip. Use a bicycle, run occasionally, go for a few hill walks to stretch your leg muscles.
In addition to this - accept the need for specific ski exercises. The Recreation Centre provides you with regular sessions - if you can manage to get along, there's nothing better. If the gym classes are not for you, then compromise by doing your own exercises. Spend ten minutes each day for one month prior to your trip away.
The simplest and most rewarding exercises are:
In addition to these simple exercises you can strengthen up a little more by hopping around on one foot for a while, then do a few press-ups until it hurts.
If you haven't skied yet, don't chicken out because what has been said above. Just read it, and get up that mountain. There's nothing to compare. After you've been up for a few days, and you're adjusted and fit for it - pick a slope steeper than you dare. Ski faster than you think you can. It might hurt a bit, but you'll never forget it.
A confusing and confused movie. Not a glimpse of soup, not so much as a shred of a duck, very little about Peking, it remains quite uncertain who made this film and why. Peking Duck Soup is a long movie that leaves its expectant audience irritated with sore bottoms and the feeling you get when your icecream falls off the cone and into the gutter.
The film was billed as a devastating political statement, an expose of the real Mao tse Werewolf. Accordingly, either the movie fails utterly or the billing is a serious misrepresentation of its intent.
Although we are badly informed at one point that Mao was the dictator responsible for the most oppressive regime of this centtury, and despite consistent attempts by the camera to investigate the insides of his nostrils in order to point out some similarity with the brutal nasal organs of Idi Amin Da-da, the film skilfully avoids, through its entire uncomfortable length, the broaching of evidence. It is in fact a string of claims devoic of premises or a conclusion, devoid of logic, and thus story not an argument.
This is not such a weakness as it sounds; it makes this light-hearted interpretation of recent Chinese political history thoroughly unconvincing but in a sense no less entertaining for that. This is simply because Peking Duck Soup is not a film for the politically inquisitive, its a film for National Lampoon fans with patience and cushions.
If you want to understand the motivaion and mechanics behind the expulsion of the Gang of Four, "Mrs Mao's realisation that she had been "buggered with a barge pole" and was consequently "in shit up to her armpits" may not be quite the sort of investigative documentary you had in mind, but it might be the sort of silly humour
Probably not in fact, but the
One scene shows the traditional line-up of five; Marx, Engels, Stalin, Lenin and
Whatever the films intentions, the sad fact is that it is repetitive, hopelessly dis-organised, bitty and disjointed, difficult to follow, to learn from, and to believe
It is, most obviously, wholly negative, which is hard to take for 2 and a half
The thing about China is that real Peking Duck Soup changes that situation not a whit.
Mondays 6.30 - 7.30 to gat some pract
— Should the Salient Editor be elected by General ballot?
— Do we want a system of referenda?
Meeting to discuss the coming S.G.M. called to resolve these issues. Monday July 16 12.00 Smoking Room.
Also Forum Thursday July 19 Lounge.
With representatives from
To speak on recant disputes and give their views on the education cuts.
All welcome.
There will be a Radioactive meeting to discuss the coming broadcast this Wednesday 18th at 5.00 p.m. in the Smoking Room.
Another WMSA presentation. This is the first of a series of mandarin films that will be screened fortnightly (hopefully weekly too). This film is backed by the famous lyrics "Mei Hue" sung by Liu Chia Chang. English Subtitles. Admission at door. All are welcome.
The group is holding its next social on Sunday 22nd of July at 2.00p.m.
Our group consists of gay people, female and male students and staff so if you are out, or in the process of coming out, and would like to meet other gay people like yourself for a change then why not come along and join us.
The group thanks its previous hosts for their kind hospitality and their excellent afternoon tea.
For information ring.
Sharleen 721 111
Ken 721 167
Trevor 862 449
That is not to say that the Society has relinquished its role as arbiter of the extremes and the voice of reason. It is just that our style has changed.
These days, confronted by the self-righteous excesses of both left and right, the approach is similar to that of Tolstoy, who, when asked if he did see a difference between reactionary repression and revolutionary repression, replied that there was, of course, a difference: "the difference between cat shit and dog shit."
The Society has room for all tastes and abilities. Speeches used to be required to be short, witty and to the point. While such a style still has its place, we now permit (in response to enormous public demand), rhetorical harangues, cha racier assassination, slander and a liberal sprinkling of obscenities. Streaking, however, is not permitted. The rules are flexible. (But at
Topics range from trivia and religion to intellectuals, politics and sex and are given good coverage. Older members however have noticed a lamentable decline in the quality of the latter in more recent years.
