College Tribune
News
October 6th 2009
Poster theft hinders ‘Yes’ campaign
l Posters advertising lecture stolen l Turnout less than expected Caoimhin Millar A batch of posters advertising a lecture on the Lisbon Treaty was stolen from the Student Centre last week, the College Tribune has learned. Generation YES, a youth lobby group set up to campaign for a Yes vote in the recent referendum, had ordered the posters to advertise a lecture being held on campus. The event was co-sponsored by the UCD Students’ Union; who recently officially came out in support of the Treaty. The SU was previously mandated by its executive to support a Yes vote following a presentation by a member of Generation YES. The theft occurred on Thursday 24th of September. The posters were taken from the group’s campaign headquarters in the Student Centre. The posters were delivered at 12pm and went missing sometime before 4pm. UCD Buildings and Services were informed of the theft, and it is believed that CCTV footage of the incident exists. Dan Hayden, Research Director for Generation YES, spoke to the College Tribune about the incident. “I find it deplorable, especially seeing as GY is campaigning hard on the facts. But it is not surprising, as this is how the No campaign has been run - in the dirt.” “It simply beggars belief that they could be so cynical not just to attack our campaign - which was wrong - but to attack an event offered by three of UCD’s best minds for the purpose of answering peoples’ questions, which should have been
beyond reproach.” It is understood that UCDSU paid for the posters. President Gary Redmond released the following statement: “Posters were ordered to promote the Lisbon Treaty lecture that took place on Tuesday 29th September. Several of them were put up around campus, but when SU Officers returned later that evening to collect more from the poster rack, all of them were missing.” “We’re currently reviewing CCTV footage with Student Centre management to identify if someone took the posters out of the building.” New posters were not printed in time for the event. Instead the talk was advertised solely through the distribution of leaflets around the campus. The lecture went ahead as planned. Entitled “The Economic, Legal and Social Benefits of the Lisbon Treaty”, it was given by three pro-Lisbon UCD academics: Dr Gavin Barrett, EU constitutional law expert; Prof. Patrick Paul Walsh, economist and development expert; and Prof. Brian Nolan, public policy expert. Hayden believes the turnout was adversely impacted by the theft, an estimated 40 people turned up. However, he was satisfied with how the event turned out. “Ultimately I doubted very much that they succeeded in their aim of depriving UCD students of access to sufficient information and reaching appropriate conclusions on this basis,” commented one of the speakers, Dr Barrett.
3
Photography by Jim Scully
Low turnout at FEE protest l
Mary-Lou McDonald lends support James Grannell
Fees were on the agenda again at the Lisbon Treaty debate on campus where a small group turned out to protest the presence of former Taoiseach Bertie Ahern. UCD’s Law Society Lisbon debate was held in O’Reilly Hall last Tuesday 29th September. Ahern was among the speakers at the meeting. Members of FEE chanted slogans such as, “no cutbacks, no fees, no Fianna Fail TD’s”. FEE are campaigning against the Government’s plans to introduce fees for third level education. Mary-Lou McDonald, Sinn Féin MEP for Dublin, came out of the debate and joined the group in a show of support for the protest. “I think the student protest is very welcome and timely,” McDonald said to the College Tribune. “After Lisbon we’re facing a couple of months in the run up to the December budget. We’re looking at swinging cuts across the board. Everybody will be affected, not least students.” “There come moments in the life of a country that people have to stand up and be counted. Students have done that already and they’re going to have to continue to do that.” Paul Stewart of FEE spoke to the College Tribune about the low turnout at the protest. “We didn’t get the numbers that we’d have liked, but we only had about 24 hours to prepare. I don’t think the num-
l Conflict between anti-fee groups
bers themselves are a significant factor. The main thing to take from it, is that the students were there to protest the presence of Bertie Ahern on campus.” “I do think there’s a lack of awareness about the activism itself,” commented
Stewart. “I also think we’ve been misrepresented numerous times by various different sources. You could see that some stu-
dents weren’t actually sure why we were there. That’s partly our fault and partly the fault of people who’ve misrepresented our stance.” Stewart believes there is a resolution to the problem. “There is work we have to do: we have to make students know why we’re here. Let the student population know we’re there to help them; and that they can come along and play a part as well.” There has been some confusion among students about the aims and motivation of FEE in comparison to other groups. “We’re trying to differentiate ourselves from the Students’ Unions and the USI,” stated Stewart. “We think students have the capability to do this by themselves; we’re not here to guide them like drones. FEE want them to play an active participant role. We think if they do that they can win, and we’re just there to help them.” In the past, FEE has opposed UCDSU and other Unions with regards to tactics in the fight against fees. As a result conflict has arisen between the respective groups. Stewart believes that the SU’s effort is ineffective. “They’ve concentrated on lobbying politicians even though we know that hasn’t worked. They’re out of tactics and out of time and if they don’t step up their campaign, fees will be in and there won’t be anything people can do about it.”