Students Occupy Council Offices

by Legend! Fri Jan 27, 2006 00:37

Congrats to all involved. Worst system ever!

by pat c Fri Jan 27, 2006 11:04

well done comrades. the grants are not treated seriously by a lot of councils and therefore are not prioritised. this is a decision made by senior management, not by the ordinary council administrative staff.

while a lot of councils require extra staff, the immediate problem of paying grants could be solved by a simple allocation of overtime.

by Lefty type Fri Jan 27, 2006 11:13

...at work. Fair play to all involved. Keep up the good fight.

by Politician Watch Fri Jan 27, 2006 11:37

Looks like a successful protest and will make the council officials think twice about who is at the other end of the delayed grant cheque. I think that the councillors in each council is somewhat to blame. It is true that senior management run the councils. But they can also be pushed in certain directions by the councillors. The Dublin Councils are run by Fine Gael and Labour coalitions. They have not put pressure on the county managers on the grants. In the elections last year was there any mention of student grants? Pat C is right that senior managers are to blame but so are the councillors and the Fine Gael-Labour coalitions.

by pat c Fri Jan 27, 2006 12:04

"Pat C is right that senior managers are to blame but so are the councillors and the Fine Gael-Labour coalitions."

councillors could make more of an issue of this. while the manager is responsible for administration, the council could force him to prioritise the grants work.

some will say this might be at the expense of housing allocation. the answer to that is more staff and funding are required.

by Dermot L - Labour Party (personal capacity) Fri Jan 27, 2006 20:33

Always nice to get in a stab against the Labour Party but the reality is somewhat different.

Labour has had proposals for a centralised, high-threshold grant for some years now and Jan O'Sullivan has raised it on numerous occasions in the Dáil. In (approx) October 2004 she made a public call for a centralised system in the Dáil which was supposdely supported by Mary Hanafin.

As of yet, the Govt have not even suggested a date for when the proposed Student Support Bill might be brought forward.

Labour Councillors have also brought motions to their respective councils in Dublin calling for centralisation of the system and the threshold increase, e.g. http://www.labour.ie/youth/news/index/20051024131945.html

Labour Youth in particular, representing students across many campuses, are active in pushing for change in this regard. This is evident in the number of Labour activists pictured at the occupation of DLRCC above.

This isn't the debate for sectarianism - it's an issue where all on the left can come together as one, fighting and achieving a lasting change and making a real difference. Well done to all those involved yesterday but the stuggle goes on (I've yet to receive my second installment, anyone up for occupying South Dublin Co Co?!)

by woodie Fri Jan 27, 2006 20:45

Labour are in the ruling groups in every council in Dublin.They've been in power for nearly 2 years now and we've seen no difference from before on this issue or any other. We still have bin tax, cuts on public services, a free run for property speculators, we still have badly organised grants etc etc...

Sorry Dermot, it seems Labour in power in the council's means absolutely nothing. How can you say Labour are in any way an alternative.

by Noel Hogan - Labour Sat Jan 28, 2006 12:12

...because they don't spend half their time fighting other left groups, but instead push on with policy? If you disagree, just look at how the Bin tax protest went. After a promising start, the SP and SWP ended up fighting each other, then the anarcho gropus joined in on the fun. In the end, failure. It was the Judaean People's Front versus the People's Front of Judaea all over again. A noble campaign ruined by the seemingly genetic inability of the micro left to work with those who may share the same goals but belong to different organisations.

So Labour get it wrong from time to time - fair enough. But unlike the micro-groups we have a tradition of open debate and discussion. Didn't get it right first time? Then raise the issue again. Fight, push, debate.

For me my final break with the micro-left came in 2002-03 when I was in USI. When the Government tried to reintroduce fees, I was suprised at the way the micro-groups rallied to defend what was an initiative introduced by Labour (Free third level fees) while accusing them of selling out at the same time. How can you accuse a party of selling out if you are at the same time rallying to defend something they introduced?

