Empty promises lead students to neither rely nor trust in YUSU
Lewis Bretts’ response to this week’s revelation about his seemingly fractured and disingenuous campaign policy exemplifies the self-serving motivation behind election pledges. It may have been apathy or blatant insincerity that has lead his “memory to be vague”, but this is not entirely relevant: both reasons would point to a Democracy and Services Officer who has a complete disregard for the student population he is meant to represent and serve.
If he genuinely cannot remember such a crucial conversation with Commercial Services – a conversation that should have redirected his entire campaign process – then it seems that Bretts did not appreciate the expectations of his electorate, or understand the simple political rule that actions, or a chronic lack of action, have consequences.
But the depravity of his apparent political ethic doesn’t just extend back to this fatal misjudgement in March and November of last year. The way Bretts has perpetuated such a seemingly vacuous and unworkable promise throughout the year makes it appear that he has a complete lack of commitment to students.
A Nouse investigation last term reported that Bretts outlined plans in his campaign policy to enable a temporary cash point in Halifax College for Freshers’ Week; but he failed to fulfill this pledge for those students who are a 15-minute walk away from central campus. His response as to why he didn’t inform the student body about the complications he had with the company he was collaborating with to enable the cash-point was simply: “Maybe I should have done.”
It may have won him votes, but it has destroyed his integrity
Such an apparent lack of passion and concern for the direction of his job is exacerbated by his equally ethically dubious decision to effectively steal enterprising ideas from students Matthew Freckleton and Scott Murphy. The whole fiasco smacks of a Students’ Union entangled in their own aims and objectives regardless of consequences and student welfare.
Competition should be encouraged and stimulated on campus. All societies should have a platform to compete, something which an increasingly monopolising YUSU seem to be adverse to, when in reality it is their job to develop.
Last year’s election was one of the most contested in our Students’ Union history, with 48 candidates competing for 23 positions. Not only does it appear that Bretts has let the student population down, but he is also complicit in tearing apart the chances of Ed Durkin’s campaign with a populist policy that Bretts must have known would win him votes. It may have won him votes, but it has destroyed his integrity.
It’s like David Cameron suddenly swooping out of his shadow cabinet with promises of a new and improved healthcare system for all without tax burdens. It would be popular, but it would be a lie. And upon jubilant victory he would be exposed in Parliament for the liar and egomaniac that his actions would prove him to be.
Maybe Bretts thought this would never come back to haunt him. If so, then he has seriously underestimated the power of the student voice and the media that represents it. Suddenly, Bretts’ actions throughout the year have begun to make sense. Just before becoming Democracy and Services-elect in June, Bretts made his opinion of articles written about YUSU elected officers, and the public domain they enter due to our website, quite clear: he said that elected student officers should not risk employment difficulties due to mistakes committed during their University life, as the public interest for the story is no longer applicable. But why would this matter if YUSU managed to maintain their election pledges – or at least structure their campaigns around legitimate election promises? Then the big bad campus media would have to keep schtum. We don’t write critical stories for cynicism’s sake.
You’re right, Lewis, “sadly” we’re all “human and fallible”, but we don’t all see a tasty opportunity to capitalise on falsified dreams and decide that personal achievement dominates over our basic job descriptions.
48 responses below. Comments are open.
Leave a Reply
Related Posts
Popular This Week
Polls
Loading ...
I’m pretty disappointed in you for this article Laura.
It’s unneccessarily personal and makes wild, sweeping accusations of the sort I wouldn’t expect from someone who claims to be an intelligent young woman who fancies a career in “proper” journalism. This piece comes across as a vitriolic ‘Daily Mail’ or ‘Sun’ type article and really doesn’t warrant a place in a paper that prides itself on its quality.
How exactly does Lewis Bretts, or any of the current sabbatical officers have “a complete disregard for the student population”. Does regularly working until way past 11pm count as that? How about going into the YUSU Office on New Years Eve and New Years Day to work on things for this term? This appears to be quite the opposite of “a complete lack of commitment to students.”
