Sabbs Accused Of Sabotaging Portering Campaign
By: Daniel Goddard
Etheridge: Humphrys ignored portering to get re-elected and Ngwena is too close to the university administration.
One of several posters that have appeared around campus.
Ex-YUSU Campaigns Officer, Chris Etheridge, has launched a scathing attack on YUSU President Tim Ngwena and Welfare Officer Ben Humphrys. In a four-page statement, Etheridge attacks the two sabbs on a number of issues, accusing them of viewing the portering campaign as “toxic” to their own agendas, despite widespread student support.
Etheridge claims Humphrys told him as early as first term that he was not prepared to follow through with the portering campaign. “[The sabbatical officers] don’t wish to be associated with [the portering campaign] because it might damage their reputations or personal standing… in November, I was told by Ben Humphrys that he did not want to be associated with the campaign if it did not achieve its aims because it might damage his chances of re-election.”
The former Democracy and Services candidate is also behind posters around campus slating YUSU’s policy and culture. One poster calls the union “YUSUless” while another attacks the hypocrisy of the union nominating the portering protest for Best Campaign. The protest did eventually win at the YUSU awards; something Etheridge has since called “a disgrace”.
Speaking to Vision, Etheridge added that the portering protest in November was merely a publicity stunt to give the impression that YUSU was being proactive, “It was scheduled before the meeting that Tim and Ben were attending. They never thought it would achieve anything.”
Etheridge’s statement cites a Vision article from last term revealing that crime on campus had increased by 72% since the portering cuts. He says that Humphrys deliberately tried to cover up and mislead students with regards to these statistics. “Ben Humphrys argued that we should not publicise the fact that crime has gone up on campus because students would ‘get into a panic’.
“In last week’s Campaigns Committee Ben stated that bike theft doesn’t really count as crime. It’s as if the only crime which counts is violent crime.”
Humphrys has responded: “My position on portering has been firmly consistent in UGMs, committees and meetings across the year… it would be immoral to misrepresent an increase in bike theft as a threat to students’ personal safety on campus.
“As a former campaigns officer whose unsuccessful bid for Democracy and services officer did not even mention portering Chris’ comments seem disingenuous, his attacks deceptive and his motives overly political. I am, and have always been, fully committed to portering on campus, and I reject outright any claims that I’ve ever been anything but fully dedicated to York Students and their campaigns.”
YUSU President Tim Ngwena, along with Humphrys, is accused of having become too close to the university.
“Tim and Ben have used their position to foster a subservient relationship between YUSU and the University rather than operating through strong and active campaigning and standing up for students.”
While still Campaigns Officer, Etheridge says he nearly stood down from his post in protest of the sabbs’ inaction, and regrets not doing so. “Another damning indictment of YUSU’s failure in my opinion is the fact that the Union did not react until prompted by Derwent JCRC. Myself and Jason Rose did our best when we were allowed to, but we were held back by the sabbatical officers until very late on into the Autumn Term. The situation got so bad that at one point we both considered resigning from our posts but foolishly decided against this because we thought that we would be more effective campaigners while within YUSU.”
Ngwena’s response states: “The portering campaign was led by the campaigns officers with the support of myself and Ben. If the campaigns officers felt our actions were not sufficient, then I would have appreciated some honest professional words as fellow officers then, rather than an attack having left office. It’s a shame that even after all the support, resources and advice we offered, Chris Ethridge only has criticism for the work that we have done this year”
Ngwena and Humphrys have already faced serious criticism this year. Motions to censure both of them were propsed by long-time portering campaigner, Miles Layram, during the YUSU election campaign week last term. Etheridge says he could not second the motions while he was still an officer but that he “morally” supported them. Despite this, Ngwena was re-elected President and Humphrys was successful in his bid to become Academic Affairs Officer.
Categories: Highlights • NewsComments Feed: RSS 2.0
Posted: Monday, June 21st, 2010 at 4:52 pm
Headlines (RSS)
“even though the identities of some of the anonymous commentators here are obvious.”
Most of us don’t post anonymously because we care if people at York know who we are.
We post anonymously to stop internet searches coming up with millions of results, which in 5 years time, might be used against us.
