MPs attack suspensions of University of Sussex demo students

The Argus: MPs attack suspensions of University of Sussex demo students MPs attack suspensions of University of Sussex demo students

The University of Sussex has suspended five students for “persistent disruption” to campus life following a string of high profile protests.

MPs have slammed the move with hundreds of staff and fellow students holding a demonstration at the Falmer site yesterday.

University bosses claim the action was necessary to quash “violence, intimidation” and “serious disruption”.

Protesters say the move is a serious threat to freedom of speech and lawful protest.

Law and international relations student Michael Segalov is one of the five who received his suspension on Wednesday evening.

He said: “I came back from work to see the letter. It’s unbelievable. We all dispute that we have done anything wrong, but even so given this is a so-
called democracy you would think we would be given a hearing or a chance to defend ourselves.

"It’s worrying because we have exams coming up and many need to use the facilities on campus for study.”

The university has seen numerous protests in the past year over the outsourcing of campus jobs.

In the spring a 54-day occupation culminated with violent scenes and arrests before a further occupation which ended on Tuesday.

The university said it singled out the five as those involved in “organising or leading the repeated serious disruption of campus”.

They are banned from stepping on campus until internal disciplinary action has concluded – thought to be some time in the new year.

Dubbed the Farthing Five, they are masters student Adriano Marotta Merola, final year students Lewis Nielson, Hichem Maafi and Michael Segalov and second year international relations student Can Aniker.

About 500 students and lecturers gathered for a rally at 1pm yesterday calling on management to lift the suspensions.

Among them were University of Brighton lecturers Jem Price, 48, and David Watson, 50.

Mr Price said: “We’ve come over in our lunch break to show our support.
 

“This feels like the victimisation of a group of students and I think there could be a different approach from the university.”

Representatives from unions, stu- dent groups and the Green Party gave speeches including city councillor Phelim Mac Cafferty.

He branded the suspensions “callous” and “awful” before reading a statement on behalf of Pavilion MP Caroline Lucas, unable to attend because of the autumn budget statement.

She said: “Those students who speak out and engage in legitimate peaceful protest should not be criminalised.

"Our universities and the government have a choice and we must continue in our efforts to get them to put people before profit.”

John McDonnell, MP for Hayes and Harlington, has also pledged to raise the issue in Westminster.

University registrar John Duffy explained students would have the opportunity to defend themselves.

He said: “We have excluded these students to protect the interests of all of the students, staff and visitors who are entitled to use the campus without fear of intimidation and serious disruption.”

 

Comments (24)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:02am Fri 6 Dec 13

whoee! says...

Arr the great unwashed lol
Arr the great unwashed lol whoee!

9:12am Fri 6 Dec 13

s&k says...

The right to protest is a necessity of democracy.
The right to protest is a necessity of democracy. s&k

9:39am Fri 6 Dec 13

Tallywhacker says...

s&k wrote:
The right to protest is a necessity of democracy.
Is there a hierarchy of rights somewhere? Does one persons right of protest automatically eliminate another persons right of going to work or free passage? What if your protest is supported by a minority, can you still trump others rights? Peacefull protest shouldn't include occupation or destruction, Having a big mouth getting on tv and wrecking something isn't democracy it's anarchy. Democracy is majority rule not loud counts more just because they are noisy.
[quote][p][bold]s&k[/bold] wrote: The right to protest is a necessity of democracy.[/p][/quote]Is there a hierarchy of rights somewhere? Does one persons right of protest automatically eliminate another persons right of going to work or free passage? What if your protest is supported by a minority, can you still trump others rights? Peacefull protest shouldn't include occupation or destruction, Having a big mouth getting on tv and wrecking something isn't democracy it's anarchy. Democracy is majority rule not loud counts more just because they are noisy. Tallywhacker

9:51am Fri 6 Dec 13

thinkbeforeyouspeak11 says...

whoee! wrote:
Arr the great unwashed lol
Arr the great stereotype. Do your research you lazy fool.
[quote][p][bold]whoee![/bold] wrote: Arr the great unwashed lol[/p][/quote]Arr the great stereotype. Do your research you lazy fool. thinkbeforeyouspeak11

9:52am Fri 6 Dec 13

thinkbeforeyouspeak11 says...

Tallywhacker wrote:
s&k wrote:
The right to protest is a necessity of democracy.
Is there a hierarchy of rights somewhere? Does one persons right of protest automatically eliminate another persons right of going to work or free passage? What if your protest is supported by a minority, can you still trump others rights? Peacefull protest shouldn't include occupation or destruction, Having a big mouth getting on tv and wrecking something isn't democracy it's anarchy. Democracy is majority rule not loud counts more just because they are noisy.
You fail to display even the most rudimentary grasp of what is going on at Sussex Uni. Please keep your ill-informed views to yourself until you have done at least a little research.
[quote][p][bold]Tallywhacker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]s&k[/bold] wrote: The right to protest is a necessity of democracy.[/p][/quote]Is there a hierarchy of rights somewhere? Does one persons right of protest automatically eliminate another persons right of going to work or free passage? What if your protest is supported by a minority, can you still trump others rights? Peacefull protest shouldn't include occupation or destruction, Having a big mouth getting on tv and wrecking something isn't democracy it's anarchy. Democracy is majority rule not loud counts more just because they are noisy.[/p][/quote]You fail to display even the most rudimentary grasp of what is going on at Sussex Uni. Please keep your ill-informed views to yourself until you have done at least a little research. thinkbeforeyouspeak11

10:22am Fri 6 Dec 13

pachallis says...

Great to see the left-wingers (Green and Labour) who need the student vote to stay in power, coming to support the protestors.