In terms of elections: “he is also complicit in tearing apart the chances of Ed Durkin’s campaign with a populist policy that Bretts must have known would win him votes.” really? How is a Subway on Campus not a populist policy? He tore about the chances of Ed Durkin by running a better campaign and not waiting until it was too late to really kick into campaigning (as did Langrish and Shanks).
“It’s like David Cameron suddenly swooping out of his shadow cabinet with promises of a new and improved healthcare system for all without tax burdens.” No it isn’t, that’s rubbish and you know it.
“If so, then he has seriously underestimated the power of the student voice and the media that represents” I think the likes of Nouse badly overestimate their power.
“basic job descriptions.” To maintain democracy and the provisions of services in the Union. So running several problem free elections, increasing the turn out at UGMs and continuing the Courtyard’s massive profit success appears to be matching those.
I think that, whilst there may have been aspects of the initial article which were unfair, that the above piece is a little hostile towards the writer, who is simply doing her job as a writer, much in the same way the YUSU Officer in question is doing his job.
Democracy and Services Officer is indeed a job.
Since when did writing vicious personal articles like this, in a voluntary student newspaper, become one?
I really wish people would stop stating that YUSU officers are heroic because they work long hours. So what if they’re in the office past 11? There’s hundreds of thousands of people in this country who work horrific hours for lesser pay than YUSU. Added to which they knew what they were getting themselves into when they ran for the job, they deserve respect for nothing more than doing the job they were elected to do and for fulfilling their campaign promises, therefore, this article gives Lewis exactly as much respect as he deserves.
“the student voice and the media that represents it”
Sorry, what monarch died and made you unelected leader of the people? Who holds you to account Laura? Or the campus media as a whole?
You berate YUSU officers etc for being cynical CV builders, but isn’t that exactly what you lot are, with the only difference that those involved in YUSU actually want to give something to the Uni community in the process – the campus media just tears people down. Foy’s “Off the Record” blog is a prime example of this – just sitting on the sidelines and sniping, rather than doing anything positive.
Which, by the way, is the answer to your question about why online articles should be time-limited. The fact is you do not have the right to pass moral judgements on people – nobody elected you, nobody holds you to account, and I for one don’t actually trust that “We don’t write critical stories for cynicism’s sake”.
Well said Andy. After all, investment bankers work insanely long hours – that doesn’t mean everyone has to like them!
“The fact is you do not have the right to pass moral judgements on people – nobody elected you”. What is this supposed to mean? Unless you are elected in a position, you are not allowed to exercise criticism? Isn’t this exactly why we have newspapers and the media?
Instead of attacking the author of this article, why don’t all of you who disagree with Laura try to defend Bretts?
A.
Anyone has the right to an opinion, only those elected have the right to claim an opinion is representative. The criticism remains: why should an organisation that has no accountability to the student body have so much power over it?
Re. Bretts, I think he shouldn’t have made those promises *if* he knew they were unachievable, but I think all candidates should be ambitious. Personally, I’m prepared to give Lewis the benefit of the doubt, as I know how genuinely hard he works. But that’s my opinion, *I’m* not going to try and ram it down anyone’s throat
I feel sorry for Lewis, he’s obviously not as smart or dynamic as he needs to be and I reckon, had he relied on his own wits when campaigning, we would be none the wiser.
Maybe his puppet master should just take to the stage himself.
But quite a few students have apparently claimed to be disillusioned with Bretts, as stated in another article. Surely then Laura’s article represents them?
And the media have power over the student body, but then again, the student body has power over the media. If no-one read Nouse, then the opinions expressed in it wouldn’t matter, would they?
I asked Bretts via email if this rumour about him knowing he wouldn’t not be allowed to install a stall is true, and he reassured me it’s not. I am also prepared to give him the benefit of doubt. If however it is proven that he was indeed told about this, then he has some explanations to give!
A.
“But quite a few students have apparently claimed to be disillusioned with Bretts, as stated in another article. Surely then Laura’s article represents them?”
