BY SEAN ASHFORD AND EMMA GALLEN

The exams being sat were from various sciences and all years, including final year Physics and Computer Science. Both the BEng and MEng Engineering Geology exam, as well as a psychology exam and business ethics were also being sat.

With so many students it was impossible to keep exam conditions, and university practice dictated that the exam was terminated.

Second year Psychology student Rachel Brown declared her anger at the lack of management and control over the situation. She said: “It is incredibly frustrating having worked so hard for something and then being left without knowing what’s happening. The invigilators did not know what was going on, sat us down and told us we could start are paper again and then said after a few minutes that we had been outside for too long.”

Initially the School of Biomedical Science’s Module Convenor has rescheduled the second year exam for the 4th June, a day later than Biomedical Science students were due to finish their exams.

However, an emergency meeting was called at 4pm involving representatives from all the School’s affected by the chaos as well as VP Education Nathan Anderson.

In the meeting a number of possible alternatives were considered. The option of marking the exam as it stood was rejected due to the fact that some students answered their paper in a different order to others, making a comparative analysis unfair. The alternative assessment option was also rejected for similar reasons.

The decision taken by the emergency committee was that that students would be awarded a mark based on their examination marks as they stand with the option of repeating in August for a higher mark if they so wish.

An email sent to all affected students read: “As a result of an unintended fire alarm sounding at 11 am during examinations being held in the Physical Education Centre this morning, your examination had to be terminated. It has been agreed that the examination will not be rescheduled in the current diet of examinations. Under the Supplementary Study Regulations, your School will assign a mark based on your performance in the examination and this will be recorded on your transcript and released on the official publication of results date of 23rd of June 2011.

If you are dissatisfied with the mark returned in respect of the terminated examination, you will have a right to take the examination as a first sitting in the re-sit period in August. If the result of the re-sit is higher than the original result, it will replace the original mark on your transcript, and may contribute to a revised degree classification.”

When confronted with these options a number of students were relatively content with the solution. However others continued to complain, with a number stating that the exam paper was the best they could have hoped for and that any alternative would likely still result in a lower mark.

Final year Computer Science student, Ben McFeeters said: “When the exam was terminated I was having nightmares about a June resit, when I had other travelling plans and just wanted to get finished.

“I’m extremely happy with the ruling, whatever mark I get probably will not affect my classification. I will be in Canada anyway in August and I am not coming back to do another exam whatever happens!”

According to Nathan Anderson he has already received over 40 complaints regarding the debacle, with staff also voicing their disapproval at the turn of events.

He also added that for any final year students involved, they would still be entitled to graduate during the summer, with the option of changing their degree classification if they re-sit in August.

It is still unclear as to why the fire alarm was set off, with a number of reasons varying from construction workers to burnt toast being proposed. Anderson has stated that if it emerges that the alarm was set off maliciously then the person responsible would be fully punished.

The first SU Council meeting since the sabbatical elections witnessed a number of constitutional amendments passed as well as the inclusion of two new societies. The meeting also featured a number of heated debates between councillors over the proposal of performance related pay (PRP) and an emergency motion relating to the upcoming University College Union (UCU) strikes on the 21 and 24 March. 

BY SEAN AHFORD AND KERRI-ANNE CAMPBELL

SU President, Gareth McGreevy was not in attendance due to annual leave. In addition, it was announced that Ryan Cushley would be stepping down from his position on Council. 

The first new society to be proposed was the Rotaract Society, a fundraising body which has already raised money for diverse causes such as leukaemia research and the Simon community. The second society, proposed by current Council Speaker Joe Corina, was QUB Labour Students. SU Councillor, Sarah Wright took on the role of Speaker for the duration of the proposal. Both societies were ratified unanimously by Council. 

The majority of the constitutional reforms were proposed by current VP Community, Jay Downs. Downs’ first proposal was to delete the constitutional clause which required amendments to be ratified by a Union General Meeting or by Referendum prior to submission to the Senate. The motion was opposed by VP Education, Nathan Anderson. For Anderson, to suggest referendums and general meetings were unnecessary was against the democratic principles of the University. The amendment, however, was carried by 38 votes to 21.

The second amendment was to change the process by which a referendum takes place so as to make it easier for them to garner enough support to get over the lower threshold for ratification (a 10 per cent turnout is required). Despite the fact that this amendment was passed unanimously, a number of senior councillors were unhappy with these two proposals, calling them a contradiction of interests. According to one councillor, whereas the first amendment called for a severe reduction in the number of referendums at Queen’s, the second was designed to make these easier and more workable tools for the Union’s disposal, therefore making the decision to largely remove referendums as “stupid”. 

Other motions carried included one to make all questions directed at sabbatical officers or any senior member of the Students’ Union as being “professionally relevant” and the introduction of anonymous questions directed towards sabbatical officers. It has been suggested the latter amendment may have been in response to the fact that so far this academic year there have been no questions directed at the sabbatical officers from Council and therefore they have not been held to account as much as they should be.

The amendment was passed with only two councillors opposing, Jason O’Neill in particular stated that this set a “dangerous precedent” for future years. O’Neill also opposed the introduction of an amendment which would lead the way to performance related pay being introduced for next year’s sabbatical team, stating that it would “open Pandora’s Box”. O’Neill expressed his concern that it could lead to future animosities being expressed at Council. However, the mer otion was passed by 46 votes to 4.

