The Gown Student Newspaper at Queen's University Belfast

i can say that i miss jacko so much coz i am one of his die hard fans,'*

@ One time councillor- Here don't go joining midsummer murders anytime soon. I'm not Fiona Kidd and I wouldn't want to get her in to trouble with my rant. I'm simply a person who takes serious objections to Stephens’s comments in regard to part time staff.

Shocking by Fiona, looks like we have another James Murphy on our hands. looks like power corrupts, even when a member of union staff gets election to one of the positions.

its quite clear that dead on steven is fiona.

We all know it will be Fiona who will crash and burn under pressure next year and yes it was stevens job to promote the SU. Just pity the SU didn't pay him when he was in laverys though - oh that's right he is allowed a life. Where are the criticisms flying at RAG for bring people on pubcrawls to different pubs (including Laverys), sabbs going to different venues to eat during the day - if we got into the nitty gritty we could be here all day...Get over it and face the fact Fiona is going to be crap and in the end up good luck to Jay and Gareth next year with the rest

@ Will of the people

What vote would this be then?

Not the sabbatical elections where the candidates supported by Paul and Barry all lost that's for sure.

Lovin the fact that the sabs who supported Paul and Barry got 91% of the vote! Whereas as Brogan and Hawthorne only got 9%. Speaks volumes! Brogan showed a complete lack of leadership going behind Duffy and Lilly's backs!

they didnt get rid of lilyduf. fiona will be the first one to go. lilyduf are on to better things. shame on broghorne, the real ones who bring the place into disrepute.

fiona will just try to sack poor steven again.

Stephen please just shut up! You reek of jealously. I have one word to sum up the Union's marketing team this year...FAIL. The lack of grass root effort and frankly lack lustre marketing this year was seriously cringe worthy. Isn't that the job you and others were employed to do? I seen more marketing work done by those not even employed in your position with more results also. Kidd didn't try to get you fired and as you seem so concerned with 'part time staff' how about we discuss the fact that marketing positions (one of which you’re in) were created at the expense of other part time staff hours cut due in part to the epic fail of marketing and probably the existence of your ‘job’. Your job is to market the SU not Laverys and the Menagerie, Kidd was right to bring up these conflicts of interest considering the lack of results from the job you were employed to do. Here, I’ve provided a link to your job description.....

http://www.qubsu.org/uploads/file/Job%20Applicatio...

“To act as an ambassador for the Students’ Union in order to increase brand awareness and encourage loyalty.”

I would not have made this post only your comments have fu*ked me off so much. Kidd's done more for part time staff than you by a mile! Get off your egotistical high horse please and spare us this petty vendetta which is clearly over the lost out on VP position. Also while we’re on it in future marketing 'events' please stop subjecting the union to your DJ'in hip indie as fuck tunes. There’s a reason the union employs separate Ents people to avail of who know what they’re doing.

fiona will do more work next year in the union than lilly and duffy put together... not only that she'll be loyal to the cause and not spend her year promoting other events. one of the biggest mistakes the union made this year was not getting rid of lil'duff quicker.

A quick note of clarification - the incoming sabbatical officers have been given an open invitation to attend EMC whenever they are able to in the run-up to crossover. They were also given speaking rights by Shane Brogan as the chair of EMC.

Any further questions regarding whether or not we're "allowed to speak"? Bear in mind that in 6 weeks we will actually *be* the EMC, so if it makes you feel better consider our attendance as unpaid training ;)

Performance below Fiona? ddnt know she was a sab. just an emotionally immature person who cant control herself. cant wait til she falls apart when she gets the job

Onlooker, are you serious about Gareth? He's by far the most hard-working and student-minded of the current VPs (and I'm not suggesting that the others don't have merits).

I really hate the way that some comments sound patronizing when responding and I don't want to sound like it at all. This week Gareth managed to get an email out to all students which stated that the SU was against the Russell Group proposals on fees. I think that's enough to show that he's not going to bend over for the University. Even before he's in as President he's already kicking up a fuss (in entirely the right way).