Of course left-wingers are totally against privatization and any form of competitive tendering to determine the optimum cost of providing services.

To them you maintain restrictive/wasteful practices and over manning and expect "evil big businesses" and governments to pick up the tab.

Or in this case, when fees would have to rise to pay for the inefficiency, by the student's parents, or the students themselves when they have to pay off their loans.
Great to see the left-wingers (Green and Labour) who need the student vote to stay in power, coming to support the protestors. Of course left-wingers are totally against privatization and any form of competitive tendering to determine the optimum cost of providing services. To them you maintain restrictive/wasteful practices and over manning and expect "evil big businesses" and governments to pick up the tab. Or in this case, when fees would have to rise to pay for the inefficiency, by the student's parents, or the students themselves when they have to pay off their loans. pachallis

10:27am Fri 6 Dec 13

thinkbeforeyouspeak11 says...

pachallis wrote:
Great to see the left-wingers (Green and Labour) who need the student vote to stay in power, coming to support the protestors.

Of course left-wingers are totally against privatization and any form of competitive tendering to determine the optimum cost of providing services.

To them you maintain restrictive/wasteful practices and over manning and expect "evil big businesses" and governments to pick up the tab.

Or in this case, when fees would have to rise to pay for the inefficiency, by the student's parents, or the students themselves when they have to pay off their loans.
The university management have actually made it quite clear that the outsourcing at Sussex is NOT as a result of cost-cutting measures.
[quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: Great to see the left-wingers (Green and Labour) who need the student vote to stay in power, coming to support the protestors. Of course left-wingers are totally against privatization and any form of competitive tendering to determine the optimum cost of providing services. To them you maintain restrictive/wasteful practices and over manning and expect "evil big businesses" and governments to pick up the tab. Or in this case, when fees would have to rise to pay for the inefficiency, by the student's parents, or the students themselves when they have to pay off their loans.[/p][/quote]The university management have actually made it quite clear that the outsourcing at Sussex is NOT as a result of cost-cutting measures. thinkbeforeyouspeak11

11:30am Fri 6 Dec 13

pachallis says...

thinkbeforeyouspeak1
1
wrote:
pachallis wrote:
Great to see the left-wingers (Green and Labour) who need the student vote to stay in power, coming to support the protestors.

Of course left-wingers are totally against privatization and any form of competitive tendering to determine the optimum cost of providing services.

To them you maintain restrictive/wasteful practices and over manning and expect "evil big businesses" and governments to pick up the tab.

Or in this case, when fees would have to rise to pay for the inefficiency, by the student's parents, or the students themselves when they have to pay off their loans.
The university management have actually made it quite clear that the outsourcing at Sussex is NOT as a result of cost-cutting measures.
@thinkbeforeyouspeak
11 - so please explain why the university management want outsourcing?
[quote][p][bold]thinkbeforeyouspeak1 1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: Great to see the left-wingers (Green and Labour) who need the student vote to stay in power, coming to support the protestors. Of course left-wingers are totally against privatization and any form of competitive tendering to determine the optimum cost of providing services. To them you maintain restrictive/wasteful practices and over manning and expect "evil big businesses" and governments to pick up the tab. Or in this case, when fees would have to rise to pay for the inefficiency, by the student's parents, or the students themselves when they have to pay off their loans.[/p][/quote]The university management have actually made it quite clear that the outsourcing at Sussex is NOT as a result of cost-cutting measures.[/p][/quote]@thinkbeforeyouspeak 11 - so please explain why the university management want outsourcing? pachallis

11:32am Fri 6 Dec 13

Tailgaters Anonymous says...

Just checking.
Has one of the quoted figures from Parliament had problems at Balcombe?
Just checking. Has one of the quoted figures from Parliament had problems at Balcombe? Tailgaters Anonymous

11:34am Fri 6 Dec 13

thinkbeforeyouspeak11 says...

pachallis wrote:
thinkbeforeyouspeak1

1
wrote:
pachallis wrote:
Great to see the left-wingers (Green and Labour) who need the student vote to stay in power, coming to support the protestors.

Of course left-wingers are totally against privatization and any form of competitive tendering to determine the optimum cost of providing services.

To them you maintain restrictive/wasteful practices and over manning and expect "evil big businesses" and governments to pick up the tab.

Or in this case, when fees would have to rise to pay for the inefficiency, by the student's parents, or the students themselves when they have to pay off their loans.
The university management have actually made it quite clear that the outsourcing at Sussex is NOT as a result of cost-cutting measures.
@thinkbeforeyouspeak

11 - so please explain why the university management want outsourcing?
ask them...
[quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thinkbeforeyouspeak1 1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: Great to see the left-wingers (Green and Labour) who need the student vote to stay in power, coming to support the protestors. Of course left-wingers are totally against privatization and any form of competitive tendering to determine the optimum cost of providing services. To them you maintain restrictive/wasteful practices and over manning and expect "evil big businesses" and governments to pick up the tab. Or in this case, when fees would have to rise to pay for the inefficiency, by the student's parents, or the students themselves when they have to pay off their loans.[/p][/quote]The university management have actually made it quite clear that the outsourcing at Sussex is NOT as a result of cost-cutting measures.[/p][/quote]@thinkbeforeyouspeak 11 - so please explain why the university management want outsourcing?[/p][/quote]ask them... thinkbeforeyouspeak11

11:36am Fri 6 Dec 13

thinkbeforeyouspeak11 says...

pachallis wrote:
thinkbeforeyouspeak1

1
wrote:
pachallis wrote:
Great to see the left-wingers (Green and Labour) who need the student vote to stay in power, coming to support the protestors.

Of course left-wingers are totally against privatization and any form of competitive tendering to determine the optimum cost of providing services.