Thus we extend a warm welcome to all interested students. Our range of activities is broad. We offer lunchtime amusement in the form of debates in the Union Hall on humourous topics and recently sent our two best debaters on a two and a half month tour of the United States. We debate other universities at an annual championship and at another level offer debates with teams from down-town (similar in formal to inter-secondary school competitions). We also have small-scale debates for those who are still grappling with speaking in public; and clubnights for special events and general socialising.
But above all we welcome the cast of thousands. All debates are open for students to attend, listen and participate. Student audiences ace known and loved for their illiteracy and vulgarity. This year has proved to be no exception.
If you are interested in joining or just curious, please contact:
or come along to any of our advertised events.
Sine qua non for Debating Society membership used to be the obstentatious display of your latest personal copy of the New Statesman. But now the last bastion of elitism has succumbed to the inexorable democratic tide. Nowadays all students at Victoria are not only eligible but actually welcomed to join the society.
Bruce Phillips, it seems was given four
Four actresses working well together,
The roles were, after all, tailor made — which perhaps tells us something about the individual actors: in Frances Edmond and Janet Fisher a certain angularity, harder line compared with Prue Langbeim and Phillipa Campbell's rounder edges.
Alyson Baker directedly a stylised, over real performance: it may be the play would not have worked otherwise. Its shape I felt could have been improved, perhaps at the expense of length, though it is not a long play: we reached the climax of what I suppose could be considered the first act comfortably enough — by the applause I wasn't the only one to think it was the end; but the second part was fraught with contrived climax, taking away from, instead of building to the end.
Late night / lunch time theatre is worth having a look at, some people I know thought it a wank, but somewhere in the list of theatrical maxim there must be one that says theatre is risk.
Fortunately, Skylab didn't hit the Recreation Centre, so no-one has any excuse not to come to ski/mixed/social/musical fitness on
Tuesday 12—1
Thursdays 5.30 — 6.30
But notwithstanding Skylab, there is still our own little hot spot.... the sauna. We've had to limit the hours, and we are sorry but the cuts are here, but come and get hot for a dollar.
Although beginners squash classes are now full (squashed together) until term three, we have had sudden unexplained fall-offs in beginners badminton. Consequently, Tuesday 10—11 and Friday 10—11 are good times to come and learn or relearn old badminton skills.
Check your timetable against ours . . . . is there anywhere you can coincide with one of our classes. Or why not come and use the exercycles. We now have moving pictures to accompany your pedalling. Ask our reception staff to introduce you to our scenic cycle track over the Paekakariki Hill without leaving the building.
For the campus joggers here is the second in our series of beginners jogging routes starting at the Recreation Centre.
The Saint Michael Meander:
"A tour of historic Kelburn, with its varied houses and its footpaths untouched by the corportion streekworks department for almost half a century."
From the Centre, go left around the Cotton Building jog past the English Department and cross to the right hand side of Glasgow Street. At the lop of Glasgow Street turn left into Upland Road and cross to the left had side; proceed to St Michael's Church; tum into St Michael's Crescent; left at the top then veer right into Kelburn Parade. Follow Kelburn Parade back to the English Department and return to the Centre via the Car Park.
I hear no-one knows anything about Winter Tournament — apologies for my slackness in this area. Winter Tournament is from 20 August to 25 August, the second week of the August holidays. This year's Tournament will be held at Otago University.
The Sports competing are as follows:
We hope Victoria will be competing in all these events. Transport has been arranged along two lines. For those of us who are less financial the Itinerary reads like this:
If this sounds too long or too cheap you can fly and it will cost you $73.00 return. For those wishing to fly, we have only a limited number of seats so could you please let me have your money for this as soon as possible.
The Social Programme, which some may be interested in, is as follows:
If you" have any queries about Tournament leave a message at the Studass Office and I will contact you. One final thing — can you make an effort to have all eligibility forms in by the end of the month please.
Can I congratulate you on an article "The C10 in Student Union House" which appea-
There are, however, a number of errors in the
STB's current operations in terms of staff em-
It is interesting to note that since the sale of Exclusive Travel attention to the compromise of NZUSA's policy by its constituents and the interest and action of concerned individuals appears to have moved from opposing travel links to South Africa.
