The President's Ruling

Mr Dwyer demanded that items 5, 6, and 7 (see below) be removed from the agenda. This was on the grounds that they are constitutional amendments and did not have the required notice of one week on the public notice board.

Mr O'Brien produced another clause allowing the motion to go through despite the insufficient notice.

Mr Dwyer objected in rather strong language. We should uphold the basis of the constitution.

The ruling was accepted.

The 5th motion reads: "That a new clause be added to Section 23. Every affiliated body shall have a President or Club Captain, a Secretary, and a Treasurer (later changed to Secretary-Treasurer); these officers, together with any other member that the club might appoint to be known as the Committee. On appointment of these officers the Secretary of the Association shall be notified of the personnel concerned and of any changes which might occur from time to time."

Mr Moriarty explained the motion. The Students' Association is responsible for all bills, etc., protracted by the various organisations. Therefore, they must have someone to contact. No one member of any organisation may take full responsibility. Therefore, there must be several officers.

Mr O'Brien laid his cards on the table. There is only one such organisation lacking several officers. There must be someone to carry out administrative tasks. All members cannot know the financial situation all the time.

An amendment that the clause be added "except any club that receives no grant." (Anarchist Association desires no grant).

Mr Bickler stated that if a club protracts a debt, grant or no grant, the Association is still responsible.

The amendment was put and lost.

A second amendment was proposed by Mr Hawkins to the effect that there be a liaison committee between Executive and the Organisation, if that oganisation prefers this to the election of officers. This could satisfy both parties.

The amendment was lost.

The anarchist vote was split on the issue, Mr Dwyer voting against. Eventually the original motion was put and carried.

Items 6 and 7 were objected to on the same grounds as was item 5. Mr Mitchell made a ruling. For the third time it was disagreed with. He defended it for much the same reasons as previously. He said the saving clause in the Constitution is there to prevent people from "getting up and thumping the table" because "a speck of dust" is on their copy of the constitution. The ruling was accepted.