And why are Labour an alternative? SImply because we aspire to be in Government, unlike the micro groups who aspire to revolution at some undefined point in the future. If you want more and better grants, or something really outrageous like, say, the abolition of third level fees, you can through your weight behind some of the micro groups and spend decades building for a revolution, or you can put Labour into power.

by 'dother Sat Jan 28, 2006 12:34

"they don't spend half their time fighting other left groups, but instead push on with policy? If you disagree, just look at how the Bin tax protest went."

Should I go back through the archives and wheel out aul Dermo Lacey - or shall I leave it to you Noel? What a great role Labour played in the Bin Tax. Two feet bad, four feet good. Onwards to Labour in Power. Heee Haw..Heee...Haw!

You really showed the wide berth of your cluelessness with that post there. What a lovely rhetorical flourish flows from your finger tips - good to see you learnt something in USI. Awful pity it's riddled with the same idiotic, uninformed sectarianism you seem to moan on about. How entertaining it is to watch you struggle with positions other than your own. Don't ye do educationals in LY?

"But unlike the micro-groups we have a tradition of open debate and discussion."

Go ask Paul Dillon or Mick O'Reilly about this. Or maybe anyone else who was at yer recent LY social partnership discussion. That was a fine rant auld Mick delivered about the lack of debate and open discussion in the LP. But I'm sure you probably view him as just a wrecker, don't ya? Maybe you can fill us Indymedia readers in on the sort of open internal debate that led to Rabbittes recent flabbergasting remarks about migrant workers? Or maybe the LP really is a case of the farmers in the parlimentary party going "yup..yup...drive!" and the sheep in the membership going "baaaaa...baaaaah." But I hope I'm wrong. I know in many of the micro-groups there is a fine history of internal debate and discussion, care you to check out their conference notes and constitutions.

"How can you accuse a party of selling out if you are at the same time rallying to defend something they introduced?"

So you view reforms as only having specific benefit to a party? As if the reform can only be appreciated by those steeped in the legacy of what ever martyrs ye claim to draw on. Eh, no I don't think so, just because LP used the opportunities open to it to introduce a rather mild fucking reform of higher education, does not mean I'll support it, but it doesn't mean I'll look a gift horse in the gob either. Defending and agitating for such reforms is a class issue, seperate from whatever auld tweeds in the LP pushed them through.

by Noel Hogan Sat Jan 28, 2006 13:51

See what I mean? Must be a weak argument if you have to spout off insults like that.

I take it you didn't read Paul Dillon's letter in the Irish Times this week - as he said, it's perfectly possible to disagree with the actions of others (including the Leadership) and be a member of the party. That's the meaning of "open debate". Note also that we don't resort to personalised insults when disagreeing with someone....

And for the record I don't think Mick O'Reilly is a wrecker or anything like that - indeed the party needs more people like him. Nor do I agree with the recent approach regarding migrant workers. But ask yourself why are people like Mick O'Reilly in Labour in the first place? Or others like him? Because they see the potential that a party like Labour has. I've been to some of the Marxism conferences in Trinity and they've been interesting and informative, but debates at such meetings generally revolve around differences that are so small to be non-debates anywhere else.

"Defending and agitating for such reforms is a class issue, seperate from whatever auld tweeds in the LP pushed them through."

So it's more important to "defend and agitate" rather than actually get these things done? And this "rather mild reform" has opened the door to thousands of students who otherwise wouldn't have been able to attend third level in the first place. And who says a party needs to be either activist based or dail based? Most Labour members see the benefit of both approaches.

by Chris Bond - UCDSU (Personal capacity) Sat Jan 28, 2006 13:57

Probably the best student demo i have ever been at. we had the whole council rattled especially after we shoved security out of the way when they tried to physically block us on the way in and we even got a meeting with the person responsible for dealing with the HEA grants in the near future as a result of our protest.