(g) The $2 surcharge per ISIC processed in New Zealand was imposed by the ISTC Steering Committee on 1 November last year not October at you state.
(h) The gross revenue (not including the $2 surcharge) from the sale of ISIC's last financial year was $36475.00 (i.e. 28825 ISIC's at $3 per ISIC processed.)
(i) It is projected that the nett income from ISIC Sales and other trading will enable the company to have repaid its current operating loss no later than
(j) The debt the company took over from NZUSA in respect to AUS Student Travel Pty Ltd was an Australian dollar debt. Thus as at
(k) For the record the UCSA (Canterbury) Executive resolved in principle in August last year to pro-vide a pro rata guarantee based on an overdraft of $100,000. They have subsequently declined to honour this committemnt. Similarly the MUSA (Massey) Executive resolved in principle to do the same but based on an overdraft of $125,000. Your article correctly reports the actions of both these NZ USA constituents since that time.
(l) In respect to STB head office operations in Student Union House the rent sought and charges prepared for certain secretarial services provided to STB by NZUSA the Board of Directors of STB Ltd believed were excessive. It should be noted that NZUSA's negotiating team refused to consider office re-organisation to allow STB to o operate more effectively in Student Union House.
(m) The Board of Directors of STB resolved on Saturday 12 May to sign an offer of lease for office space in Courtney Place and move from Student Union House. This decision was reported to NZUSA's May Council verbally and in writing following the signing of the offer of lease on Wednesday 16 May. NZUSA held an SGM on this matter (and related question!) on Wednesday 27 June. STB has not yet moved (although the obligation imposed by way of the offer of lease in my view makes this inevitable in the near future) and if the move takes place a period of at least two months will have elapsed between the notice of the move occurring and the event happening. Not an unreasonable time period in my view.
(n) I have observed the Canterbury situation and the debate on the move to withdraw from MUSA and I would disagree that the guarantee question was "a major stimulus for the withdrawal issue." In my view the difference between individuals at Canterbury and NZUSA other constituents (who are of course NZUSA) hat been on political questions. I note with interest in this regard that when put to the rank and fund file members of Canterbury recently they voted by a significant majority to remain in NZUSA.
I hope the above is of interest and assistance to your readers.
This letter it to express our sincere thanks to all the students, both local and overseas students, who have supported our campaign to oppose the fees increase of $1,500.00 for private overseas students enrolling next year in universities. The campaign, which had included marches to Parliament on two occasions, petitions etc, have succeeded in the fees raise being dropped for the overseas high school students presently in New Zealand. We also give special thanks to NZUSA, our Student Association, NOSAC, the academic staff and alto Salient newspaper for their hard work and support in the campaign.
I would like to take issue with Mr Abu Sajed regarding his views on overseas students and discriminatory fees. He is of the opinion that an overseas student has no rights apart from that accorded to a visitor (Salient
To transform the question of discriminatory fees into one of 'rights and privileges' again shows your lack of understanding of the issue. No one has any doubts that the Government can do whatever it pleases. What in effect the Muldoon Government has done is to put up different rules for different people in regards to entry, into tertiary institutions on the basis of nationality. Is this desirable?
The only criteria for having to pay $1500 depends on where you come from without regard to individual circumstances. This is a complete reversal of the government policy of taking in students from as varied a background as possible, irrespective of wealth. The arbitrary manner in which this new ruling is implemented may set dangerous precedents. What will happen when the economic situation gets worse? Will the government tell prospective workers from the Islands that they can come to New Zealand only if they promise not to use the health facilities since things are so tough? Perhaps the next step would be to make Islanders and other non-citizens pay for their children's primary education, who knows?
Mr Sajed it alto of the view that if New Zealand has taken a part in 'siphoning' off a country's wealth then it hat a moral duty to help that country, i.e. a moral duty can only arise when there it a colonial relationship. This is definitely a far-cry from Islamic or Christian principle! Surely this places too heavy a burden on the Conquistadors? Anyways lest he forgets New Zealand did have a committment to Malaysia and Singapore in the past. New Zealand forces were actively engaged in military actions against the Malaysian people throughout the 50's and 60's. This has resulted in the stabilisation of a corrupt and undemocratic government in both countries. Now the New Zealand Government has decided to cater for the elite of both Malay and Singaporeans by selling them education at the beastly turn of $1,500.