To them you maintain restrictive/wasteful practices and over manning and expect "evil big businesses" and governments to pick up the tab.

Or in this case, when fees would have to rise to pay for the inefficiency, by the student's parents, or the students themselves when they have to pay off their loans.
The university management have actually made it quite clear that the outsourcing at Sussex is NOT as a result of cost-cutting measures.
@thinkbeforeyouspeak

11 - so please explain why the university management want outsourcing?
www.sussex.ac.uk/ procurement /documentsandpolicie
s /tfmandcatering/ faqs

to paraphrase: 'insert corporatespeak here'
[quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thinkbeforeyouspeak1 1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: Great to see the left-wingers (Green and Labour) who need the student vote to stay in power, coming to support the protestors. Of course left-wingers are totally against privatization and any form of competitive tendering to determine the optimum cost of providing services. To them you maintain restrictive/wasteful practices and over manning and expect "evil big businesses" and governments to pick up the tab. Or in this case, when fees would have to rise to pay for the inefficiency, by the student's parents, or the students themselves when they have to pay off their loans.[/p][/quote]The university management have actually made it quite clear that the outsourcing at Sussex is NOT as a result of cost-cutting measures.[/p][/quote]@thinkbeforeyouspeak 11 - so please explain why the university management want outsourcing?[/p][/quote]www.sussex.ac.uk/ procurement /documentsandpolicie s /tfmandcatering/ faqs to paraphrase: 'insert corporatespeak here' thinkbeforeyouspeak11

11:37am Fri 6 Dec 13

thinkbeforeyouspeak11 says...

everyone downvoting the students' cause, please at least be courteous enough to leave a reason why
everyone downvoting the students' cause, please at least be courteous enough to leave a reason why thinkbeforeyouspeak11

11:39am Fri 6 Dec 13

Bill in Hanover says...

thinkbeforeyouspeak1
1
wrote:
whoee! wrote:
Arr the great unwashed lol
Arr the great stereotype. Do your research you lazy fool.
If anyone is stereotypical it is the second year student doing the 'International relations' course, it sounds like something thought up by the writers of 'The Young Ones' I suppose he failed the entrance exam for media studies or history of art.
[quote][p][bold]thinkbeforeyouspeak1 1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]whoee![/bold] wrote: Arr the great unwashed lol[/p][/quote]Arr the great stereotype. Do your research you lazy fool.[/p][/quote]If anyone is stereotypical it is the second year student doing the 'International relations' course, it sounds like something thought up by the writers of 'The Young Ones' I suppose he failed the entrance exam for media studies or history of art. Bill in Hanover

12:30pm Fri 6 Dec 13

graham_Seagull says...

So at a time when there are great concerns that a significant proportion of the UK electorate doesnt vote, we have people posting comments on here to complain that our students are taking an interest and standing up for what they believe to be correct.

couldnt make it up.

Aguably we need much more participation in UK politics and less armchair commenting, then perhaps we'll really have more people taking part in the electoral process.
So at a time when there are great concerns that a significant proportion of the UK electorate doesnt vote, we have people posting comments on here to complain that our students are taking an interest and standing up for what they believe to be correct. couldnt make it up. Aguably we need much more participation in UK politics and less armchair commenting, then perhaps we'll really have more people taking part in the electoral process. graham_Seagull

1:29pm Fri 6 Dec 13

thinkbeforeyouspeak11 says...

Bill in Hanover wrote:
thinkbeforeyouspeak1

1
wrote:
whoee! wrote:
Arr the great unwashed lol
Arr the great stereotype. Do your research you lazy fool.
If anyone is stereotypical it is the second year student doing the 'International relations' course, it sounds like something thought up by the writers of 'The Young Ones' I suppose he failed the entrance exam for media studies or history of art.
way to miss the point
[quote][p][bold]Bill in Hanover[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thinkbeforeyouspeak1 1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]whoee![/bold] wrote: Arr the great unwashed lol[/p][/quote]Arr the great stereotype. Do your research you lazy fool.[/p][/quote]If anyone is stereotypical it is the second year student doing the 'International relations' course, it sounds like something thought up by the writers of 'The Young Ones' I suppose he failed the entrance exam for media studies or history of art.[/p][/quote]way to miss the point thinkbeforeyouspeak11

4:48pm Fri 6 Dec 13

bug eye says...

I would rather see the universities step up to the plate and expel or suspend offensive students for persistent noise pollution and rubbish pollution and any other anti social behaviour being caused within the communities they live.
I would rather see the universities step up to the plate and expel or suspend offensive students for persistent noise pollution and rubbish pollution and any other anti social behaviour being caused within the communities they live. bug eye

5:08pm Fri 6 Dec 13

pachallis says...

thinkbeforeyouspeak1
1
wrote:
pachallis wrote:
thinkbeforeyouspeak1


1
wrote:
pachallis wrote:
Great to see the left-wingers (Green and Labour) who need the student vote to stay in power, coming to support the protestors.

Of course left-wingers are totally against privatization and any form of competitive tendering to determine the optimum cost of providing services.

To them you maintain restrictive/wasteful practices and over manning and expect "evil big businesses" and governments to pick up the tab.

Or in this case, when fees would have to rise to pay for the inefficiency, by the student's parents, or the students themselves when they have to pay off their loans.
The university management have actually made it quite clear that the outsourcing at Sussex is NOT as a result of cost-cutting measures.
@thinkbeforeyouspeak


11 - so please explain why the university management want outsourcing?
www.sussex.ac.uk/ procurement /documentsandpolicie

s /tfmandcatering/ faqs

to paraphrase: 'insert corporatespeak here'
@thinkbeforeyouspeak
11 - thanks for the link. Yes - I agree there is some "corporate speak" here but the key points are - 1) the university want to save £500k per year in providing services and 2) they want to maintain or ideally improve services to customers.

