Second Student Parliament Meeting 2011-2012: Minutes

 

Queen Margaret University Students’ Union             

Second Student Parliament Meeting 2011-2012

24^th November 2011

 

Present:

Maciej Czajka (MC), Michael Breckenridge (MB), Fergus Boden (FB), James Holdcroft (JH), Yves Witache (YW),  Tasena McCreary (TMcM), Magdalena Wroblewska (MW), Gintare Vosyliute (GV), Bogdan Gligor (BG), Jordan Forbes (JF), Laura Timperley (LT), Raina O’Mahony (ROM), Jessica Da Costa (JDC), Jessica Knapper (JK), Elin Nordberg (EN), Constant Thiollier (CT)

 

Apologies:

Michelle Rush (MR), Melvin Henley (MH), Sarah Watson (SW), Colin Ray (CR), Sarah Johnston (SJ), Dene Walker (DW), Ciara Merouan (CM), Jordan Hepburn (JH), Mary Shannon (MS), Ciara Steedman (CS), Gemma Hunter (GH)

In Attendance:

Cecile Guilloteau (CG),

 

1. 1.    Introduction

The Chair Maciej Czajka (MC) opened the second Student Parliament Meeting of the year, welcomed all MSPs in attendance and presented apologies for MSPs not able to attend.

The minutes from the previous meeting was approved during the session.

MC announced that due to the high number of apologies the meeting was not quorate and an emergency quorum needed to be declared by the Student President before going ahead. MB announced that due to the importance of making a decision on the sustainability policy, the meeting was quorate with 16 MSPs in attendance.

MW and TMcC announced they would like to speak to MSPs respectively on the Night March and to bring an update about issues with international students’ loan/sponsorship.

1. 2.    Warm up debate: Zero Tolerance Policy

MC launched the warm up debate and asked MSPs if they thought the Students’ Union was offering a safe space for students.

BG sought clarification on what a Zero Tolerance Policy was. MC explained that it was about re enforcing the Equal Opportunities Policy.

MW informed MSPs that one of her friends had been harassed here at QMU around the Halls of Residence. However she did not know she could report it and she believed that no one would care. This should not be happening in QMU.

CT asked what differences a new policy would bring. MW outlined that the policy will raise staff and student awareness about routes to report such behavior.

JH specified that the Students’ Union does have a policy about discrimination but this does not directly relate to sexual harassment.

JK asked where the policy was stated. JH informed her and other MSPs in attendance that it was in the Constitution and that any student feeling harassed could go to himself, the Student President or the Welfare and Representation Co-ordinator to report it. He outlined that procedures were already in place.

LT suggested that there might be a need for defining what harassment is exactly as this is a delicate issue. She outlined that it was however difficult in a social environment to identify sexual harassment as this was subject to individual interpretation. MB supported LT’s view saying that a same behavior may or may not be considered as harassment depending on the individual feelings and interpretation.

MW argued that there was still a need for attitudes to be changed and that behavior should be reported.

CT questioned the need of having a new policy since there was already an Equal Opportunity policy implemented in the Students’ Union and students were aware of behaviors that were not acceptable.

MW and JH argued that there was no specific definition about sexual harassment in the Constitution and there was a need for making a difference between harassment and sexual harassment.

JDC asked whether this would involve having a full new policy. JH and MW informed that there would only be changes to the existing Equal Opportunity policy. They added that it is the responsibility of the person victim of harassment to report it and the objective of the policy is to give students a clear definition to help them to identify which behaviors are not acceptable.

TMcC suggested that leaflets should be done and display to students as there is no awareness of the existing policy. MB stressed that the Students’ Union did not have the resources to produce leaflets.

JH agreed and added that prior to raising awareness it was essential to redefine sexual harassment.

The chair MC closed the debate and informed that details of what a Zero Tolerance Policy should look like will be further explored.

1. 3.    Information Services – Fraser Muir

Fraser Muir introduced himself as Director of Information Services which covers responsibilities for the LRC, IT and Timetable.

FM first apologized for IT issues that occurred early this year because of the huge amount of updates. He informed students about communication channels in the University: moderator, info box, plasma screens, and text messages. A document detailing all communication channels is available on line.

EN asked who could be contacted to display a poster on all plasma screens.  FM explained that Miranda Stevens-Clay was the main contact, however to screen a poster in LRC, this needed to be sent to LRC staff.

FB enquired about the procurement of recycled paper. FM said that it was something that had been looked at but this had a high cost (40% more) and that machines were old and not working well with recycled paper. He advised that the University did not want to increase the cost of printing for students. FM informed that the benefit made from printing was used to source the LRC with books.

CT asked if there was a possibility to accept a decrease of benefit and use recycled paper. FM says that this was doable however he was concern about future complaints from students if LRC resources are not renewed as needed.

