Other formats

    Adobe Portable Document Format file (facsimile images)   TEI XML file   ePub eBook file  

Connect

    mail icontwitter iconBlogspot iconrss icon

Salient. Victoria University Student Newspaper. Volume 38, Number 11. May 29, 1975

Need For A Change In SRC?

page 19

Need For A Change In SRC?

Dear Bruce,

Your article on SRC but week teemed to miss the main problem with SRC completely.

People don't go the SRC's because they are too boring.

I suggest there are two reasons for this:
1.the nature of the speakers at SRC
2.the nature of the topics raised.

With regards to the speakers at SRC we have the same twenty of so people involving nearly all the motions and these people are the main speakers to motions put forward.

I don't see any point in your division of a salient clique, New or Old Catholic Left cliques. I think it is far more important to look at what part members of the executive play in SRC. Not withstanding two members executive are running SRC most of the we find that of the 98 motions moved this year, 30 were moved by the chair involving bureaucratic things like confirmation of minutes and elections and 30 or nearly half of the 68 remaining motions were moved by members of the executive. Certain members executive like to play up the claim that SRC decided all association policy which is true, but at the same time a large proportion of this policy is mooted by them.

The nature of the topics raised at SRC is also an important factor in keeping 5,700 students persistently away from it. I understand that these people are not interested in whether the association supports or does not support the Rosa committee or uses brown toilet paper, etc. However, people are prepared to act when repressive motions not within their interests are put forward, such as the drinking horn motion of Colin Feslier.

The subsequent motion put forward by myself showed a number of interesting points about the operations of SRC. One is that the so called silent majority are prepared to let the politicians go on their ego trips as much as they like until they try to put restraints on student activities.

The outcome of this meeting has since been described as 'ludicrous', 'stupid', 'immature', etc. and I accept this criticism but I wonder if some of the other nutters moving motions at SRC ever think of what is thought of some of their incredibly stupid motions. I feel certain if people didn't have to sit through some of the boring shit that come up we would get more people at SRC.

Having looked at some of the problems, so what? who cares? Certainly not the verocious minority who presently run it. As far as I can ascertain nor do the apathetic majority.

Kevin Wright