The political portal of the University of Manchester
On Wednesday, the students of Manchester University had their chance to put their questions to Vice-Chancellor Alan Gilbert, hear his responses and debate the issues. The Q&A session took place in the Main Debating Hall of the Students Union.
To Jack McGinn, the session left more questions unanswered. He has written an open letter to Alan Gilbert to express his dissatisfaction with what he heard from our Vice-Chancellor. Continue reading ‘Open letter to Vice-Chancellor Alan Gilbert’
Lech explains the fallacy of electronic cigarettes.
My elder brother recently introduced me to the newest production of Star Wars. Being the accommodating youngest sibling of three, I bore witness to George Lucas’ latest rehashing or ‘re-editing’ of the famed sci-fi series. My attempts lasted the best part of 300 brutally painful seconds. Please don’t misinterpret this statement as presenting an all-understanding self-righteous student who can assuredly decide what is and what isn’t beneficial. Exercises in responding flexibly to other person’s social choices are part of the immutable sequence of development as an individual. Hell, it prepares us for the compromises associated with the 9-5. For non-smokers, proximity to smoking is an exercise of self-restraint. I hate the smell, the act, the texture, the general bravado associated with the art of lighting up and that is before we even mention the price (£39.99 for a starter kit). Its outlawing in public places following its prohibition by law was greeted with more relief than ecstasy on my part. Smokers, on the other hand, feel aggrieved by the state’s exuberant over-regulation and alleged frequent human right impingements. Yet, does increasing another individual’s risk of death by direct consequence of close interaction deligitimise a smoker’s claims to liberty and free choice? Bearing this in mind, it is with keen interest that I discuss the recent heralding of a new clone of electronic cigarettes or ‘nicotine-sticks’ as dubbed by World Health Organisation (WHO) experts. These are legal in public places, relativity unknown and potentially a dangerous alternative. Continue reading ‘Return of the Puff’
Maria Francesca R. Fernandez on why America has made the right choice with Obama as her new President
It doesn’t take a pundit to observe that Barack Obama’s election was a happy day for most people on this side of the Pond. Our distant support for this fresh and controversial Democrat is certainly justified, especially when contrasted with what the Republicans had to offer in this year’s presidential election campaign.
For one, Obama appreciates the importance of regaining global confidence in America and restoring its moral credibility. He condemns the role that the United States plays in sustaining tyrannical dictatorships including the recently ousted presidency of Pervez Musharraf, understands that George W. Bush’s ‘silent treatment’ of the Axis of Evil does not amount to diplomacy, and hence displays a willingness to engage in multi-lateral talks. Not only is this a welcome change of tone, but also a step towards improving international security. McCain, despite having had far more years of foreign policy exposure, has discredited his own advantage by showing little tact on the issue of bomb, bomb, bombing Iran; infamously approving 100 more years of the war in Iraq, which his vote helped initiate; and generally failing to control a temper so volatile it could incite a third world war – I dread to think what he might do sitting across the table from unyielding world leaders at a summit, when even in the controlled environment of a presidential debate he was incapable of masking his antagonism towards Barack Obama, a colleague and compatriot. Continue reading ‘Yes he can!’
Laura-Marie Töpfer on why the hyping up of Obama’s triumph needs to be treated with caution
‘Historic Victory!”, “New Dawn!”, “Record!” – powerful headlines were emblazoned in big letters on newspaper covers around the world at the beginning of this month, when America voted in the most eagerly anticipated US election for half a century. Ecstatic crowds all over the globe celebrated the spectacular win by the Democrats. The American people have given their mandate to Barack Obama, the young senator from Illinois with mixed-race ancestry. He is going to light a fire under the Washington establishment and he is going to get things done. Change has come. But has it? We would certainly answer this question with ‘yes’ if we see ‘change’ as being the end of the Bush era and the hope for a new president who will end the war in Iraq. However, if we look at the policy aspect, our answer is less clear. With the impact of the current financial crisis, it is not looking good for America’s economy. And inequalities of income and wealth are wider than they have been in a century. All true. But this is not enough to say that the US will necessarily move to the left. The belief that Obama can offer a package of attractive new policies to resolve America’s political and social dilemmas couldn’t be further from the truth. He is against Iraq, but has avoided much detail about how and when he would extract US troops. He talks openly about the need to reduce inequality but has not been specific on whether, or to what extent, he would raise taxes on the super-rich to pay for social programmes. He won’t support a ‘single-payer’ plan like Britain’s NHS to improve US healthcare, which would be the best way to control medical costs. In other words, Obama has produced a lot of lofty talk so far. What is missing, are specific policy proposals on his agenda which do indicate considerable change. Continue reading ‘Obamamania and its flaws’
The views expressed in this article are the views of the author and not the views of the Politics Society.