Where was the USI president?, its a complete disgrace, that the person paid to represent students on a national level doesnt lend support to a camapign concerning one of the conerstone student issues. The man is no longer fit to represent students, he should be impeached.

by d'other Sat Jan 28, 2006 13:58

Marxism is not a party conference, it is a series of political discussions orchastrated by the SWP, think of it as a rally. But that is one organisation. Maybe you can enlighten us with your insights on the internal dynamics of the rest of the leftist organisations?

Great to see that in the LP you are allowed to debate and speak your mind -pity no one is listening to ye though It would seem ye actually have no input into the decisions carried out by your party leadership evidenced by Rabbittes statement - so whats the point of that then Noel eh?

Bleat bleat bleat...

by Noel Hogan Sat Jan 28, 2006 14:04

If he was informed that the protest was taking place and refused to support it than I agree, it is shameful.

He was informed, wasn't he?

by Chris Bond Sat Jan 28, 2006 14:14

He was indeed, he also knew about the campaign all along and his prepartion for it was shambolic.

by Noel Hogan Sat Jan 28, 2006 15:22

Well done, here's hoping that Congress sees a more activist officer board for 06-07.

by ede - ógra shinnféin Sat Jan 28, 2006 15:35 eiresaoirse32 at yahoo dot com Monaghan 765758768

Congratulations may the forces be with you and break the capitialist system down by not making a phone call for a meeting in the first place, let the revolution Begin Mammy i havent got me grant im gonna have to find my way to skool without the insured and taxed skate board .

by Darragh Sat Jan 28, 2006 16:53

What the hell are you talking about you fool? There were many phonecalls made, and they were all ignored. You obviously don't know the importance of a grant. Many people I know who recieve the grant are also holding down jobs, working crazy hours.

So stop shitting out your mouth, and try saying something productive. Idiot.

by Jane Horgan-Jones - UCDSU Education Officer Sun Jan 29, 2006 20:39 sueducation at ucd dot ie

There have been some allegations that the protest was a unilateral action by UCD (mainly made by the President of USI and some other CO's). People have also said that it is my fault and the fault of UCD's deputy president that the protesters were exclusively UCD students and no USI officer board or other student unions were present. So, I'd just like to post a clarification of events before during and after Thursday's action to clear things up.

I’ll give a rundown of my involvement in the grants campaign, the involvement of USI, and why any allegation that it is somehow UCDSU's fault that Thursday’s protest was not a national one is complete crap. Apologies for the length but it is a long story and requires detail to do it justice.

I met Tony McDonnell, USI President, on the 27th December in town to discuss the grants campaign. We had an extensive discussion about it and I made it clear that I thought it was essential that USI get on board for this campaign.

I said that we had been working on it ourselves in UCD (through letter writing, phonecalls, petitions etc) but that I felt it was now time for it to be national if it was going to really achieve any long term change. I also said that I felt some direct action should be taken, and that this would be a natural progression of the campaign at least in UCD given the extensive lobbying work already done by our SU to no real avail.

I mentioned the idea of a Day of Action, where councils all around the country could be targeted by different local SU’s. I agreed to forward Tony a list of the dates that grants came in to UCD last year, and also my own text for the flyer and poster for the campaign.

Originally this had been planned for UCD to do ourselves, and I had discussed it with our designer, but once Tony assured me that USI would take it on and print the posters and leaflets, I was more than happy to pass the text on if it was to make the campaign truly national.

I also suggested the 25th/26th January as a possible date for an action, and stressed that any later than this would be unworkable as the second instalments of the grants would have mostly arrived and it would no longer be the “issue of the day” and we would be far less likely to get students out to protest. Tony agreed with me on this.

The next day, I forwarded Tony, as agreed, information from our admin building and the text I had written for posters and flyers.

On the 7th of January I attended a meeting with Tony McDonnell and Ryan Brennan in USI Ceann Áras to discuss the design of the posters.