MC asked if there will be soon a possibility to print in color. FM informed that new machines will arrive soon. It will be more reliable and there will be the option for students to print in color.

TMcC suggested that some of paper purchase could be done in recycled paper. FM says that contract with suppliers were tight and there was not much flexibility.

JDC raised an issue she has been facing with laptops borrowed from the LRC. She explained that it was particularly difficult to log in online. She reported it to LRC staff but they had been unhelpful.  FM asked JDC and other MSPs to report to him any such issue so that he can ensure students receive advice as appropriate.

JDC also asked if this would be possible to have student e-mail account capacity extended. FM informed that QMU did not have the capacity to offer large e-mail boxes to students.

MC thanked FM and advised students that he will give them FM e-mail address so that they can contact him.

1. 4.    Officers report

MB presented the officer report and outlined the main projects the officers had been working on: Movember, Green Impact Award, Safety Campaign and Student Led Teaching Award. MB also informed that sport teams had done well.

There was no question to the Student President regarding the work of the officers.

1. 5.    Motions

Sustainability policy

FB presented his motion and the sustainability policy. He explained that the Union was already having a responsibility practice on a day to day operational level but this would re enforce it.

JDC asked if adopting a sustainability policy would concern practices in University e.g. plasma screens stay on all night when no one is on campus. FB explained that with adopting the policy the Students’ Union will have a specific role on lobbying the University to become more environmental friendly.

The motion was passed unanimously.

 

CCTV on campus

CT presented his motion.

MW asked if the figures about the low impact of CCTV on crime was a UK figures or applicable to QMU. She suggested that CCTV cameras may have a bigger influence on reducing crime in QMU. CT says that it was UK wide figures but there was not reason QMU would be very different from the rest of the country.

TMcC said she understood the need for an investigation but that having a high number of CCTV cameras was good to ensure security. She outlined that student security issue may be better ensured if security officers were better present which is not always the case.

BG says that there were so many cameras on campus that some may be misplaced or misused. Having an investigation is necessary to monitor the impact of CCTV cameras on campus.

MC informed that when he met with Stephanie Patterson, the Accommodation manager, she had said that CCTV cameras were not looking into students’ flats and there was no violation of privacy.

CT said that it was easy for security staff to change the camera angle.

LT agreed that there was a need for a report and that this was concerning if security staff was not responding when students call them.

MB informed MSPs that security on campus was being reviewed this semester.

JDC asked whether the vote was going to be about the two actions point of the motion. She said that having a lot of cameras was good and that parents were feeling their children were safe living on campus.

CT said that the most important part was that an investigation is done and that if it is found that some cameras are not useful then the Union should lobby the University to reduce the number of CCTV cameras.

The motion was passed with 10 votes for (5 against and 1 abstention).

6. AOCB

NSS Champion

MB reminded MSPs what the NSS was. He informed that student champions had been recruited to promote the NSS but there was no student from the School of Health Sciences. A few students from the School of Health Sciences volunteered.

Student-Led Teaching Award

MB reminded that the SLTA planning committee was meeting in the afternoon from 1.15pm in the Students’ Union offices. He encouraged all MSPs to take part in the group and that later in semester two there will be recruitment for panelists.

NUS Conference

MB explained that NUS National conference was held in semester 2 and that QMU could send two delegates. One of the delegate will be the Student President but the other student will elected by members of Student Parliament. Class Reps and MSPs are encouraged to nominate themselves

Night March

MW informed MSPs that there would be a march in Edinburgh this Thursday 24^th November from 7.00pm Teviot place to protest against violence made to women. The march will be about 2 hours and followed by a big event.

International Student Sponsorship

TMcC updated students on the issue she has been working on since last meeting. She informed MSPs that the issue was still unresolved. QMU has been asked to give the promised funding to students but they are still waiting for their loan.

Staff Strike

MB informed MSPs that a UK wide strike has been called for Wednesday 30^th November. MB explained that the strike concerned students as it is about pensions and all students will go to employment after their studies.

MB said that he had ensured that all classes cancelled on the 30^th would be rescheduled.

EN expressed her concern if her class is scheduled but she cannot access the campus because of travel disruptions. MB ensured that he was working with the University to negotiate a closure. Some Universities decided to close campuses because of security but QMU was on this date still going to be opened.

BG asked if there was any action MSPs could do about it. MB said that he was continuing discussion with University.

Eurig Scandrett, QMU UCU President and designated spokesperson to Parliament, explained to students why they were going on strike. He outlined to students that there had been cuts in funding for Universities which meant less resources e.g. less books in LRC, less teachers.

On the 30^th because of the strike some courses may be cancelled and it may be that there is not enough security staff working. In this case the University would close.

Eurig Scandrett said that all students were welcome to join staff on the 30^th in the square to sign the petition and then go to join the march to the Scottish Parliament.

MC closed the meeting and announced the next meeting will be on the 7^th February 2012.