From what I heard, he wasn't at the EMC where Fiona tried to attack Steven sacked. (I think he was in Dublin for the smedia awards.) I would've loved to have been there if he was.

The above commenter is not the same person!

Looks very bad trying to get staff the sack already, however put it down to a mistake, still wish her well, she can't be any worse than the current vp.

Re A Sab Named Paul- live up to your promise below Fiona.

RE: Stephen Connolly
As you are aware from our previous discussion, no threat was made against your job and I have confirmed that no breach of the constitution was committed.
Furthermore, I would like it to be known that I have never attempted to threaten any member of staff at Queen’s Students’ Union.
If you wish to discuss this matter further please feel free to contact me.
I will not post any further comments on this thread.

Fiona's performance at council was unprofessional and disgusting. As an incoming VP you should be ashamed of yourself. If you have nothing constructive to say at council then you should just keep quiet. Your outburst not only shocked me but also showed your emmotional immaturity for the job of VP next year.

As for trying to get Stephen sacked, that is a dirty act.

Shame on you!!!

I am a member of EMC and there is no defamation in what Stephen is saying; Fiona did attempt to have him sacked at that EMC. Also it is quite obvious that Fiona is now posting under different names.

Wise up Fiona. And your performance at last week's council was disgusting.

Hey Paul, You still a Sab? Shit... I thought they got rid of you!

why would she not complain about deci gallen, paul mcadams or jim harte?

I think that Fiona needs to apologise for her behavior in recent times, especially to Stephen.

Hold on, so the incoming VP campaigns and communications had concerns over a lead member of the SU marketting team Djing at other venues such as Laverys, or the Menagerie which wasn't mentioned. and you think she's wrong to be? is it not her job to be concerned about these things.

Also raising concerns over an individuals actions isn't a "personal attack" especially if those concerns can be seen as legitimate. Had she stated "I feel that one of our brand ambassadors DJing and being part of the organisation (i.e. taking ticket money) at club nights in other venues with a direct competition to that of the Students Union poses a conflict of interests and the matter should be looked into" would you still be on here complaining?
In fact seeing as you claim to have an official complaint underway do you not realise it's very foolish to be discussing the matter on a public forum? this can only weaken your already quite questionable position when dealing with any official channels.

You've already demonstrated that she didn't disrupt the EMCs agenda and no official contribution was noted thus negating your original high and mighty claim that miss Kidd was in breach of the constitution by involving her self in official EMC business.

As a member of the Students union casual staff who was able to pay his rent last month thanks directly in no small part to Miss Kidd i think it's quite ridiculous that you're trying to claim she's an enemy to the staff at QUBSU. A venue going through some of the leanest times its suffered in a number of years, that needs a dedicated and driven marketting team now more than ever before.

As you have said Stephen, you lost the election by a "hefty margin" maybe it's time you accept it.

33 and 43 are mine.

There's no debate over whether it was suggested that I should lose my job. Fiona's words when I confronted her about this were: "I just said that you shouldn't be working as a brand ambassador..."

Personal attacks on part-time members of staff are not "relevant".

A simple apology or even acknowledgement that it was uncalled for would have sufficed.

Stephen. "I didn't post that [...] I stand by what I said" - Could you please clarify this.
You either did post it - and thus stand by your own words, or didn't post it and stand by someone else's words.

On the constitution: whilst it does say: "Any Student of the Students' Union may attend an Executive Management Committee Meeting but has neither voting rights nor the right to contribute to the debate."

This does not mean that no student can ever speak. Multiple times students have been allowed to attend and, where relevant, allowed to speak on certain subjects.

And, to finish, the speaker declared that "if it's not in the minutes, then it didn't happen" at the council meeting in March. And, as he sees himself as the interpreter of the Constitution, he's right.