The text on the posters that were eventually sent to CO’s is the text I wrote, with some minor alterations that I made the week after.

At this meeting, there was extensive discussion about whether we should put details of a national day of action on the posters. I was in favour of this, while Tony was reluctant to do so, as (quote) “I don’t want to have a protest with just you, me and three lefties from UCD”. I found this to be a prevailing attitude of Tony’s throughout the meeting; a reluctance to attempt to do anything progressive for fear of failure.

We eventually agreed that we would leave a white strip at the bottom of the poster so that if SU’s did want to hold an action, then they could write the details in here themselves. Tony stressed that not all unions would want to hold protests, and that he had received mixed reactions to the idea when he floated it to CO’s by phone.

I can only imagine that he was not lying to me, and that he did indeed explain to CO’s what the white strip was for, and mention the idea of a protest as discussed with me, and our agreed proposed date. If he did not, then that is not my fault, nor was it my job to contact CO’s and ask them to get involved. That is the job of the national union, and given the circumstances I was helping as much as was possible given my commitments in UCD. Similarly, if he did ring them, and they were not interested in the idea of a day of action, then that is hardly UCD’s fault either. We can hardly be expected to shelve our plans for a campaign simply because other unions refuse to come on board.

Again, I stress, Tony took on the responsibility of contacting other unions about a proposed action or day of action. This is unsurprising, considering that it is HIS JOB.

I then heard nothing for quite some time, but received 60 posters to UCD which I put up without writing on the white strip as I had not heard from Tony about the possibility of a national action, and wanted to make sure if one was called, I could go around and write on the white strip. I then had a phone conversation with Tony during which he gave the impression that the mood was not there for a national actions (s) and so he would not be calling one. Of course, if he had called one, then we would have been fully behind that and prioritised it over any local action. However, a national demo or day of action was not called, and it is impossible to blame me, a CO officer, for that instead of the President of the National Union. I also received none of the promised flyers, which Tony had been reluctant to send to every college but assured me that on demand, I could get some for UCD. These flyers have still not materialised.

On the evening of Thursday 19th January, a student in UCD informed me that he had learned Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County Council grants were to be excessively late again this term. The next day, I discussed the idea of holding a protest with Dave Curran, Deputy President of UCDSU. However, as we like to involve our class reps in decision making about this sort of thing, we called a meeting on the Monday to decide finally on the action, and to decide what form it would take.

That same Monday night, I informed Tony McDonnell that the protest would definitely be taking place. I received no response until Thursday morning, when I was informed that he would not be able to attend due to short notice. In the meantime, Dave made numerous attempts to involve other colleges, especially those in the Dublin area who would be particularly affected by DL/Rathdown grants being late. This, of course, is not his job either.

Some colleges responded and said they would be able to send a few people, and some said that the date did not suit due to short notice. Tony, unlike Dave Curran, has the ability to send an email to all USI member colleges with one click of a button, and could have done this. However, he didn’t, so we had to do our best with photocopied contact pages from the USI diary divided up among busy officers to contact.

Of course this is unfortunate and of course we would prefer if more had been able to attend, but given the time-dependant nature of the problem and the inevitable fact that no date will suit everyone, we decided to continue with the action.

However, if this day of action had been called by USI at the beginning of the month, when I suggested it to Tony (along with the date, which remained the same throughout for various reasons), then the problem of late notice would not have existed. I would argue that it is USI dragging their feet, and not any fault of mine or Dave’s, which resulted in the protest being a mostly UCD affair.

Regarding Tony’s non-attendance due to “short notice”, it is worth noting that at National Council on Saturday he said that he had a meeting of the National Qualifications Authority (could be wrong on the exact name of this body) and that as this dealt with important issues such as the Bologna Process, it would have been impossible for him to skip this meeting. This does not seem to tally with his excuse of “short notice”, but seems to point to a prioritisation of this meeting over attending the grants protest. This is of course his prerogative, but I think he should be honest about the reasons for non-attendance rather than trying to blame myself or Dave.