Yeah, that’s great, let’s take a few vox pops of some random students and label that representative. Smart work there
“If no-one read Nouse, then the opinions expressed in it wouldn’t matter, would they?”
That’s hardly power. Even if Nouse’s readership went through the floor, they’d still get a fat cheque from YUSU (irony anyone?) and keep on publishing, and those opinions of people like Laura would still have some impact (eg. on employers, years after people graduate).
“and those opinions of people like Laura would still have some impact (eg. on employers, years after people graduate).”
So? If someone has done a good job, the public will have mostly good opinion for them. So even if an employer decides to go through the archives a student newspaper, they might read one or two negative articles, but most of them will be supportive.
A.
And that, Aris, is why you totally don’t get what I’m saying.
It is not for the media to decide whether someone has done a good job or not, it is the student body. Here’s the crucial bit: *the media is not necessarily representative of student opinion*, because, and I’ll say it once again: they are neither elected nor accountable
I’m sorry, but I cannot seriously believe that this website’s regular commenters still fail to understand what a Comment article is. By it’s very name it is an article which reflects the opinion of the author, an opinion which we all agree she is free to air.
You may disagree with her sentiment, that is your opinion. I, for one, do not. That is my opinion. That’s what happens here – we all argue our opinion in the spirit of debate – how very scholarly of us.
What shouldn’t happen is yet another argument between Aris Catsambas and his fake named but incredibly conspicuous opponent. That, frankly, is just boring, and we’ve all seen it before.
So, Aris, Hack, please voice an opinion and then move on. Your arguments are just irritating and I’m fed up of wasting my time thinking there might actually be other opinions written. On this, I think, I can claim to be representative of the readers of this website!
The article was a sensational story typical of the student media at York today. It fail to do some basic research.
YUSU Market days have existed for years. If anything, YSM has tried to rip it off. I have been to numerous where different craft and book stalls would setup for the day, student designers would exhibit and sell their works, all for a nominal fee. Run by YUSU, not YSM.
Has a member of staff telling a candidate in the elections, officer-elect or current officer their policy ‘couldn’t’ or ’shouldn’t’ work ever stopped an officer running on a campaign before? If so, we wouldn’t be with our beloved YUSU Courtyard now.
Candidates often run on idealistic campaigns, which they hope to be able to achieve during their time in office, or at least start the ball rolling. This will always be the case and should be the case. An officer has to challenge the status quo and try to achieve new things, break down barriers. Without it, why bother with student representation or student officers at all?
Come on Nouse, credit where credit is due. Offer the other side and let the YUSU officers tell you the ‘hidden truth’ about what they do on a daily basis. It isn’t sexy, probably even not fun much of the times, but a selfless job giving back so much to the University they love.
Maybe Nouse could shadow some YUSU officers for a week and find out what life is really like, the many hours of meetings on a weekly basis to defend what students currently have, and how difficult it is to achieve manifesto pledges. Term 1, Freshers madness, Term 2, Election madness, and Term 3, being chased out of the door.
Lewis, Laura – You’re Fired
“Conspicuous oppoenent” – not, though, his usual oponent, as ip addresses and a new year’s resolution will confirm
!
“this fatal misjudgement”!
Who’s died because of a lack of fruit and veg stall? And what from?
Not enough vitamin C?
“The media is not necessarily representative of student opinion [and] they are neither elected nor accountable”
But the important thing is that they DO keep YUSU to account. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again; if the article is fair (albeit harsh) then it simply raises the stakes. If Lewis is indeed still suggesting that it’s possible and the newspaper is suggesting that he knew it was impossible an entire year ago then the result is simple:
A) Lewis fails and the media annihilate him
B) Lewis succeeds and annihilates the media
If it turns out to be impossible and Lewis knew it, students (and the media) have the right to be upset (and also have the right to completely and utterly not care). If not, the media are being extremely harsh. We’ll just have to see what happens..!
Jamie – scurvy can kill if one does not get enoug Vitamin C.
Personally Ithink all the sad bastards who are still whinging about the lack of a stall should go on a vitamin C strike. Take the hippies and eco-losers with you as well.