I want to make it perfectly clear that there's no way I'll ever be grateful to a government which has consistently smeared and attacked overseas students for no apparent reasons apart from perper-tuating lies. My sympathy to you Mr Sajed for you have eyes yet failed to see. Like you say education it a privilege yet you have failed to learn.
One may choose to be a Communist, Homosexual or General Dissident. One may not choose to be a Gypsy or a Jew. Please remember what wholesale slaughter of a RACE meant, when compairing numbers exterminated in the death camps.
Any programme good or mediocre that reminds us what race discrimination can lead to it valuable.
Well.....you expected replies to Mr Entell's letter.....you now have at least one!
I must say, that as a woman I whole heartedly agree with his suggestions on our education. Although I am at university I consider the main reason for doing a BCA on my part is that it will be a brilliant way of enabling me to catch a man! I look forward to do
I consider that the thirty year gap between now and my marriage should be profitably spent in a nice clerical job after obtaining a degree and saving up in a home-ownership account and also saving to be able to support 'my love'. I will also continue to study cooking books and
I expect that some of those asexual, Liberated, (excuse me) flappy titled bitches with IQs of the same level as I. B. Flapworth will reply to Mr Entell's previous letter decrying his pearls of wisdom. Well. . . . girls, (?) wouldn't you like something to arm for
Lots of love to any prospective hubby.
I refer to Loh Seng's letter (Salient
While I do appreciate an individuals'; right to free expression of his viewpoint. I certainly cannot stand him releasing black wind from his stinking arsehole in my presence.
Whether Loh Seng is your true name or not, you appear to be only a lunatic, knowing not what you are screaming and grumbling about. Perhaps it is because of the effect of the full moon at the time.
I refer particularly to your sentences like "..... to increase the quality of the product "and" "..... to offer overseas students crumbs." If you feel you are offered crumbs, why the hell did you still stick your arse here for? If you seek to condemn the courses which have benefited thousands of Malaysians so far, take ray advice, it is high time that you look for a psychiatrist. Don't leave it till too late.
I am grateful for New Zealand offering me the chance of tertiary education. What I get is cream, not the bloody crumb you claim. Loh Seng, don't confuse yourself. The crumbs you mentioned were: just your own hardened shit from your yesterday's constipation.
I refer also to your sentence ".......in this stinking rat-hole." Well, if you don't like this country, by all means raise you stinking arse and get lost. There is no reason for you to stay here and condemn it to such a degree. You do not appreciate the opportunity this country has offered you. You are ungrateful. If this is a stinking rat-hole, remember that you are the father rat. You are the one who stinked the hole as you excreted the biggest and wettest shit.
Nobody deprived you of the chance to get a decent education in the University of Peking. Surely their ideology suits you. No doubt Chairman
Please do not use "our people" or "we" any more in your future letters, because people like you are not qualified to do so. Your viewpoint and opinion in no way represent those of the other Malaysians on this campus and in Malaysia. You have insulted us by doing so.
To balance up a typical Malaysian Gov't cheap propaganda by Abu Sajed, I would like to express the general feeling felt by the majority of the people back in Malaysia.
Finally I advise Abu to crawl out from the coconut shell in which he has been shadowed for too long under the umbrella of racism.
It is with sorrow that I note the demise of my wife's second cousin's best friend Arnold (J.C) Grope, who, incensed at your supposed interference in his evangelical crusade and you continuing refusal to publish his letters, has finally bitten the white line an Old Karori Road and gone around the proverbial twist. But, I daresay, this Godless institution shall struggle on regardless.
Of course, student life is pretty rough, and the student's association is not helping the situation. The cost of three square roots a day is going up in leaps and bounds, as is the risk involved in swiping Barrett's hotel glasses. And now that the price of a dozen of our staple die-try unit has risen to monumental proportions, I'd say we're just about out of it. But Studass can only come up with the same old ideas - these marches and associated parliamentary crappola.
What is needed is a fresh approach and an attack on the source of our problems. You could teach a tortoise to sing sooner than teach a politician to think, so before you go off to apply green armour-plating to Gwen Rowling's shoulderblades, I would suggest that present approaches should be sent down the tube.
Our first priority must be the removal of locks on armoured freightways vans. That, and the new printing press currently being installed in the swimming pool custodian's office, should solve the liquidity problems of your average student-in-the-street. And if all else fails, I suggest we circumvent Muldoon's crowd altogether and declare our own government — New Zealand ruled by VUW could only flourish. We could even put the subsidy back on piss!!
