News

Last week’s Exec meeting spanned two boardroom visits, much to everyone’s dismay.
The extra event proposal, a.k.a the Exec’s attempt to mitigate Undie 500 riots, was discussed.

he plan is to have a rugby face off between the universities of Canterbury and Otago, with a gig afterwards. Apparently similar events happened in the past before Canterbury “got all bogan.” The responsibility to organise this fell on Events, although it is to be underwritten by the campaigns initiative budget line. James was incredibly antsy about underwriting the event, presumably preferring blood in the streets to a bad budget line, and voted against the motion.
Constitutional changes were next on the agenda, with a focus on online SGMs. Concerns were raised about ‘referendum fatigue’, a possible new condition that could arise if students have to express their opinion on too many issues. Another proposed change was a screening process for SGMs, whereby student motions would be selected by the Exec prior to voting. After Dan pointed out how much power the Exec would get with this effective veto, the atmosphere brightened, and the Exec quickly passed a motion supporting the fundamental core of the model and directing Harriet to investigate. Dan ‘Good Guy’ Stride abstained.
Extreme Meeting: Part Two welcomed replacement Postgrad Rep Travis Monk and Youthline was chosen as the new Capping Show charity, “pending their acceptance” of course.
The operational report was discussed in excruciating detail. In short, satisfaction with OUSA is high among first-years (idiots), and peters off as students get further up in the system (cynics). OUSA General Manager Stephen Alexander congratulated the Exec on getting to grips with the organisation much faster than any other Executive before them.
Much of Part Two was spent discussing the governance structure review. John Phillipson, a member of the working party, introduced the report with a self-confessed ‘Dan Stride’ speech, stating that the report is a “blue-print for greater representation in our future.” The conversation got a little heated, concluding with a motion that feedback would be taken into account, and a second draft formulated for a future meeting. John seemed distressed about altering the proposal, so who knows what kind of changes will actually be made.