What then Bretts, can you live with that on your conscience?
This is just like when Tony Blair lied to us about Iraq.
This article smacks of arrogance and self-righteousness. Perhaps you should consider running for a sabbatical position and then you will understand just how difficult it is. So Lewis hasn’t managed to get a fruit and veg stall on campus? (‘So’ being the operative word here). Does it really matter in the great scheme of things? At least he doesnt swan around with his head up his arse like you lot do!
Laura, this really is a paticularly nasty and accusatory piece and it’s made me very angry. How dare you say he has an ‘apparent lack of passion and concern’ for the job? You obviously don’t know him well enough to make an informed decision. Lewis is frequently in the YUSU office until late, striving hard to fullfil his role as Democracy and Services Officer.
If you want fruit and veg, stop moaning and go to Morrisons! However, I suspect this isn’t the reason you felt so impassioned that you had to write the article…
This article smacks of arrogance and self-righteousness. Perhaps you should consider running for a sabbatical position and then you will understand just how difficult it is. So Lewis hasn’t managed to get a fruit and veg stall on campus? (’So’ being the operative word here). Does it really matter in the great scheme of things? At least he doesnt swan around with his head up his arse like you lot do!
Laura, this really is a paticularly nasty and accusatory piece and it’s made me very angry. How dare you say he has an ‘apparent lack of passion and concern’ for the job? You obviously don’t know him well enough to make an informed decision. Lewis is frequently in the YUSU office until late, striving hard to fulfill his role as Democracy and Services Officer.
If you want fruit and veg, stop moaning and go to Morrisons! However, I suspect this isn’t the reason you felt so impassioned that you had to write the article…
Hack Supremo: you’ve hit the nail on the head!
Yeah, go to Morrisons! You should consider taking that minibus-to-Morrisons that Lewis also promised in his campaign.
“If you want fruit and veg, stop moaning and go to Morrisons!”
Yeah, stop bitching about the stall and just use Luis Bretts’ weekly bus service to Morrisons.
Lewis, even.
“Does it really matter in the great scheme of things?”
It is hard to understand how people who are attending what’s considered one of the country’s top ten unis can be so simple. Most people are not complaining because they didn’t get their fresh fruit! Most people are complaining because they were cheated! How can anyone not see this? Yes, fair enough, lack of a stall is no big deal. But lying is, regardless of the issue. And if the accusations were true, if Bretts knew he would not be allowed to install such a stall, he should have let the student body know.
Why doesn’t Nouse ask Brett’s opinion on all this? After all it would only be fair enough to give him a platform to defend himself.
A.
Are you even at this university any more? No? Oh, well get a job and stop commenting on a crappy student newspaper then!
The fact that I am not a student at York anymore does not mean I am not allowed to comment. After all, Bretts was elected when I was still a member of the student body, so if he was indeed lying, he was lying to me as well.
If you disagree with my comments, do point out the fault in my thinking. But retorting that I am no longer a student at York, without even commenting on my views themselves is pedantic and childish.
At least I’m honest, commenting under my name. Who knows whether you’re still a student?
A.
Me?
Has anyone considered that people may have voted for Lewis because he caught the students’ attention with his ‘cardboard campaign’ and not necessarily because they wanted a fruit and veg stall?
Rhianna saw off competition from a well-respected incumbent, because she ran a simple campaign based on a well established brand. Her policies (all be it sound ones) were, IMO, irrelevant to her victory.
I believe the policies that Lewis came up with could have been the most un-implementable & financially recless but if he had presented them as he did last year, he would still have won.
Let’s be honest, this is the same Uni that elected a pirate. It doesn’t give a crap about policy during the election but rewards a good campaign.
When campus is about to be hit by its usual array of unoriginal posters and flyers, surely Bretts should be celebrated for one of the best (serious) campaigns of recent times? I didn’t vote for him but still think he should.