The final constitutional amendment passed, and passed unanimously, was the introduction of end of year reports by sabbatical officers to aid the transfer of future sabbatical teams.

The final major issue of the evening was an emergency motion proposed by NUS-USI Deputy President, Lorcan Mullen, and this passed after a heated debate between certain members of Council. The motion called for the SU to support the upcoming UCU strikes by urging students not to cross the picket line and attend classes. At one point of the debate a councillor accused the motion of being “pure socialism”. VP Downs said that if fees do not increase then the University will cut 400 jobs and that this is why students ought to show solidarity with the unions. After two proposed changes the motion was eventually carried with only 4 council members opposing it.

BY SEAN ASHFORD

It has recently emerged that three candidates will run for the post of VP Education. Louis O’Neill of Accountancy and of the GAA has in recent days declared his candidacy and will face Council Speaker Joe Corina and councillor Nuala McAdams for the post. Mr O’Neill is the latest of candidates to declare he will run in the upcoming elections and it is possible that others may come forward before nominations close next Monday.

A split in the current sabbatical team sees VPs Jay Downs, Niall Bole and Adam McGibbon standing against fellow officers Fiona Kidd and Samantha Tan. This marks a turnaround from last year when all five of these candidates campaigned alongside each other.

Thus far there appears that three major groups will contest this election, it is not known whether more candidates will be added to each ticket. The most complete group so far is the team of Jay Downs, Niall Bole, Ethan Loughery, Nuala McAdams, Adam McGibbon and Lorcan Mullen. The other group containing current sabbatical officers consists so far of Samantha Tan, Fiona Kidd and Joe Corina. The third group in this year’s election will consist of a mixture of candidates from the Law Society and GAA which includes candidates Jason O’Neill, Niall McShane, Aidan Hughes and Treasa Harkin.

There are at the moment three confirmed candidates for the role of SU president. Current VP Community Jay Downs will compete against fellow VP Samantha Tan and Jason O’Neill, president of the Law Society at Queen’s.

The contest for Clubs and Societies at the moment appears to be a straight contest between incumbent Niall Bole and the GAA’s Niall McShane, on the same ticket as the Law Society.

The role of VP Campaigns will be vital in the coming months and current VP Fiona Kidd will seek to retain her role against NUS-USI Deputy President Lorcan Mullen. For the post of VP Community, student councillor Derek Crosby will stand as an independent candidate against Queen’s Radio station manager Ethan Loughrey and the Law Society’s Aidan Hughes.

Thus far no candidate has been put forward to take on Adam McGibbon as VP Welfare. McGibbon has enjoyed a high profile due to his performance as a Green Party candidate in last year’s Westminster election. At the time of print there appears to be no one willing to challenge McGibbon.

Finally for the position of VP Equality and Diversity, Lucy Griffin, Treasa Harkin and Damien Edgar will contest what is perhaps the most open position available. All three candidates have kept quiet about their campaigns so far, but with the elections rapidly approaching do expect each to begin their campaigns in earnest within a matter of days.

Nominations for the seven student officer positions will close on Monday 21 February at 5.00pm, and polling will take place via Queen’s Online from Tuesday 1 March until 5.00pm on Wednesday 2 March.

BY EMMA GALLEN

This proposal is likely to soothe tensions within Cable’s party over the looming threat of higher fees, especially after the last autumn’s Browne review. The Liberal Democrats pledged to phase out the fees system in their election manifesto, but have been accused of betraying students (and their many student voters) after abandoning this position in the coalition agreement.

While the student unions are broadly receptive to Cable’s proposal, student support is not universal. Many see a lifelong tax to be more unfair than fees; others may see university as an investment, with higher debt at a prestigious university worth the risk for a better potential career.

QUBSU VP Welfare Adam McGibbon thinks this mindset values university for the wrong reasons. “University is about learning about life and meeting people as well as gaining a qualification.” For McGibbon, Cable’s other proposals regarding university disregard some of the major benefits of campus life. The VP’s view is that encouraging more students to stay at home to study overlooks the importance of gaining independence.

Cable also dismisses classes with low contact time, claiming that there is “no need for seven hour weeks” and arguing they could be taught in two years instead of three. This proposal undermines the value of most Arts degrees where class time is minimal in order to allow more time for student reading and staff research.

VP Education Nathan Anderson stressed that students must be cautious in their readings of Cable’s proposal, highlighting that the majority of Cable’s cabinet are ideologically opposed to a “tax on the affluent.” He was also keen to make it known that Queen’s will not necessarily be affected by Cable’s proposals as Northern Ireland regulates its own universities and are have to carry out their own review.  However, he does warn that the Browne review will set a precedent that Northern Ireland’s Department of Education and Learning will follow.

NUS-USI Deputy President Lorcan Mullen thinks that the proposals are an overall positive:

“While this is only a proposal, and a proposal facing likely opposition from the vice-chancellors and senior Tories (including ministers in Cable’s department), it is encouraging news. It is my firm view that any settlement that makes education free at the point of access, and brings proportionate post-degree contributions will be fairer.

Of course, the various student unions will make a proper assessment of Cable’s plans when more details are available. However, this should not distract students from the dangers of a zealously pro-market, pro-cuts government seeking to concurrently slash spending in our system.”