What is wrong with that? Can the current supplier "step up to the mark" (sorry for corporate speak) and address the £500k overspend on delivered service costs? Alternatively should another department have it's budget cut to keep the current service?

Who should provide the £500k? Students? Parents? Government?

I see that the students suspended say they are being refused the right to peaceful protest. I think you will find they have gone past "peaceful protest" and on to "civil disobedience". At this point they have to accept that if they break laws then they have to accept the punishment.

These "Sussex five" seem to subscribe to the Caroline Lucas interpretation in that if you try "peaceful protest" and fail, then you go to "civil disobedience" and expect no punishment because you are in "the right".

I wish these students a profitable life on the dole as I can't see any propercompany now wanting to employ them. Why did they go to University in the first place? Perhaps they want to become MPs or councillors?
[quote][p][bold]thinkbeforeyouspeak1 1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thinkbeforeyouspeak1 1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: Great to see the left-wingers (Green and Labour) who need the student vote to stay in power, coming to support the protestors. Of course left-wingers are totally against privatization and any form of competitive tendering to determine the optimum cost of providing services. To them you maintain restrictive/wasteful practices and over manning and expect "evil big businesses" and governments to pick up the tab. Or in this case, when fees would have to rise to pay for the inefficiency, by the student's parents, or the students themselves when they have to pay off their loans.[/p][/quote]The university management have actually made it quite clear that the outsourcing at Sussex is NOT as a result of cost-cutting measures.[/p][/quote]@thinkbeforeyouspeak 11 - so please explain why the university management want outsourcing?[/p][/quote]www.sussex.ac.uk/ procurement /documentsandpolicie s /tfmandcatering/ faqs to paraphrase: 'insert corporatespeak here'[/p][/quote]@thinkbeforeyouspeak 11 - thanks for the link. Yes - I agree there is some "corporate speak" here but the key points are - 1) the university want to save £500k per year in providing services and 2) they want to maintain or ideally improve services to customers. What is wrong with that? Can the current supplier "step up to the mark" (sorry for corporate speak) and address the £500k overspend on delivered service costs? Alternatively should another department have it's budget cut to keep the current service? Who should provide the £500k? Students? Parents? Government? I see that the students suspended say they are being refused the right to peaceful protest. I think you will find they have gone past "peaceful protest" and on to "civil disobedience". At this point they have to accept that if they break laws then they have to accept the punishment. These "Sussex five" seem to subscribe to the Caroline Lucas interpretation in that if you try "peaceful protest" and fail, then you go to "civil disobedience" and expect no punishment because you are in "the right". I wish these students a profitable life on the dole as I can't see any propercompany now wanting to employ them. Why did they go to University in the first place? Perhaps they want to become MPs or councillors? pachallis

7:02pm Fri 6 Dec 13

thinkbeforeyouspeak11 says...

pachallis wrote:
thinkbeforeyouspeak1

1
wrote:
pachallis wrote:
thinkbeforeyouspeak1



1
wrote:
pachallis wrote:
Great to see the left-wingers (Green and Labour) who need the student vote to stay in power, coming to support the protestors.

Of course left-wingers are totally against privatization and any form of competitive tendering to determine the optimum cost of providing services.

To them you maintain restrictive/wasteful practices and over manning and expect "evil big businesses" and governments to pick up the tab.

Or in this case, when fees would have to rise to pay for the inefficiency, by the student's parents, or the students themselves when they have to pay off their loans.
The university management have actually made it quite clear that the outsourcing at Sussex is NOT as a result of cost-cutting measures.
@thinkbeforeyouspeak



11 - so please explain why the university management want outsourcing?
www.sussex.ac.uk/ procurement /documentsandpolicie


s /tfmandcatering/ faqs

to paraphrase: 'insert corporatespeak here'
@thinkbeforeyouspeak

11 - thanks for the link. Yes - I agree there is some "corporate speak" here but the key points are - 1) the university want to save £500k per year in providing services and 2) they want to maintain or ideally improve services to customers.

What is wrong with that? Can the current supplier "step up to the mark" (sorry for corporate speak) and address the £500k overspend on delivered service costs? Alternatively should another department have it's budget cut to keep the current service?

Who should provide the £500k? Students? Parents? Government?

I see that the students suspended say they are being refused the right to peaceful protest. I think you will find they have gone past "peaceful protest" and on to "civil disobedience". At this point they have to accept that if they break laws then they have to accept the punishment.

These "Sussex five" seem to subscribe to the Caroline Lucas interpretation in that if you try "peaceful protest" and fail, then you go to "civil disobedience" and expect no punishment because you are in "the right".