Anonymous Massive! believes Rhianna’s vistory was due to the Massive! amount of nakedness her campaigners displayed rather than any branding/simplicity related issues
Anonymous Massive! would like to take this opportunity to announce Anonymous Massive!’s candidacy for all 6 sabbatical position, running on a platform of mind control and subliminal messaging. You want no policy and original campaigning, you got it!
“surely Bretts should be celebrated for one of the best (serious) campaigns of recent times?”
And then we wonder why there are no honest politicians! Naturally, if you reward good campaigns and not honesty, that’s what you get.
A.
It was a rubbish idea anyway, Country Fresh is 10 minutes away from campus, if students were really bothered about fresh fruit and veg they’d go there.
Let’s not forget about his “weekly blog” either… You’d think out of the number of hours he spends at his computer all day he’d be able to find 5 minutes a week to film himself telling us he’s been to a few meetings…
Commented edited by a moderator.
I greatly admire Lewis Bretts. Here is a man who overcame the laws of morality to implement his spectacular will, the details of which we do not know yet. He is a superman of nietzschean proportions. The people are stupid and believed his lies but we will all benefit from his rule. Every society requires this kind of man to enable rejuvenation and growth and it was his duty, not his choice, to lie to us. We must surrender ourselves to his magnificent will and follow him wherever he may take us, for I know that he won’t forsake us. Forget this liberal drivel, I’m loving Bretts instead.
You need fruit and veg.
I bet the Courtyard will start selling Turkey Twizzlers next. What a joke.
p.s. pucka
p.p.s. pucka
“So Lewis hasn’t managed to get a fruit and veg stall on campus? Does it really matter in the great scheme of things?”
Yes, it matters. It matters because the fruit and veg stall was one of the reasons I voted for Bretts, as well as his plans about the Heslington cash point and the mini-bus. Because I disagree with Anon. saying that the uni “doesn’t give a crap about policy during the election but rewards a good campaign”. Because when I voted last year, I thought carefully about who to vote for, and made sure to check out everyone’s policies when deciding. The fact that he also ran a good campaign helped him, of course, but I think it’s a bit of a generalisation to state that the student body as a whole doesn’t care about policy.
If Bretts genuinely thought that a fruit and veg stall was possible and did his best to carry it out, then that’s one thing. If he knew it was impossible and still sold the idea to students, then that’s another. And if he WAS told and then forgot, then I don’t think that’s an acceptable excuse. Yes, we’re all human and fallible, but fallibility is less easily forgiven when it comes to matters of elected representatives who let us down and break our trust.
I agree with Catsambas on this, including that we should hear more of Bretts’s side of the story. Still, an apology at least from Bretts would be nice.
Methinks ‘Dancing Queen’ and A.Catsambas might be the same person…
If you were stupid enough to believe he was gonna put a fruit and veg stall on the campus then you shouldn’t be allowed to vote. It’s all very well getting up in the air about it now but shouldn’t Nouse actually have investigated this ridiculous claim at the time? Effected change by exploiting blatant lies instead of whinging about it afterwards?
Just a thought
I can definitely state that, fond as I am of Abba, I am not ‘Dancing Queen’. a) I always comment under my name, and b) I didn’t vote for Bretts anyway.
Best,
A.
Firstly, all Nouse editors are elected, including Laura;
Hack Supremo – just because Nouse is funded by YUSU, does that mean that they should not be liable to criticism? Is Nouse a YUSU advert? Well, that would be truly biased journalism right there;
Nouse ARE planning to shadow YUSU for a week in a new blog planned; I doubt this would make Laura want to retract any of her comments. The article isn’t about a lack of fruit and veg – it’s the fact that Bretts centred his campaign on a promise that he knew was unworkable. And failed to tell students that;
And Lewis DID get asked his opinion, to which he answered what Laura has quoted here, “I’m human and fallible”. Nouse never runs a story without a right of reply. This is illegal. For the full quote, please refer to: http://www.nouse.co.uk/2010/01/26/bretts-knew-fruit-and-veg-couldn%E2%80%99t-happen/
Have most of Laura’s critics read this new story? This is a comment piece, it’s purely subjective, and a personal attack was not launched against Bretts. This piece was based around facts given to Nouse as outlined in the above news, and thus objective, article. Get the facts straight before abusing a piece that is intentionally subjective and opinionated in its nature – and is attacking a flawed campaign policy rather than personality.