Now - if we're done, would you please remove it.

Em, so, yea.

I didn't post that and I haven't made any false claims.

I stand by what I said as I think it should be open.

Here's the constitution: http://www.qubsu.org/uploads/file/about/CoreConsti...

It's rule 4.1.5.

1.5 Any Student of the Students' Union may attend an Executive Management Committee Meeting but has neither voting rights nor the right to contribute to the debate.

(Oh, and it won't be in the minutes of that EMC meeting because it wasn't on the agenda or in the reserved items. I checked that out when I was making a complaint.)

Stephen, if it is you posting this, then you should be aware that:

Firstly; You have made a claim against a certain persons which is factually incorrect, and can be seen to be defaming someone in an elected position.

Secondly; The current law on defamation stands as such: "words calculated to disparage the
plaintiff in any office" which your words can clearly be seen to be doing.

I thus suggest that in light of this you either email the gown to the effect that you did not post that comment and it should be removed, or email the gown and kindly ask them to remove the post from the site.

I look forward to a speedy resolution of this matter.

Charlemagne, code word for Connolly (which of course you will deny). Since I am immature and an "utter pleb" the fact that it annoyed you brought me much pleasure LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!! ;).

Enjoy your day because you just made mine!!!
LOL!

@Wah Wah
Insightful comment, your contibution didn't reek of pathetic immaturity at all. You utter pleb.

This thumbs up / down system is ridiculous. It completely certifies any hint of bias on this site. Anything that agrees with the RAG / CU agenda, thumbs up! Anything against, thumbs down. It's embarrassingly consistent. A comment from Connolly? How dare he! He wears skinny jeans and has yellow shoes. I've never talked to him but everyone else says he's a dick so I'll hop on that bandwagon. Immediate thumbs down. Kidd! Isn't she the good one? The one who I'm meant to like? Thumbs up. It doesn't matter that her defence was 'it wasn't' and 'i didn't'. Yeah, right. Anyone who was impartial, (something which would be nice to see sometime) would read that someone tried to sack someone else for no justified reason. Pathetic personal agendas infiltrating Union politics once again.

Down with this sort of thing. Anyway, Duffy and Lilly are a GBOL. You should all calm down, you'll give yourselves high blood pressure, it's not healthy.

Re the whole Unionist DUP thing. It's complete nonsense. The petition was signed by people from across the cultural and political spectrum. I signed it, and I am not a Unionist (I am, for the record, acting chair of QUB Alliance Party). I should also point out that I did not sign the petition because I have anything against either of them personally, or because I wanted to remove them. I signed because I wanted to give them the chance to justify themselves in the eyes of council and of the student body as a whole. I wanted to hear from them about the aspects of their job which council doesn't see, the advocacy work and things like that. On the night Barry Duffy convinced me that, although he was not the hardest working sabb we have ever had, he has been a strong advocate for students and that he should stay in office during the exam season when advocacy by the VP education becomes very important. Paul Lilley, on the other hand, convinced me that he is a total waste of air.

I too emailed and Shane and have yet to get a response. That email address is correct.

Note to Shane: Check your emails and reply.

I was talking about Connolly not Kidd btw

Fiona Kidd did break the constitution - it states that any student may attend but have no speaking rights. I really actually do worry and hope McGreevey's work wasn't in vain this year for it to go back to what it was like last year under James Murphy. We shall all wait and see. On another note, I have emailed Shane Brogan two weeks ago and haven't received a reply - is the email su.president@qub.ac.uk ? Could someone confirm this?

Go tell someone who cares ...

RE: Stephen Connolly
As you are aware from our previous discussion, no threat was made against your job and I have confirmed that no breach of the constitution was committed.
Furthermore, I would like it to be known that I have never attempted to threaten any member of staff at Queen's Students’ Union.
If you wish to discuss this matter further please feel free to contact me.
I will not post any further comments on this thread.

She attempted to have me sacked at EMC 3 weeks ago.