I wish these students a profitable life on the dole as I can't see any propercompany now wanting to employ them. Why did they go to University in the first place? Perhaps they want to become MPs or councillors?
For all of you out there who are questioning the legitimacy of the occupation, I think there is a single point which you've been missing. That is, the occupation is a last resort. The students at London University and at Sussex University went through all the 'legitimate' routes first, yet still found themselves totally and utterly ignored by senior management. While you may hold differing views on the actual cause of protest (i.e. outsourcing of jobs) - you can not possibly deny that senior management should at the very least hold some form of dialogue with the students - some of whom, let me remind you - are paying up to £30,000 for their degree. It is the management who steadfastly refuse to enter any kind of debate on the relevant issues, and if you think this is acceptable then I am seriously concerned for you.
[quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thinkbeforeyouspeak1 1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thinkbeforeyouspeak1 1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: Great to see the left-wingers (Green and Labour) who need the student vote to stay in power, coming to support the protestors. Of course left-wingers are totally against privatization and any form of competitive tendering to determine the optimum cost of providing services. To them you maintain restrictive/wasteful practices and over manning and expect "evil big businesses" and governments to pick up the tab. Or in this case, when fees would have to rise to pay for the inefficiency, by the student's parents, or the students themselves when they have to pay off their loans.[/p][/quote]The university management have actually made it quite clear that the outsourcing at Sussex is NOT as a result of cost-cutting measures.[/p][/quote]@thinkbeforeyouspeak 11 - so please explain why the university management want outsourcing?[/p][/quote]www.sussex.ac.uk/ procurement /documentsandpolicie s /tfmandcatering/ faqs to paraphrase: 'insert corporatespeak here'[/p][/quote]@thinkbeforeyouspeak 11 - thanks for the link. Yes - I agree there is some "corporate speak" here but the key points are - 1) the university want to save £500k per year in providing services and 2) they want to maintain or ideally improve services to customers. What is wrong with that? Can the current supplier "step up to the mark" (sorry for corporate speak) and address the £500k overspend on delivered service costs? Alternatively should another department have it's budget cut to keep the current service? Who should provide the £500k? Students? Parents? Government? I see that the students suspended say they are being refused the right to peaceful protest. I think you will find they have gone past "peaceful protest" and on to "civil disobedience". At this point they have to accept that if they break laws then they have to accept the punishment. These "Sussex five" seem to subscribe to the Caroline Lucas interpretation in that if you try "peaceful protest" and fail, then you go to "civil disobedience" and expect no punishment because you are in "the right". I wish these students a profitable life on the dole as I can't see any propercompany now wanting to employ them. Why did they go to University in the first place? Perhaps they want to become MPs or councillors?[/p][/quote]For all of you out there who are questioning the legitimacy of the occupation, I think there is a single point which you've been missing. That is, the occupation is a last resort. The students at London University and at Sussex University went through all the 'legitimate' routes first, yet still found themselves totally and utterly ignored by senior management. While you may hold differing views on the actual cause of protest (i.e. outsourcing of jobs) - you can not possibly deny that senior management should at the very least hold some form of dialogue with the students - some of whom, let me remind you - are paying up to £30,000 for their degree. It is the management who steadfastly refuse to enter any kind of debate on the relevant issues, and if you think this is acceptable then I am seriously concerned for you. thinkbeforeyouspeak11

7:28pm Fri 6 Dec 13

pachallis says...

thinkbeforeyouspeak1
1
wrote:
pachallis wrote:
thinkbeforeyouspeak1


1
wrote:
pachallis wrote:
thinkbeforeyouspeak1




1
wrote:
pachallis wrote:
Great to see the left-wingers (Green and Labour) who need the student vote to stay in power, coming to support the protestors.

Of course left-wingers are totally against privatization and any form of competitive tendering to determine the optimum cost of providing services.

To them you maintain restrictive/wasteful practices and over manning and expect "evil big businesses" and governments to pick up the tab.

Or in this case, when fees would have to rise to pay for the inefficiency, by the student's parents, or the students themselves when they have to pay off their loans.
The university management have actually made it quite clear that the outsourcing at Sussex is NOT as a result of cost-cutting measures.
@thinkbeforeyouspeak




11 - so please explain why the university management want outsourcing?
www.sussex.ac.uk/ procurement /documentsandpolicie



s /tfmandcatering/ faqs

to paraphrase: 'insert corporatespeak here'
@thinkbeforeyouspeak


11 - thanks for the link. Yes - I agree there is some "corporate speak" here but the key points are - 1) the university want to save £500k per year in providing services and 2) they want to maintain or ideally improve services to customers.

What is wrong with that? Can the current supplier "step up to the mark" (sorry for corporate speak) and address the £500k overspend on delivered service costs? Alternatively should another department have it's budget cut to keep the current service?

Who should provide the £500k? Students? Parents? Government?

I see that the students suspended say they are being refused the right to peaceful protest. I think you will find they have gone past "peaceful protest" and on to "civil disobedience". At this point they have to accept that if they break laws then they have to accept the punishment.

These "Sussex five" seem to subscribe to the Caroline Lucas interpretation in that if you try "peaceful protest" and fail, then you go to "civil disobedience" and expect no punishment because you are in "the right".

I wish these students a profitable life on the dole as I can't see any propercompany now wanting to employ them. Why did they go to University in the first place? Perhaps they want to become MPs or councillors?
For all of you out there who are questioning the legitimacy of the occupation, I think there is a single point which you've been missing. That is, the occupation is a last resort. The students at London University and at Sussex University went through all the 'legitimate' routes first, yet still found themselves totally and utterly ignored by senior management. While you may hold differing views on the actual cause of protest (i.e. outsourcing of jobs) - you can not possibly deny that senior management should at the very least hold some form of dialogue with the students - some of whom, let me remind you - are paying up to £30,000 for their degree. It is the management who steadfastly refuse to enter any kind of debate on the relevant issues, and if you think this is acceptable then I am seriously concerned for you.
@thinkbeforeyouspeak
11 -then please fell concerned for me!

I just can't work out what the provisioning of services within Sussex University has got anything to do with the students?

Should students be involved in every decision that the University takes with the power to overrule any changes that they disagree with? And by students I assume here the activists in the Students Union.

I doubt whether the Students Union has any such power. IMHO if the students don't like the service provided by the University they do have the right to leave and go to another University.

And how much of the £30k will the students actually be paying themselves? How much came from their parents (so if anything they should be consulted), or won't be paid until they (hopefully) get real jobs and have to pay back the loans.