‘Firstly, all Nouse editors are elected, including Laura’
Where you at the these so-called ‘elections’? If so, you wouldn’t have a leg to stand on using this argument. The elections were an absolute disgrace and a joke to democracy. 1)There were people voting who used to write for Nouse and had come back specially to vote, i.e they were ex-students.
2) Everybody who voted had to be a member, and thus have paid the £5 membership fee, which many people hadn’t.
3) The voting was not done in secret and was done in the ridiculously undemocratic way of putting one’s hand up in the air. Obviously this meant that everyone was either copying the people next to them (namely the Nouse crowd who were influencing the votes), or chatting to those around them and deciding on a block vote.
4) Comments were being made by old/current Nouse editors alike, to the tune of who everybody should vote for, and by humiliating some members that were running.
5) Most of the major editorial positions had effectively already been decided upon before the elections so that others standing never had a chance.
6) By virtue of the way the voting was done, it was easy for people to vote twice or not vote at all, as this could not be properly monitored.
7) The election was not minuted as it was supposed to have been.
You might like to look at this article: http://www.yusu.org/blog/entry/190. I know that this was eventually overturned (due to lack of evidence/people caring) but it is undeniable that this was not a democratic election and editors were often appointed in an unfair way, i.e they had already effectively been guaranteed the position before they went to the election.
“Everybody who voted had to be a member, and thus have paid the £5 membership fee, which many people hadn’t.”
Those are the rules of EVERY society election.
Well that’s a nice bit of FUD, debatable.
1) It was very clear where the 4 ex-York students were – some put their hands up but their votes weren’t counted.
2) There was someone at the door so although I can’t guarantee it, I find this unlikely.
3)
a) Agreed, putting hands up is not ideal but it’s the only reasonable option with the amount of time this process takes.
b) I looked around a fair amount and didn’t see anyone change their vote mid-way through. I’ll call BS on this one.
4) No they weren’t.
5) This is news to me, and probably a lot of people in the room who didn’t know the candidates well and voted entirely based on their speech. The more seasoned Nousies could vote on experience, and that is absolutely the right thing to do if you know how someone has performed over the past year.
6) People voting twice would have been caught by looking at the total vote count, sorry. Not voting is a problem?
7) Fair point
Unfortunately (fortunately?) your premises are incorrect and some I think you’ve made up on the spot, so I’m going to say your conclusion is invalid.
This discussion has been beaten to death elsewhere and investigated by YUSU who have already concluded it was okay, so please don’t reply here unless it is on topic, ie. about the comment piece.
Sick of empty promises? Vote Miller for D & S 2010.
“3) a) Agreed, putting hands up is not ideal but it’s the only reasonable option with the amount of time this process takes.”
Not true. URY elections have hands voting for uncontested but always to paper-based secret ballot for contested positions. It takes longer but is worth it. Likewise minuting of numbers is important etc. But it’s unlikely to have massively swung the vote.
In terms of ex-students and unpaid members – both are against Nouse’s rules but are unlikely to be detrimental to the voting process and are again unlikely to have massively swung the vote.
Whilst there were a few bent rules, there were no massive issues (i.e. compared to the entire Vision team paying Nouse membership to usurp the Editor or other damaging equivalents) and it’s fairly likely that Nouse have taken the issues on board and the new team will strongly consider the problems before the next election anyway!
Also. Not relevant to article. If Charlotte had promised to print 5,000 copies per issue and do 10 issues per term then it would be a comparable situation. Though we still haven’t had Lewis say explicitly that he knew it was an impossible task – and we still haven’t seen that it is indeed impossible. So maybe just leave it as having been raised and debated and consider how possible policies will be at the elections in a few weeks?
Look, lets get to the heart of the issue, I have big thighs so will you sleep with me laura??????