Ok, just spoken to Sahar (BUCF President), BUCF has NOT been derecognised (yet anyway). What is happening is that they are effectively beginning that process and Sahar is to appear before the Guild Council on March 25th to essentially ‘explain herself’.
Max
And what’s she got to explain? Did they mislay some paperwork again? They really should consider reorganising their system if they have.
From what I heard, it was a breach of the constitution (whether it is the Guild’s or their own we don’t know) and there was the whole fiasco about their AGM. But obviously there is going to be more than just that
What occurred at their AGM which caused it to become a fiasco then?
They didn’t have enough members turning up (you need a 1/3) so it got disallowed
Dont forget BUCF’s signed up and paid up membership is near enough 150. So they need minimum 50 to meet the 1/3 quota. How many times does BULS get 50 members out to an event pray tell? Its not as easy as it sounds mate. A large membership can be a blessing and burden. The Guild has never seen a political society as strong as BUCF in recent memory and they are using outdated, stupid “rules” to hold them to ransom.
Whilst I do not know about this case, I do believe that if rules are outdated, then they should be changed. And while I have every sympathy for the BUCF and have absolutely no desire to see them kicked out of the Guild, the Guild is and should remain independent of political parties. Rules are there for a reason, if those rules are false, unreasonable or no longer relevant, then those rules should be changed. If BUCF, the Lib Dems or BULS breaks the rules that are in existence, then they should be held accountable
As I said I have absolutely no desire to see the Conservatives kicked out of the guild as I believe in pluralism. But the Guild’s independence is an important facet to it that I have no desire to see infringed upon.
It would of course be ridiculous if the Conservative Future were punished on a technicality if they still had more members turn up than every other society (46 for example). My point is that this rule for 1/3 members has only just appeared as a problem because the Conservatives have been caught by it. 50 members is a heck of a lot of people. I do think that it would not have taken a lot of foresight on the part of someone in BUCF to have looked at the membership lists and spotted that this may occur said “Hang on” and brought it up to the guild before it became an issue.
Well they had over 30 turn up to the first AGM but it was still declared invalid by the guild so another had to be held, then when the other needed to be held the BUCF committee decided to hold it as quick as possible after the date the first was supposed to be however the guild then pulled up ANOTHER rule which said the (2nd) AGM wasnt publicised enough and didnt give the members 2 weeks notice (despite the fact they had all known well in advance of the first one that was cancelled by the guild last minute). So yeh its all about technicalities and stupid inflexible regulations. The society has remained absolutely on top of their guild paperwork and they were actually on a list of socieities who had completed almost ALL of the guild paperwork required of them. This isnt about their wretched redtape, BUCF have adhered to that, its about stupid quotas and general internal committee strife which has been leaked to the guild.
Then very clearly there is an issue with the guild that needs to be discussed and sorted out.
Thank you for the information bucf.
No problem. Personally I think the guilds inflexibility has caused the society a great many problems. Luckily, despite a few ups and downs, Sahar and the committee have rallied together. BUCF is very strong and the Guild would live up to its reputation of being completely out of touch with the student body if it were to reject or censure one of the most successful socieities on campus. Anyway we shall see what happens but im pleased to see that BULS recognise the importance of cross party politics on campus.