The (National anthem or similar inserted as background here) prevailing gloom in our beloved nation need not continue. It it up to you and I, and all our cricket loving people, to take the lead (the emotion is bladder-rending at this stage). Death to hedgehogs, Wombats are forever.
T. Scotney's blatant attempts at self-justification are totally absurd. Her hapless drivel can in no way be accepted as even remotely plausible.
I would have thought it patently obvious that the English language according to myself is the best method yet devised by Man as a means of self-expression, — this is an indisputable fact.
What relevance from 557 B.C. and Caesar (which one?) to the current discussion?
The error made by T. Scotney is common and therefore cannot be described as "creative, innovative and original".
Yes, the P.S. is the single most crucial issue facing mankind in the forseeable future, and why should I have a sense of humour? — some people have to be different.
The additions to T. Scotney's letter are childish and petty, and I would much prefer a total lack of willingness to compromise, if at all possible.
N.B. "meas amicos" is clearly incorrect, in any language.)
The Minister of Education owes the students of New Zealand and overseas students studying here, an appearance as well as an explanation of matters concerning the Bursary System.
As far as I am concerned the minister should crawl out from beneath his stone, state his case, crawl back under again so as the whole student body can jump on his stone and squish him!
P.S. I hope the ½ witted commie-bastard who set the fire alarm off in Kirk on Monday
May I through your paper, pass on a message to one G. R. Howell, alias Raz, alias Gumboot Maniac of Vic house.
I hope your collar bone will soon mend (I am told you broke it while running into a moving car whilst testing the theory that a gumboot worn over the head will prevent one from seeing where one is going.) But be cheered by the thought that the Vic camps, alias one 4-a-side soccer team (that has been beaten by every team it has played) will no longer have you in its side and so longer will you be a loser. Now is your chance to support a decent side. Oh yes, by the way, the hairy lip has got to go.
P.S. The name does not imply that I am one of the famous 4-a-side soccer wombles.
As a Malaysian I am ashamed of the inhuman feelings expressed by Dr Mahatir in his recent statement on the plight of the Vietnamese refugees.
Mahatir's racist attitude towards non-Malays is well-known. However, most people thought that his racist attitude would have been watered down now that he has been appointed a Deputy P.M.
His present policy is a clear extension of the distasteful things he has advocated in the book' "The Malay Dilemna".
The main reason for preventing these refugees landing in Malaysia simply because most of them are of Chinese origin. If they were Muslims, I am absolutely sure that Mahatir and his racist collegues will open up new lands to resettle them. Malaysia has plenty of underdeveloped land.
This has been done on at least three previous occasions when Muslim refugees from Cambodia and elsewhere arrived.
I dread to think of what will happen if Mahatir becomes the P.M. Probably he may follow the present Vietnamese policy and send all the non-Malays to the seas!
Andrew Tees is clearly destined for political prominence and if you don't print this the accusations of a left-wing bias in your publication are well-founded.
Ian Andrews, writer of but weeks "local Rock Round Up", speaks through the hole he sits on.
He claims that he is endeavouring to spark interest in the local rock scene, yet critisizes and pulls down most of the bands he speaks about. And, apart from molesting his own aims, he generally speaketh a load of shit.
Just because he himself, and only himself, does not like the blues, that does not automatically make all blues-rock "boring" and "repititious." Music is not to be judged by its class, rather, it's merits within its class, or classes. Contrary to what he claims, Rough Justice are a good band. They are talented and play their R & B better than most New Zealand groups. It's unfortunate that they have not attained the recognition they deserve. What's more, if you don't like them don't go and see them! Only a right cretin would go and see something half a dozen times when the didn't like it the first time. I also find that the clothes a group wears have little influence on the quality of the music.
Another group you seem to dislike is Street Talk. How can a group receive "consistently larger audiences than they deserve."? This obviously shows their talent and popularity even if they don't have the almighty Ian Andrews Seal Of Approval. Street Talk are, in a word brilliant.
In general, the write up in last weeks Salient appeared to me to be an account of the bands you've heard over the last six months, and said little of the actual places. I wasn't allowed into the Last Resort with a can of coke (which they don't sell) and that in itself says enough of the management of that place. The Rock Theatre has a decent management but is more like a concert hall than a personal night spot. The band-audience relationship there is zilch. Sure the music's good (in case anyone got the opposite impression) but a little more could be expected of the actual place.