Hi all, and thanks for taking the time to read my article! My name’s Rob Pinfold and I’m (as of about three weeks ago) The General Secretary of the University of Manchester Students’ Union. I’ve been invited by the Politics Society to lay out my positions on some issues as well as some of the (many!) things I want to achieve in my year of office.
Continue reading ‘GenSec’s Plans for 2008/2009′
As we head towards the end of this academic year, we are experimenting with a new feature on the Politics Society website, known as “Guest Articles”. Our aim is to give students a platform on which they can express their opinions and give others the ability to debate the views expressed in the article. As a society, we do not support any political group or alignment and will aim to give fair representation to all groups. If successful, guest articles will feature prominently on our new website (to be built over the summer) and become a regular feature (hopefully weekly) in the next academic year.
The first article to be published is written by Rob Tidy and is entitled “Why won’t our Union campaign for LGBT rights?“. Rob has proposed the “Love Without Borders” LGBT rights motion at several General Meetings and the motion has never been passed - potentially because quorum was never met or was lost when the motion was up on the agenda. Rob outlines some of his frustrations in this article.
The second article is entitled “Winning a Free Education“, written by Chris Jenkinson. Chris has been elected for the role of UMSU Academic Affairs Officer for next year and states in the article why he opposed the free education motion at last week’s General Meeting and some of his views on how we should be campaigning for a free education.
If you are interested in writing articles for the society, drop me an email at james@manchesterpolitics.co.uk.
The views expressed in this article are the views of the author and not the views of the Politics Society.
I knew that speaking in our Students’ Union general meeting against a motion entitled Fight For a Free Education would inevitably open me up to attacks that I don’t agree that higher education should be free, as it was before 1997. So before I start describing how we can win a free education, let me set one thing straight: I believe that access to higher education should be accessible to all, and the best way for this to happen is for the cost of the education to be paid by the government through general taxation, and for students to be supported with universal, rather than means-tested grants.
Where I differ from those I affectionately describe as being on the hard left is how to achieve it. The Students’ Union should have policy supporting a free education, but needs to be a sensible and inclusive one which reaches out to students. It shouldn?t be prescriptive - specifying a monthly quota of flyers or the text to appear on a plaque is counterproductive.
We need a policy which enables campaigners and activists to reach out to less politicised students and allows them to take ownership of the campaign, engaging them and ensuring that even small actions taken are steps towards victory. Continue reading ‘Winning a Free Education’
The views expressed in this article are the views of the author and not the views of the Politics Society.
Wednesday 30th April saw one of the best attended UMSU General Meetings this academic year, second only to November?s spectacle of democracy. We?ve debated policies about war, finance, environmentalism and internationalism: a list that shows just how conscientious and politically active our members are, and one which leaves me speechless. Almost.
This year, the General Meeting, ?the supreme decision-making body of the Union?, has decided that it still quite likes Palestine and that it?s not too keen on global warming, which I’m sure most of us (except perhaps for next year’s supposedly right-wing Zionist Union Executive committee) would see as both laudable and worthwhile. It’s been presented, when it’s actually managed to achieve quoracy, with a further twelve undebated motions ranging in topic from the dire state of our bars to cold-blooded murder. Without being passed by the GM the union can’t take any real stance on these issues, which is a sorry state of affairs for the largest student union in Europe to get into given that we need less than 1% of our members to give up a few hours a term. It?s just not cunting (see http://www.umsu.manchester.ac.uk/pdf/MOTION_H_30.4.08.pdf).
Continue reading ‘Why won’t our Union campaign for LGBT rights?’