Why do these activists ever go to University in the first place? I suppose it is better than them getting a real job.
[quote][p][bold]thinkbeforeyouspeak1 1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thinkbeforeyouspeak1 1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thinkbeforeyouspeak1 1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: Great to see the left-wingers (Green and Labour) who need the student vote to stay in power, coming to support the protestors. Of course left-wingers are totally against privatization and any form of competitive tendering to determine the optimum cost of providing services. To them you maintain restrictive/wasteful practices and over manning and expect "evil big businesses" and governments to pick up the tab. Or in this case, when fees would have to rise to pay for the inefficiency, by the student's parents, or the students themselves when they have to pay off their loans.[/p][/quote]The university management have actually made it quite clear that the outsourcing at Sussex is NOT as a result of cost-cutting measures.[/p][/quote]@thinkbeforeyouspeak 11 - so please explain why the university management want outsourcing?[/p][/quote]www.sussex.ac.uk/ procurement /documentsandpolicie s /tfmandcatering/ faqs to paraphrase: 'insert corporatespeak here'[/p][/quote]@thinkbeforeyouspeak 11 - thanks for the link. Yes - I agree there is some "corporate speak" here but the key points are - 1) the university want to save £500k per year in providing services and 2) they want to maintain or ideally improve services to customers. What is wrong with that? Can the current supplier "step up to the mark" (sorry for corporate speak) and address the £500k overspend on delivered service costs? Alternatively should another department have it's budget cut to keep the current service? Who should provide the £500k? Students? Parents? Government? I see that the students suspended say they are being refused the right to peaceful protest. I think you will find they have gone past "peaceful protest" and on to "civil disobedience". At this point they have to accept that if they break laws then they have to accept the punishment. These "Sussex five" seem to subscribe to the Caroline Lucas interpretation in that if you try "peaceful protest" and fail, then you go to "civil disobedience" and expect no punishment because you are in "the right". I wish these students a profitable life on the dole as I can't see any propercompany now wanting to employ them. Why did they go to University in the first place? Perhaps they want to become MPs or councillors?[/p][/quote]For all of you out there who are questioning the legitimacy of the occupation, I think there is a single point which you've been missing. That is, the occupation is a last resort. The students at London University and at Sussex University went through all the 'legitimate' routes first, yet still found themselves totally and utterly ignored by senior management. While you may hold differing views on the actual cause of protest (i.e. outsourcing of jobs) - you can not possibly deny that senior management should at the very least hold some form of dialogue with the students - some of whom, let me remind you - are paying up to £30,000 for their degree. It is the management who steadfastly refuse to enter any kind of debate on the relevant issues, and if you think this is acceptable then I am seriously concerned for you.[/p][/quote]@thinkbeforeyouspeak 11 -then please fell concerned for me! I just can't work out what the provisioning of services within Sussex University has got anything to do with the students? Should students be involved in every decision that the University takes with the power to overrule any changes that they disagree with? And by students I assume here the activists in the Students Union. I doubt whether the Students Union has any such power. IMHO if the students don't like the service provided by the University they do have the right to leave and go to another University. And how much of the £30k will the students actually be paying themselves? How much came from their parents (so if anything they should be consulted), or won't be paid until they (hopefully) get real jobs and have to pay back the loans. Why do these activists ever go to University in the first place? I suppose it is better than them getting a real job. pachallis

11:18pm Fri 6 Dec 13

ourcoalition says...

In answer to the questions on outsourcing - how about G4S - or Serco - or private home care companies in Brighton and Hove, paying staff just for the visits to elderly people; not paying between visits; not paying travel costs; staff using their own phones in emergencies - no recompense; longest visit 36 minutes, shortest 11 minutes; most of all, only able to provide basic care, no time to talk or find out how these most vulnerable people actually are.

All of us should take an interest in these things - well done to the students - your efforts will not be in vain.
In answer to the questions on outsourcing - how about G4S - or Serco - or private home care companies in Brighton and Hove, paying staff just for the visits to elderly people; not paying between visits; not paying travel costs; staff using their own phones in emergencies - no recompense; longest visit 36 minutes, shortest 11 minutes; most of all, only able to provide basic care, no time to talk or find out how these most vulnerable people actually are. All of us should take an interest in these things - well done to the students - your efforts will not be in vain. ourcoalition

9:19am Sat 7 Dec 13

medianscore says...

s&k wrote:
The right to protest is a necessity of democracy.
Oh really? So if a group of students turned up next those bunch of Marxists with banners saying, "Vote UKIP" they would be left alone in peace yes?
[quote][p][bold]s&k[/bold] wrote: The right to protest is a necessity of democracy.[/p][/quote]Oh really? So if a group of students turned up next those bunch of Marxists with banners saying, "Vote UKIP" they would be left alone in peace yes? medianscore

9:33am Sat 7 Dec 13

Tallywhacker says...