Which brings up another point. The music, generally, is good. The musicians work hard for a few scummy bucks and they don't need any fuckwits showing off their almighty ignorance by writing them off with a few worthless words. Smashed Executive, Johnny Mono, and the Steroids show a lot of promise, while bands like Medusa (for whom I did not see a mention of a word about) and Rough Justice have shown their promise with consistent performances.
One night at the Last Resort ( a few weeks ago) Medusa played before an audience of 20 like it was playing before 2000. This shows the typical Wellington bands dedication. No pulling out because of inadequate P.A. systems from this lot. So much for the "shit from Wellington."
So, Ian Andrews, just remember who you are You are in no position to rubbish bands like these, As much as you'd like to think you are, you aren't the world's leading music critic — just an assholes.
P.S. Who the fuck is Mick Jagger anyway?
Re Daniel Stenwick's letter in the last issue. I wholeheartedly agree with every one of the points he and Mr En tell raised. However, I must point out that, although all women are below average this do not mean that there is such a thing as an average
Why are catholics allowed at this university? Don't you think that they should be made to pay $1,500 p.a. also to pay for the privelege of studying here? I'm sure I'll have lots of support!
Ban the Haps burgs!
Through your column I would like to appeal to Mr B. G. Kelly. Apparently he met a young lady of my acquaintance at a duel this afternoon. It has reached my can that the only thing she has been heard to say since then is, "What a man, B. G., what a man".
Now, I ask you, what kind of a state is that for a poor, wee, girl to be in? If you've stolen her heart B. G. Kelly, you deserve a fate worse than 724404-6699230!!
Strewth! wot with the "Rice Risotto", I think in the roll, not to mention, raisons, apple, wet cole slaw, celery and white stuff, corned beef (corned beef isn't a crime except in the company of the other shit.)
What happened to good old fshioned wholesome, the American way, good old fashioned apple pie like mom used to make, tomato, lettuce, egg, cheese, ham, chicken (hate salami) No beetroot or it'll end up on the floor. Also a complaint from Dune about the black bits in the custard squares, and also there was no icing. Kyle however had a pie that was nice (B.A. student.)
Cordial being passed off as fruit juice at 25c per cup. Heaters on all during summer. Chips, milkshakes and burgers should be available up stairs, and vending drink machines like wot used to be in the gym. Pinball not operational during early mornings peep bing bing tweet twot, when everyone is still trying to sleep.
The service of the downstairs staff is atrocious, yeah, wot, and put the change on the counter, we want service with a smile like wot the ANZ gives on telly.
Can't think of anything else and am running out of paper. Yours in disgust.
P.S. Do something about the view.
Please note that the letter which you published over my name in your edition of
(Salient apologised for any embarrassment that may have been caused. However, we have no way of determining whether a letter is genuine or not — ed.)
Regarding the correspondence submitted by Loh Seng under the heading 'The Facts on Overseas Students' in Salient Volume 42, No 15,
We take extreme exception to the polemic and biased stance taken by its bigotted author. We suggest that if Loh Seng finds New Zealanders' only chance for Tertiary education so restrictive, crumby, petty and of so low quality, that he leave our "oppressive shores."
We as New Zealanders and, regardless of what he may think, proud of it, must accept he restrictions and quotas placed on New Zealanders' entry to many specialised courses. We further recognize the need to exclude overseas
We also take exception to his assertion that. "The University system does not incur any extra costs for taking overseas students; neither does it do so at the expense of local students." We suggest that Loh Seng should wake up to the facts of life and stop dreaming. If less overseas students were enrolled in courses with restricted numbers, there would be more places for New Zealanders or lower costs, due to subsequent decreases in staff and resource material required e.g. in ACCY 101, COML 101, ECON 101, 111, 112 and BUAD 113 to name but a few.
If our university system is as bad as he makes it out to be then the only recourse open to overseas students is to employ the tactics of consumer resistance or to write to 'Fair Go' — which are New Zealanders' only courses of action, unless we leave for greener pastures. Unlike our foreign friend we consider that buying guns, violence and murder is inconsistent with the aim of promoting world peace and equality in accordance with the United Nations stated goals.
As to his reference to this University as a "Stinking rat-hole" we suggest, if the cap fits, wear it. Perhaps if he left, it would be a far more pleasurable one to work in. Indeed if he approaches us we would be glad to wave him goodbye from the airport. Unfortunately our being students prohibits our sponsoring his immediate departure.