Whether they were free or not, it still made the protestors look like mugs, standing outside Hes hall, munching on pepperoni pizzas.
What serious protest have you ever seen that, after 5 minutes of shouting, ends with the protestors eating pizza and then walking home? This was without a doubt one of the weakest protests ever seen. What an embarrassment!
a) You could always use your first name at least.
b) How would your own opinion be used against you in the future, if you are so sure of it? Be honest, the only reason you post anonymously is that it makes it easier to be nasty and resort to personal attacks.
A.
a) Using a first name is absolutely no different from using an alias, is it?
b) Because only a fool would possibly claim they will never change their mind on a topic, or indeed, care about a particular issue in 3,5 or 10 years time.
“Be honest, the only reason you post anonymously is that it makes it easier to be nasty and resort to personal attacks.”
Incorrect. Although winding you up is very enjoyable by-product that everyone who reads Nouse or Vision online enjoys.
“a) Using a first name is absolutely no different from using an alias, is it?”
I think it is quite different. Using a first name makes you identifiable to York students who take an interest in these issues (a rather small number of people if we are to be honest with ourselves) but it does not create a googlable record of your opinions. There are quite a few Georges out there..
Aris, A person might be very happy with their opinion and subsequent comment, but that still doesn’t mean they wish for their name to be returned along with other peoples’ comments, or even the very subject of the article.
I never, ever, want my name to be linked to some of the other comments as quite often, they are stupid.
Excuses, excuses… are you trying to convince me or yourselves?
“Because only a fool would possibly claim they will never change their mind on a topic, or indeed, care about a particular issue in 3,5 or 10 years time.”
I agree with that. In fact, I agree so strongly that I believe there is no shame in changing your mind over an issue, if you are honest about it. So then why not have your old opinions associated with your name, unless they are so extreme that they might seem truly ridiculous in the future? In other words, if you agree that changing your mind over something is legitimate, why don’t you want anyone to be able to say ‘look, in the past you said x’?
I don’t buy it – you just prefer being able to criticise and insult people without them knowing who you are.
A.
“I don’t buy it – you just prefer being able to criticise and insult people without them knowing who you are.”
Not all people.
In fact, only you. It’s just too much fun.
The funny thing is that you truly believe you are winding me up. I am not upset or anything – just surprised at the immaturity you display. You must be living a sad life if you find it fun trying to wind up someone you don’t even know online.
In any case, when I said that you enjoy insulting people, I was not referring to your attitude towards me, but to the attitude anonymous commentators have against Etheridge.
A.
If you don’t mind, why do you continually take the bait Aris? On here and on Nouse. Every single time.
It’s called procrastinating. Still, it is truly pathetic gaining pleasure by winding up strangers online.
A.
Now who’s throwing personal insults around Aris? Hypocritical much?
Bahahahahahaha
No, not really… mine is an insult based on facts, and under my name. I don’t say stuff like ‘Etheridge is boring’ or ‘Chris is indecent’. I say simply that gaining pleasure by mocking people you don’t know online is pathetic. I’d like to know, those who ‘dislike’ my comment, do you really think it is normal to do that? To be so immature you actually enjoy making fun of others online?
Anyway, I am tired of all this. If you are who I think you are, the real reason you dislike me, and the reason you always attack me personally, is that I was one of the strongest critics of the person you supported and whose campaign you designed for a sabbatical position. Instead of admitting it, you keep trying to undermine me in every other discussion. This is truly indecent.
A.
I assume you must be talking about a sabb officer at Cambridge, as I can’t think why you’d be criticising somone at York, not being a student here anymore.
And on that basis, you are wrong.
I can confirm I’m not, nor have I ever been involved in Cambridge Students’ Union.
Aris,
What I don’t like is that regardless of the article on Vision or Nouse, the comments always end up revolving around you. There were 50 decent comments on this article, and now the last 8 are just about you. Intentionally or not, you’ve hijacked another article.
Please, just go away.
Is it my fault that people start attacking me? My original comments were about the article.
A.
You really didn’t need to offer a reply to that. In fact, whenever you’re about to write a reply on these threads again, stop and think. Then go for a walk. And don’t leave a comment.
Go on, now, go. Walk out the door. You’re not welcome anymore.