thinkbeforeyouspeak1
1
wrote:
Tallywhacker wrote:
s&k wrote:
The right to protest is a necessity of democracy.
Is there a hierarchy of rights somewhere? Does one persons right of protest automatically eliminate another persons right of going to work or free passage? What if your protest is supported by a minority, can you still trump others rights? Peacefull protest shouldn't include occupation or destruction, Having a big mouth getting on tv and wrecking something isn't democracy it's anarchy. Democracy is majority rule not loud counts more just because they are noisy.
You fail to display even the most rudimentary grasp of what is going on at Sussex Uni. Please keep your ill-informed views to yourself until you have done at least a little research.
You clearly missunderstand. I was making a general comment regarding protesters belief that their right of protest over-ride everybody elses rights for anything else. Doesn't matter what the protest is about or where, protesters expect to be allowed to carry on no matter who else is inconvenienced or whose property is destroyed. With regard for the uni I couldn't give a rats a$$ about the students petty problems with the world not following their demands. Try not letting your narrow view limit your vision.
[quote][p][bold]thinkbeforeyouspeak1 1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Tallywhacker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]s&k[/bold] wrote: The right to protest is a necessity of democracy.[/p][/quote]Is there a hierarchy of rights somewhere? Does one persons right of protest automatically eliminate another persons right of going to work or free passage? What if your protest is supported by a minority, can you still trump others rights? Peacefull protest shouldn't include occupation or destruction, Having a big mouth getting on tv and wrecking something isn't democracy it's anarchy. Democracy is majority rule not loud counts more just because they are noisy.[/p][/quote]You fail to display even the most rudimentary grasp of what is going on at Sussex Uni. Please keep your ill-informed views to yourself until you have done at least a little research.[/p][/quote]You clearly missunderstand. I was making a general comment regarding protesters belief that their right of protest over-ride everybody elses rights for anything else. Doesn't matter what the protest is about or where, protesters expect to be allowed to carry on no matter who else is inconvenienced or whose property is destroyed. With regard for the uni I couldn't give a rats a$$ about the students petty problems with the world not following their demands. Try not letting your narrow view limit your vision. Tallywhacker

11:29am Sat 7 Dec 13

thinkbeforeyouspeak11 says...

pachallis wrote:
thinkbeforeyouspeak1

1
wrote:
pachallis wrote:
thinkbeforeyouspeak1



1
wrote:
pachallis wrote:
thinkbeforeyouspeak1





1
wrote:
pachallis wrote:
Great to see the left-wingers (Green and Labour) who need the student vote to stay in power, coming to support the protestors.

Of course left-wingers are totally against privatization and any form of competitive tendering to determine the optimum cost of providing services.

To them you maintain restrictive/wasteful practices and over manning and expect "evil big businesses" and governments to pick up the tab.

Or in this case, when fees would have to rise to pay for the inefficiency, by the student's parents, or the students themselves when they have to pay off their loans.
The university management have actually made it quite clear that the outsourcing at Sussex is NOT as a result of cost-cutting measures.
@thinkbeforeyouspeak





11 - so please explain why the university management want outsourcing?
www.sussex.ac.uk/ procurement /documentsandpolicie




s /tfmandcatering/ faqs

to paraphrase: 'insert corporatespeak here'
@thinkbeforeyouspeak



11 - thanks for the link. Yes - I agree there is some "corporate speak" here but the key points are - 1) the university want to save £500k per year in providing services and 2) they want to maintain or ideally improve services to customers.

What is wrong with that? Can the current supplier "step up to the mark" (sorry for corporate speak) and address the £500k overspend on delivered service costs? Alternatively should another department have it's budget cut to keep the current service?

Who should provide the £500k? Students? Parents? Government?

I see that the students suspended say they are being refused the right to peaceful protest. I think you will find they have gone past "peaceful protest" and on to "civil disobedience". At this point they have to accept that if they break laws then they have to accept the punishment.

These "Sussex five" seem to subscribe to the Caroline Lucas interpretation in that if you try "peaceful protest" and fail, then you go to "civil disobedience" and expect no punishment because you are in "the right".

I wish these students a profitable life on the dole as I can't see any propercompany now wanting to employ them. Why did they go to University in the first place? Perhaps they want to become MPs or councillors?
For all of you out there who are questioning the legitimacy of the occupation, I think there is a single point which you've been missing. That is, the occupation is a last resort. The students at London University and at Sussex University went through all the 'legitimate' routes first, yet still found themselves totally and utterly ignored by senior management. While you may hold differing views on the actual cause of protest (i.e. outsourcing of jobs) - you can not possibly deny that senior management should at the very least hold some form of dialogue with the students - some of whom, let me remind you - are paying up to £30,000 for their degree. It is the management who steadfastly refuse to enter any kind of debate on the relevant issues, and if you think this is acceptable then I am seriously concerned for you.
@thinkbeforeyouspeak

11 -then please fell concerned for me!

I just can't work out what the provisioning of services within Sussex University has got anything to do with the students?

Should students be involved in every decision that the University takes with the power to overrule any changes that they disagree with? And by students I assume here the activists in the Students Union.

I doubt whether the Students Union has any such power. IMHO if the students don't like the service provided by the University they do have the right to leave and go to another University.

And how much of the £30k will the students actually be paying themselves? How much came from their parents (so if anything they should be consulted), or won't be paid until they (hopefully) get real jobs and have to pay back the loans.