All the notice that was possible was given, and he was informed of the protest the same day as our class reps.

I find it incredible that two officers from one individual college can be blamed for the failure of the USI President to organise a national campaign, especially given those officers’ numerous attempts to involve, assist and include USI at every turn in the road, only to be completely let down by an incompetent and passive leadership. UCD students who attended the protest on Thursday should indeed be applauded for their activism and for their solidarity with students nationwide who are suffering financially due to the disastrous grants system.

Significant press coverage, including RTE, was secured for the campaign and awareness raised about the plight of Irish grant-holders. This action, combined with all the lobbying and letter-writing, all the petitions and posters and flyers and stands, is a campaign. Tony McDonnell sending out posters to CO’s with a space for action details which never gets filled out is not.

by former usi member Mon Jan 30, 2006 20:30

I was a member of the union of students in ireland when noel was the deputy president. his answer to the 69% hike in registration tax was to float 69 rubber duckies in the liffey and to really step it up he went down capel street with the usi education officer and bought hand-cuffs for the front of the department of education. he probably thinks that those disagreeing with him then were 'wreckers' or 'ultra lefts' that only wanted to attack each other with pointless arguments.

noel has got a few things wrong. the bin tax was not introduced becuase of fights among the left groups. of course he's quite ignorant of this as he did not participate in that struggle. most of the usi officers (with the exception of about 2 or 3) played a bad role when it came to bin tax and the jailing of a student over in ucd. the councils won because the pressure put on by the campaigns were not strong enough. it cannot be said that intra left fighting was the reason. noel also ommits that the labour party support bin tax. the most they want to do is reform it. labour are in power in the dublin counicls why isn't it abolished? why did labour mayor of dublin vote for it? I disagree with labour having some kind of glorious internal democracy. there is no serious organised opposition to rabbitte. even the 'left' that oppose the racist deportations are not opposed to other policies such as coalition or the eu. if there was they'd probably get the boot just like cllr. bree.

the protest at dun laoghaire seems like good work and fair play to all involved. chris is quite inexperienced if that was the best protest he was ever on. but all the same it's a step in the right direction for the students union. the usi are a f**king disgrace. also what's the story with the other unions in dublin? why didn't they support it? lets expose them.

by Topper Mon Jan 30, 2006 20:50

Jaysis, these "ede" character really is something, his recent posts on this site have been among the most knuckle-dragging ever seen

by pat c Tue Jan 31, 2006 11:02

i actually doubt if ede is really in sf. most of his comments seem calculated to bring the party into disrepute.

by ede - ógra shinnféin Wed Feb 01, 2006 11:45 eiresaoirse32 at yahoo dot com Monaghan 54767676

A serious issue indeed , have been helping student's get Grants for a few years now, apply in june to recieve at christmas is the usual way, 2month's in the post, 2 month's in the VEC, 2 month's with santa before it reaches me.

by pat c Wed Feb 01, 2006 12:04

If you think this is a seriuous issue then why are you knocking those who are taking direct action to try and do something about the matter? You are not doing SF any favours in the style of your attacks on all and sundry.

by ede - ógra shinnféin Wed Feb 01, 2006 13:02 eiresaoirse32 at yahoo dot com Monaghan 667587678

Just looking for a good blood boiled reaction pat glad i got it more power to ya and all who are demanding there rights
Glad that the students are taking this issue serious, for it is a serious National Disgrace that should be tackled locally and Nationally and Its good to see your campaign Taking momentum as it need's to spread it'sself nationally and hope it do''''es 4 ill be looking one next year sin é ede

by Chris Bond Sat Feb 11, 2006 22:45

''chris is quite inexperienced if that was the best protest he was ever on''

Point taken i have only been a student activist for 17 months, but i sed it was the best student demo i was ever on not the best protest.