Fellow UC Pols Members at the University of Canterbury As always thank you to those whom put themselves forward for election in times where engagement with the younger voter is really low This is sad when you dont even want to take place in major decisions like your own “goddamn” future. You snooze you lose. The democratic process is supposed to be sacrosanct and it is well documented that the loss of some votes in Western Australia brought about another election at a cost of around $60 million Therefore would the executive please peruse and respond to my blog as someone whom was at the AGM and commented on gordondicksonblogtown.co.nz Again I plead with you to accept the democratic process is supposed to be sacrosanct. Every one is entitled to have his or here vote cast and recorded accurately A very concerned UC Pols member
As to the requested information from the University of Canterbury under the Official Information Act and “LGOIMA” in relation to the election of student representative on the Council itself. No response today. I next expect the part time Vice Chancellor Mr R Carr to expect the candidates and the 12,000 students to pay for this election information despite having been provided with plenty of money already and hand delivered too. All the while reserving the right to destroy the voting result data held by the Scrutineer and Counsel for the University Mr Donald McBeath of MDS Law in Addington.This shows how much this Council respects the democratic process. We are all taught in lectures that the intent of Parliament is that this information should be made readily available and the Minister should sack the Council like ECAN and the Southern District Health Board It should never ever ever be forgotten that the candidates were informed formally the existing Council members would not enter into debate with any of the 7 candidates any one of whom could have been elected to sit alongside them for one year. More shame on the Council in a supposedly democratic country. To UC I ask release the information as it is in the best interests of democracy and will go someway to showing the public that what is taught in Law lectures is practiced by the University of Canterbury
UC Pols (the Political Society here at the University of Canterbury) election today saw no bloodletting on the floor but votes were cast and at least one cast aside. Raises the possibility of even more ? Again again and again we find voting irregularities and already one re-held election here at the University. Have a guess what the white object is on the floor in the foreground of the below photograph is ? Where it should have been is in the hands of the vote counters but was it? Begs the question what happens now. Yet another election! Every vote is important n’cest pas? Seems the current theme of re-held elections will continue. On one hand the people of Canterbury dont get a vote when it comes to a Regional Council, simply fixed in my view, and here they are at UC disregarding and discarding them. I am confident the attendees at today’s election from both the University of Canterbury Students Association’s current Executive ( a very senior law abiding one to I might add) and the “LICE” scrutineer (set up for monitoring elections here at U C) whom was both present and highly visible at the election will have plenty to say.
P S It would be disingenuous to say in relation to the last election (the third one ) when if one examines the documents available to date one was all that was necessary. Yeah I know. I am awaiting a response from the University of Canterbury Council’s Vice Chancellor R Carr to an Official Information Request of some considerable time ago now relating to the election and despite the fact that they have the money, well over one hundred dollars, in advance and it will only take ten minutes to do a simple cut, paste and send I still await this simple request to be complied with. This is the second one and the first is with the Ombudsman. The first partial response had almost 60 blacked out areas in just a very few pages. Unless that is they decide to involve “Counsel” again. This Counsel has the dual role of “Counsel” and the “Scrutineer” and has been asked not to “destroy” the voting results despite the Council saying to the candidates and voters they will. The longer we all wait for the Official Information Act Response Numbered “15-55 ” and more than enough time has past (I should be getting interest) the greater the opportunity exists for the University to destroy the “raw” voting data. It could be suggested that if the Counsel for the University is needed to help re examine this election then he would have to stand down because it wont look good jumping from the floor of the court room into the witness box answering a question put by himself on behalf of U C and then jumping back out onto the floor of the court room to ask himself another question repeated as necessary! The successful candidate is also asked to comment but please tell us which of the two hats you have you are wearing when you respond
Disclaimer I have received a formal expression of concern that I have failed to “unidentify” myself from the New Zealand Labour Party and hence, this, in my humble opinion as a Life Member of the New Zealand Labour Party, disclaimer. It is akin to saying Richie doesn’t belong in the “All Backs”. As a result of this three of us are now about to face the wrath of the special “Constitution Sub Committee” of which only two have the right to appear???
Democracy or what?
“No Nukes” and UCPOLS Member and Voter
E & O E
Blog 32 11:35 a m 10/5/2015
University of Canterbury Student Representative on the “Full” Council Election Results
Hot of the Press
I have just been and asked Joanne X on the sixth floor for a copy of the University of Canterbury Election results for student representative seat on Council and been referred to the office of the combinedly roled University of Canterbury Registrar and Council Returning Officer Mr Jeffery Field and can confirm that “they are not available at this time”
The outcome of being referred to the office of the Registrar and Election Returning Officer Mr Jeffery Field, whom was in the company of another very mature balding European male, as at this time unidentified, despite the name of the “Scrutineer” having already been asked formally of the Chancellor J Woods more than long enough ago to have been provided with this information. Mr Field acknowledged that the results would be announced sometime and by email.
What I would have preferred to hear was that the records of the voting which is the subject of much correspondence with “Council” have not been destroyed. Another sad sad day for democracy in Aotearoa
As one of seven student “Candidates” awaiting the outcome for an electronic in most part election for which polling closed at 5:00 last Friday I feel like I am in Syria, Harare, Libya, the Square between the Red shirts and the Yellow shirts in Bangkok or Tahrir Square again. And still we await the Prime Ministers formally requested statements on this regime here at the University of Canterbury