Abu Sajed gets my vote of "The Most Confused Person of the Year" Award. His brilliant letter on those wretched, vile and racist immigrant races is an absolute delight to read! I could have sworn that he had plucked a few comments from the book written by 'Straight-Shoot-em' Mahatr B. Mohd in "The Malay Dilemma". It sure is, comforting to know that there's someone around who shares similar views with that nasty little author who advocated the shooting of Vietnamese refugees.
Begging forgiveness, there are a few points I would like to make in reply to that excellent letter. Abu Sajed seems to confuse racism with inverse discrimination. Put simply, racism is racial discrimination based on the notion of race superiority, intolerance and hatred of people of a different race. Racism is when everything depends on me colour of your skin.
Inverse discrimination is when you give additional assistance to less-privileged minority groups in order to improve their standard of living by giving them more opportunities. This is not done at the expense of other better-off groups. In Malaysia you have a most blatant form of racial discrimination. In a country where 80% of the people of all races are poor, it makes little sense to single out a certain ethnic group to give it assistance while at the same time denying others the opportunities for employment, education and health facilities.
Poverty in Malaysia is not confined to a single ethnic group. Poverty cuts across communal lines. Inverse discrimination is a myth in Malaysia. Behind the rhetoric and the exhortations about the need to help the 'indigenous people' is an insidious and crude form of apartheid not easily noticeable to the outsider.
To label Malaysians of non—Malay origin as 'Immigrant races' is crass ignorance. Malaysians of non-Malay origin are just as much Malaysians as those of Malay origin. It serves little purpose in dividing Malaysians up according to where their fathers or fore-fathers originally came from. To assert that so-called 'immigrant races' have stubbornly refused to integrate is fictitious. Abu Sajed undoubtedly believes integration is a good thing. Perhaps he has not heard of such alternatives as multi-culturalism or multi-lingualism. To accept integration as good without more than a rudimentary knowledge of the actual situation in Malaysia (perhaps I'm being overly generous) is a great disservice to yourself. As for refusing to speak and use Bahasa Malaysia, Abu must be unaware that the present generation of Malaysians from all ethnic-origins is well-versed in the national language.
Abu Sajed even has the cheek to talk about the 'Malaysian way of life'. Since he has pronounced himself qualified to write about the Malaysian way of life', I hope he will be more explicit in his next letter as to the definition of the term. It is difficult to understand why Abu compared the Malaysians of non-Malay origin with that of a Greek immigrant in New Zealand. Such a comparison is absurd. A Malaysian of non-Malay origin is as much a Malaysian as Muldoon is a New Zealander. But why the hell doesn't Muldoon learn to speak Maori? After all he is part of an 'immigrant race' which settled in Aotearoa shortly before the turn of the century isn't he? Why doesn't the Pakeha integrate with the Maori way of life? To indulge in such comparisons to fondly pursued by Abu Sajed is fruitless. Where will it all end? In the Garden of Eden?
Firstly I would like to complain about the apparant lack of interest shown by the econ 101 dept. in releasing the mid year results. How come all the other depts have everything in order whilst the imbecile fuckwits in the "Prefabs on the Prairie" are stil twiddling their thumbs or whatever.
As for a fuckwit, this Bertram goof hasn't been told that students can't be expected to write as fast as he speaks, i.e. flat knackers and touching 2000 words per minute. Actually I think that Burtram with his fire engine coat is aiming for the Tees lookalike contest. Even the knee high shorts are similar.
Next is the price rises in the Milk Bar of the cafe, the only trouble is that it seems to coincide with a drop in quality.
And to those of you who are confused by my identity I am definitely not Les Cleveland's prodigal son. I came from a distinguished line of Flapworths dating back a couple of years.
I was not impressed with your editorial "Can-terbuury in Again, Again." I acknowledge that an editorial is an expression of opinion, but in all fairness shouldn't the readers be given some access to the 'facts' upon which this opinion wa formed. How many articles about Canty's withdrawal movements have been published in Salient. More to the point, how many Cantas have been distributed around campus, giving an alternative opinion.
I found the editorial somewhat misleading, 800 to 500 votes isn't, to my mind a particularly convincing loss. Not when those votes are only 1300 of a possible 7000 votes, and the majority was 61% of votes. It would only take 150 voters to change their minds for that motion of withdrawal to have been passed.