Why do these activists ever go to University in the first place? I suppose it is better than them getting a real job.
It isn't solely to do with the provisioning of services - there is a much, much wider agenda. I suggest you take a look at the Sussex Against Privatisation facebook page to educate yourself on the aims and goals of the campaign - your arguments indicate that you're making assumptions without knowing the full details. There's also a petition which has been signed by over 7500 people demanding the reinstatement of the 5 suspended students: http://www.change.or
g/petitions/professo
r-michael-farthing-v
ice-chancellor-of-su
ssex-university-to-i
mmediately-retract-t
he-suspension-of-fiv
e-sussex-students-wh
ich-began-on-the-4th
-december?fb_action_
ids=1015174520010238
5&fb_action_types=ch
ange-org%3Arecruit&f
b_ref=__CAsxsgpugf&f
b_source=other_multi
line&action_object_m
ap=%5B55835467091799
6%5D&action_type_map
=%5B%22change-org%3A
recruit%22%5D&action
_ref_map=%5B%22__CAs
xsgpugf%22%5D
[quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thinkbeforeyouspeak1 1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thinkbeforeyouspeak1 1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thinkbeforeyouspeak1 1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pachallis[/bold] wrote: Great to see the left-wingers (Green and Labour) who need the student vote to stay in power, coming to support the protestors. Of course left-wingers are totally against privatization and any form of competitive tendering to determine the optimum cost of providing services. To them you maintain restrictive/wasteful practices and over manning and expect "evil big businesses" and governments to pick up the tab. Or in this case, when fees would have to rise to pay for the inefficiency, by the student's parents, or the students themselves when they have to pay off their loans.[/p][/quote]The university management have actually made it quite clear that the outsourcing at Sussex is NOT as a result of cost-cutting measures.[/p][/quote]@thinkbeforeyouspeak 11 - so please explain why the university management want outsourcing?[/p][/quote]www.sussex.ac.uk/ procurement /documentsandpolicie s /tfmandcatering/ faqs to paraphrase: 'insert corporatespeak here'[/p][/quote]@thinkbeforeyouspeak 11 - thanks for the link. Yes - I agree there is some "corporate speak" here but the key points are - 1) the university want to save £500k per year in providing services and 2) they want to maintain or ideally improve services to customers. What is wrong with that? Can the current supplier "step up to the mark" (sorry for corporate speak) and address the £500k overspend on delivered service costs? Alternatively should another department have it's budget cut to keep the current service? Who should provide the £500k? Students? Parents? Government? I see that the students suspended say they are being refused the right to peaceful protest. I think you will find they have gone past "peaceful protest" and on to "civil disobedience". At this point they have to accept that if they break laws then they have to accept the punishment. These "Sussex five" seem to subscribe to the Caroline Lucas interpretation in that if you try "peaceful protest" and fail, then you go to "civil disobedience" and expect no punishment because you are in "the right". I wish these students a profitable life on the dole as I can't see any propercompany now wanting to employ them. Why did they go to University in the first place? Perhaps they want to become MPs or councillors?[/p][/quote]For all of you out there who are questioning the legitimacy of the occupation, I think there is a single point which you've been missing. That is, the occupation is a last resort. The students at London University and at Sussex University went through all the 'legitimate' routes first, yet still found themselves totally and utterly ignored by senior management. While you may hold differing views on the actual cause of protest (i.e. outsourcing of jobs) - you can not possibly deny that senior management should at the very least hold some form of dialogue with the students - some of whom, let me remind you - are paying up to £30,000 for their degree. It is the management who steadfastly refuse to enter any kind of debate on the relevant issues, and if you think this is acceptable then I am seriously concerned for you.[/p][/quote]@thinkbeforeyouspeak 11 -then please fell concerned for me! I just can't work out what the provisioning of services within Sussex University has got anything to do with the students? Should students be involved in every decision that the University takes with the power to overrule any changes that they disagree with? And by students I assume here the activists in the Students Union. I doubt whether the Students Union has any such power. IMHO if the students don't like the service provided by the University they do have the right to leave and go to another University. And how much of the £30k will the students actually be paying themselves? How much came from their parents (so if anything they should be consulted), or won't be paid until they (hopefully) get real jobs and have to pay back the loans. Why do these activists ever go to University in the first place? I suppose it is better than them getting a real job.[/p][/quote]It isn't solely to do with the provisioning of services - there is a much, much wider agenda. I suggest you take a look at the Sussex Against Privatisation facebook page to educate yourself on the aims and goals of the campaign - your arguments indicate that you're making assumptions without knowing the full details. There's also a petition which has been signed by over 7500 people demanding the reinstatement of the 5 suspended students: http://www.change.or g/petitions/professo r-michael-farthing-v ice-chancellor-of-su ssex-university-to-i mmediately-retract-t he-suspension-of-fiv e-sussex-students-wh ich-began-on-the-4th -december?fb_action_ ids=1015174520010238 5&fb_action_types=ch ange-org%3Arecruit&f b_ref=__CAsxsgpugf&f b_source=other_multi line&action_object_m ap=%5B55835467091799 6%5D&action_type_map =%5B%22change-org%3A recruit%22%5D&action _ref_map=%5B%22__CAs xsgpugf%22%5D thinkbeforeyouspeak11

2:19pm Sat 7 Dec 13

pachallis says...

@thinkbeforeyouspeak
11 - why should I educate myself on the wider aims and goals of the campaign? It is up to you and the rest of these left-wingers activists who don't seem to understand the financial mess this country has been left in after the previous government to explain to us what it is all about.

I did have a brief look at some of the links and IMHO these protesters must live in another world where they think they should be immune to the financial problems and what needs to be done to recover - things such as having to make financial cutbacks as prices increases outweigh pay increases.

How much of the "wider agenda" directly impacts the students and the university, and how much of this is just an excuse for civil disobedience to support left-wing ideologies?

You state that we should we proud that these students take an interest in politics - unfortunately I see them more as behaving like overgrown children who can't get what they want, rather then young adults who are very lucky to be getting/wasting a university education.

Let's hope they grow up one day and start acting responsibly.
@thinkbeforeyouspeak 11 - why should I educate myself on the wider aims and goals of the campaign? It is up to you and the rest of these left-wingers activists who don't seem to understand the financial mess this country has been left in after the previous government to explain to us what it is all about. I did have a brief look at some of the links and IMHO these protesters must live in another world where they think they should be immune to the financial problems and what needs to be done to recover - things such as having to make financial cutbacks as prices increases outweigh pay increases. How much of the "wider agenda" directly impacts the students and the university, and how much of this is just an excuse for civil disobedience to support left-wing ideologies? You state that we should we proud that these students take an interest in politics - unfortunately I see them more as behaving like overgrown children who can't get what they want, rather then young adults who are very lucky to be getting/wasting a university education. Let's hope they grow up one day and start acting responsibly. pachallis

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree