Prez attacks rules
Oxford Union President Neil Mahapatra has attacked the Union's extensive rule-book this week, claiming it allows incompetent officials to "hide behind the rules in order to follow their own ends", and prevents full disclosure of candidates' abilities in the press.
The comments came during discussion of the upcoming Union elections. Current rules prohibit "drawing the fact of the Election...to the attention of Members in a systematic or persistent way" and a breach could result in a tribunal and potential fines of up to £100 for Union members.
Daniel Johnson, Returning Officer at the Union, admitted that this media control was "very restrictive", but explained that the rules were put in place five years ago, when even college authorities had complained about excessive hacking. Johnson explained that the purpose of the rule was to make sure that elections are "not about who has the most friends, or money".
The rule may, however, have the opposite effect, preventing anyone but the Union hacks themselves having any knowledge of the abilities of electoral candidates. The only means by which new Union members can discover anything about those standing is by relying on the short manifestoes which arrive in pigeonholes on the day prior to an election. As one Teddy Hall fresher commented, this means that "we have no real idea who these people are".
Johnson defended this situation, saying that the rule "may not work brilliantly, but it works", and suggested that anyone seeking to change it would have to be very "brave" in face of resistance.
Deputy Returning Officer Alex da Costa added that the rule is not totally restrictive, saying that: "we are allowed to talk about it between friends".
Neil Mahapatra appeared more optimistic about reform, stating that "the entire body of rules is due for a complete overhaul". He insisted that the best interests of the union are served "not through a blind obsession of the rules, but a willingness to serve the ordinary members".
22nd Nov 2001