She said that I shouldn't be working for the Union because she saw me DJing in Lavery's.

I had consciously not promoted Lavery's, I was simply standing in to give 2 of my friends a break when they needed it.

It was also in breach of the SU constitution - which states who can contribute to the debate at EMC. A rule which I'm sure is in place to stop people disrupting the agendas with irrelevant business.

She beat me in the sabbatical elections by a pretty hefty margin - and I'm pretty sure my part-time job can't be seen as a threat.

But yes, there's an example of when she tried to have a part-time member of staff sacked.

(If you think that I'm in the wrong, have a think about some of the other people who work in the SU and DJ in other venues. You'll find a good few who weren't named by Fiona.)

kidd will struggle.

Are you serious?

- She has argued with Dodge for keeping part-time staff hours up.

- She helped Jane Arbuthnot head up a petition to ensure all part-time staff got paid on time, when it looked like they'd lose out of getting pay until a month later.

The suggestion that she's going to cut hours or jobs is utterly ridiculous.

And just for clarification - She didn't call any of the exec members disgusting. She called the ignorant sheep that walked out of the meeting, as soon as they had saved their idiotic friends from the chop, disgusting.

Belfast Holylands
"They seem like alright lads.

I think all this is just becuase they like the odd drink. Damn union has been over taken by puritans."

This comment is hallariously ignorant.
1. Puritans were in the main Calvinistic Protestants. Luther and Calvin were well known to enjoy the odd drink (in moderation). In fact Calvin brewed his own beverages, the same drink is still available today in Geneva.
2. Oliver Cromwell is one of the most famous puritans even he enjoyed a drink or two.
3. Teetotalism under the banners of Pioneers (a mainly catholic Group) and Temperance (a mainly protestant group) only became popularised in the late 18th to early 20th Centuries, long after the "Puritan" movement (late 16th- early 18th Centuries).
4. An overwhelming majority of the Council and EMC (this year and next) enjoy the odd drink.
5. Because someone enjoys the odd drink or not is no way to judge their ability to govern Churchill for instance enjoyed his whiskey, wheras Hitler was teetotal.
6. I doubt very highly that any in the council is concerned about whether any member of the Exec. drinks or not even the most hardcore teetotalists.
7. This is especially true when the SU itself has 5 bars on peremises.
8. I don't know any in the council who would refer to themselves as "puritans".
9. In the comments in the council and out of the council the only ones who consistently raise this issue are the likes of the Belfast holylander. It iis not a main issue, stop pretending that it is.

I could go on to demonstrate further how ignorant these claims are. However I need not...

her roaring and shouting like a halfwit, calling some members of the exec disgusting,

also when said members of staff for the sack i want talking about the sabs either, part time staff watch you backs with kidd around

What performance exactly?

I think Kidd will struggle next year given her performance at Council. Also trying to get members of staff the sack is no way to go into a job.

Onlooker, I have to agree with you! The DUP at Queen's are in a powerful position. In Queen's they have the entire EMC and the entire leadership of the acedemic staff in their pockets. Their powerful reach streches beyond this I hear that the entireity of NUS, USI and NUS-USI are their subjects. Worse the three main parties in every country of the world listens to every word they utter, trembles and obeys.

I have heard terrible terrible things that goes on in their meetings some of the ceremonies include sacrifice of goats, wearing of funny hats, wearing strange tatoos and speaking in strange languages (that are not even Ulster Scot). This is the most terrifying thing, they are in conspiracy to channel Cromwell's spirit into Shane Brogan to remove the last oppostion to their cruel rule Lilly and Duffy. They also posessed the rest of council all the RAG members, Green members, Poly-Soc. members, YU members, TUV members, Dragonslayer members, Drama Soc. members, CU members, Conservative members, English Soc members and Independent members with similar GAA hating spirits. They were fortunately unable to do these wicked practices on the GAA/Law members as they avoided council all year knowing that they could be so easily posessed by the Queen's DUP. Their conspiracy was to remove the Lill/Duff alliance and used their stooges to move against their own free will to stop them. Thankfully, this was defeated and the world can sleep at last knowing that the powerful DUP at Queen's was stopped by a bunch of lads in GAA shirts.

Onlooker get a life, I'm pretty sure that the DUP at Queen's are not that powerful and are not that concerned about world domination or ridding the place of lilly and duffy.

The fact is there is no such group as the DUP at Queens, there is only the DUA.

The other thing of interest is that a majority of people on the motion were not unionists, they were a motley crew of different councillors all who wanted to hear the debate on the issue. This was because of the last council meeting when the Chuckle Brothers failed to turn up to council after apparently being at a GAA formal. This petiton was not to lynch the chuckle brothers.

Those who spoke for the motion were people comming from a range of backrounds, the majority of which to whom the Northern Ireland Constitutional Question does not matter. Notice too that there were no motions brought against Paul Courtney (who is in the GAA + Catholic), Gareth McGreevey (who is in the Law Soc. + Catholic), Shane Brogan (who is from the Republic of Ireland headed up the Irish language stuff in QUB two years ago + Catholic). Sectarianism played no part in this decision whatsoever but it is convenient for those who hate protestants and hard work to claim that Unionists "lead the charge" on a protestant crusade to purify the world of drink, the GAA and Catholics. The truth is those who lead the charge of anti-Chuckle sentiment were catholics and internationals who believed their work ethic was poor and everyone other than the GAA/Law Clicke can see that.

So stop these clouded, sectarian and partizan allgegations of sectatianism. You are not big and you are not smart! Go back to your cave of bitterness and hibernate until you sleep off your gruchiness and then come back and talk civilly

barry duffy entered a barry duffy looky-likey competition and came 3rd

they're not there to just help students on an individual basis. in fact, there's an entire Advice Centre in the union with full-time staff to do that.

The VPs are there to do the big picture stuff. To force big changes within the Union and University.

Showing people where the Bot toilets are, is not the job of a VP. But i'm sure Lilly and Duffy excelled in this role.

great to see the two lads get back in. they are the only 2 members of that exectutive that you see on the ground helping the students. They are the face of the union, they are the 2 men that most people recognise as members if the union and who people would approach if they had a problem, which i did and they quickly sorted it (it wasnt major but they helped alot). most people dont even know who the hell those other people are brogan, hawthorn???? how the hell you supposed to talk to them about a problem your having when you dont even know who they are? if they spent less time licking the ass of the university and more time looking after the students on an individual basis then it would have suited everyone better.

Any word of when the societies cup is being organised?

It's not surprising that anyone speaking in favour of Lilduff on here seems to be, well, thick as f**k.

How was it secterian pray tell?

You are aware of those who were most strong for it arent you....whereas Unionists played little part, and i can tell you there were Unionists who voted for, against and abstained on the motions respectively. Was the very presence of a 'Prod about the place' enough to trigger the bigoted paranoia of some?

Perhaps one of those associating this with Unionists could look into who it was pushing for this, and who was most passionate about it...

It shows the staggering levels of ignorance among some posting on here, and no doubt some of the GAA-Law clan that arrived in and left before the council sitting, as to what the motives for this were and who it was you were watching make speeches and voting against.

Clearly some of you turned up thinking you where there to defend you own tribe against the big bad Unionists. That says a hell of a lot more about you than it does about any of us and ANYONE including the two VP's in question who know what they are talking about will know how ridiculous you sound.

I have to say as a Unionist i end this year with more respect for Lilly/Duffy than i did at the start for my own reasons. I cant say the same for the ragtag mob of street urchins that they brought with them last night. Thank goodness at least one of them who fled with the rest was soundly defeated at the ballot box in the elections if thats the respect she chooses to show council and the SU in general.

Sad to see sectarianism back into the Union.