I would like to dispute the statement that the anti-NZUSA movement is not "ground-swell" ie the feelings of the vast majority. Even the above figures suggest that any such ground swell is at least that of a very substantial minority. I attedded last years attempt to get out of NZUSA at Canterbury - the vast majority of students present were against NZUSA - the motion was only defeated after twenty minutes of spectuacular oratory by the president of Otago. He promised to personally stand over NZUSA to make sure they towed the line. (Of course he resigned a little later to a comfy job).
The feeling amongst the students I was in contact with, in my various classes, who form part of the apathetic majority was definitely anti ALL student politics. A feeling demonstrated by the multitude of darts and calls when any student politician attempted to canvas support in lectures.
Mr Beach states that one of the reasons "why we don't need NZUSA" is because it does not deal with matters "concerning" students. How right he is - any student population is a diverse body with liberals, radicals, conservatives, apa-thetics, and everything rise. There is no way a student politician (elected by a very small body of students) can issue a statement that accurately reflects the majority, let alone all, student opinion (and by majority opinion, I mean majority of university students, not just the majority of "politically aware" students!)
He sums up anti—NZUSA feeling as generated because "few students seem to understand what their national association is and what it does." And whose fault is that?
And just in passing, "the liaison between national officers based in Wellington and Govt..... officials is built around a personal contact basis is cited as a reason for retaining NZUSA. But other than breaking the bad news first on bursarys etc., (courtesy the tea lady?) it has yet to have yielded any positive results — finding out that our bursarys Should be raised $9.00 doesn't make the bitter pill of reality any better!
Just remember Mr Beach, that in democracies it is appreciated if more than one opinion can be given!
Living in your comfortable, safe, stereo, t.v., plenty of nice food and drink environments do you human rights campaigners really give a shit about the majority of the Southern African Blacks. I know of one Mozambique worker who returned to S.A. whose only comments about his newly acquired freedom was, "you can't eat freedom." After an initial period of having subhuman elements roaming the countryside armed with Russian weapons raping, pillaging and killing we reap the profits and starve.
Fairyland ideals should remain locked in your immature minds as there is no room for them in this harsh world.
Honourable kiwis are already fighting in this area to protect the innocent civilians from brutal acts. They are practical supporters of human rights. The right not to be killed, raped or have your home looted.
Do you make allowances for their atroceties, them being savage and not civilized, you must as you do not mention any of their subhuman acts. Did I hear a word about the shooting of the plane crash survivors? Not bloody likely. People and animals don't do acts on that level. Only subhuman bastards drop to that level. Your friends
P.S. More than 90% of you fuckers have never been there.
Help! I'm being maligned! Dr Sparrow, you were wrong! They Are out to get me! (And incidentally, Doctor, the rash hasn't gone away, but the Locoid's working wonders.) But back to the matter in hand:
Zounds! A.B. Pointon has caught me with my credentials down. But listen, A. B., you don't know what it's like! Slaving over a hot typewriter deep into the night, ceaselessly screwing one's pretentiousness to the sticking place, one's purile mind distractedly fretting over Kathy Drysdale (oops! now everbody knows!) — oh, you just don't know what it is to be a film critic these days.......
And what thanks do I (sob) get? None! And to think I'm only doing it to finance my grandmother's hysterectomy and buy calipers for my
But seriously, folks. I'm glad A. B. Pointon likes my column, even if s/he misunderstands what I say. Which is probably because I don't understand half what I babble on about, myself. In my case, I make it a policy never to go to the movies I write about.
Still, things must be put right. It was the 3rd time I saw Carrie, Not the 5th, that I noticed the cars driving backwards. So there. But A. B. Pointon is right about many things (I Do buy my own tickets, which has got me an established column, which is great because I just Love to hear the sound of my own voice), so I'll take his/her advice to heart.
Hang on, though. I've just had a brainwave-not something that happens every day, as I'm sure you're aware. Because I think discussion of plays and books and films etc. is desirable, and should be as wide as possible, why don't A. B. and I both write a review for next week's edition? Let's say, of 'Interiors'. Keeping it to about 750 words each, and submitting it by high noon this Wednesday. That way, A. B. Pointon gets to put his/her money where his/her mouth is, and also, Salient's readers get a wider range of opinions with which to compare their own.
The gauntlet is down, A.B.
P.S. Who Is A.B. Pointon anyway? Obviously someone who knows me disturbingly well.....
P.P.S. I catagorically deny the rumours about me and Brian Westlake.