Belfast Nightclub has licence revoked

Popular Belfast nightclub Rain had its entertainment licence suspended recently for a series of alleged health and safety breaches over the last number of months.

The drastic decision to suspend the licence was taken by Belfast City Council in the wake of a number of inspections by building control staff. On repeated occasions rain was found to have exceeded its maximum capacity allowed by health and safety, with reports stating that on one of these occasions they were more than 300 people over the limit.

Following a meeting of BCC’s Licensing Committee on 16^th February the incidents of overcrowding on the 7^th November, 30^th January and 6^th February were regarded as being sufficient grounds to take such action.

In a statement to the media, Councillor Christopher Stalford, chairman of Licensing Committee, said: "We take our responsibilities as a licensing and enforcing authority very seriously, particularly as these functions are exercised to ensure public safety in places of entertainment.

"Belfast has a burgeoning night time economy and this is something the council encourages and is extremely supportive of; however, where there is the potential for the public's safety to be at risk and where there have been alleged breaches of any licence, the council will take robust action when necessary."

SU Management Team Director Andrew Dodge said in relation to the situation that: “Customer safety is paramount in the operation of any licensed venue. It is good news that the BCC took positive action to ensure adherence to licensing laws and that they have clearly demonstrated to all license holders that breaches will not be tolerated”.

He added that: “Developments will be circulated by the VP Welfare, Adam McGibbon, to ensure that our members are up to date on issues”.

This is not the first time Rain has hit the headlines as last year it was accused of discriminating against disabled people. Ciaran McGrogan was allegedly forbidden from entering the club due to his being in a wheelchair. A facebook campaign calling for a boycott of Rain later gained over 12,000 followers.

QUB Student Elections 2011 Runners and Riders

With the annual Students’ Union sabbatical elections on the horizon the candidates for the seven positions available are beginning to emerge in anticipation of what is already shaping up to be one of the most closely contested elections in recent years.

The most intriguing aspect of the forthcoming election is certain to be the split in the current sabbatical team with current VP’s Jay Downs, Niall Bole and Adam McGibbon standing against their fellow officers Fiona Kidd and Samantha Tan. This marks a significant turnaround from last year when these candidates ran alongside each other when campaigning for election and one wonders what effect this will have on the cohesion within the SU for the remainder of the year.

From the candidates declared thus far for the election, there appears to be three major groups already formed. The most complete group so far is the team of Jay Downs, Niall Bole, Ethan Loughery, Nuala McAdams, Adam McGibbon and Lorcan Mullen. The other group containing current sabbatical officers consists so far of Samantha Tan, Fiona Kidd and Joe Corina. The final major player in this year’s election will be the Law Society which includes the candidates Jason O’Neill, Niall McShane, Aidan Hughes and Treasa Harkin.

For the key role of SU President there are three candidates running representing each of the major factions in the election. Current VP Community Jay Downs will compete against fellow VP Samantha Tan for the role. However also running is Jason O’Neill, president of the Law Society who are keen to recover after last year’s mauling, and in an attempt to steal a march on his opponents O’Neill has already launched his campaign via facebook.

In the battle for education it will be a straight fight between Nuala McAdams and Joe Corina. McAdams so far appears to have the backing of the stronger ticket, but the current speaker at council Corina has launched an early campaign calling for a fairer appeals process in the university as well as a reassessment of the university’s approach to employability, saying it no longer must be        ‘ just an add on’. However there are rumours that Laura Ellis may also be running, possibly with the backing of the Downs President campaign, though this is yet to be confirmed.

The contest for clubs and societies promises to be equally competitive with the incumbent Niall Bole being challenged by Niall McShane who is running with the Law Society. Bole has performed well in his year in the job, but McShane brings the support of the GAA with him and the early indications are that this could well be one of the closest contests.

With the continuing campaign against the raise in tuition fees the role of VP Campaigns will be vital, and current VP Fiona Kidd will contest against Lorcan Mullen. Whilst Kidd has headed campaigns this year, it was deputy NUS-USI president Mullen who organised the large protest in front of the SU late last year, and with the support of the three sabbatical officers Mullen looks to have the advantage at this early stage.

In what promises to be the most charismatic category independent candidate Derek Crosby will stand against Ethan Loughery and Aidan Hughes for the Community post. The larger than life Crosby, a member of RAG, hopes to defeat Queen’s radios’ Loughery and Laws’ Mooting Officer Hughes in what again looks like a tight contest.

A much more straight forward election will be for the Welfare position where no candidates have been put forward to take on Adam McGibbon. McGibbon has enjoyed a high profile years thanks to his performance as a Green Party candidate in the previous general election, and as such there appears to be no one willing to challenge him.

Finally for the position of VP Equality, Lucy Griffin, Treasa Harkin and Damien Edgar will contest what is perhaps the most open position available. All three candidates have kept quiet about their campaigns so far, but with the elections rapidly approaching expect each to begin their campaigns in earnest within the near future.

OPINION: Are politics and honesty mutually exclusive?

As every child in the United States will tell you, the first American president was a man of great moral integrity, incapable of telling a lie. As the story goes, George Washington once cut down his father’s cherry tree. Upon finding the tree reduced to firewood, Washington’s father asked him if he knew who had committed such an act. His response of “I cannot tell a lie” is well known in American folklore.

BY SEAN ASHFORD

This is obviously a fable, but it must be looked at as having double significance today. Politicians seem to have lost the ability to take a moral approach to decision making, and the result has been a series of broken promises, lies and scandal.

Before the election, every Liberal Democrat candidate signed a pledge promising to oppose tuition fee increases and to fight for the right of every student. It cannot be a case of political reinterpretation. Nick Clegg himself said “Our message to students is clear: we remain the only party that believes fees are unfair, and the only party with a plan to get rid of them for good; we’ve developed a plan to phase out tuition fees over the course of the next six years, to ensure this vital policy is affordable even at this time of economic crisis.”

It now seems that a cornerstone of Lib Dem policy has been abandoned, cast aside due to the allure of power. But the question I ask is not whether this is right or not, I ask what standards should we hold our politicians to? Do we expect too much, or indeed too little of them?

It appears now to be an acceptable thing for politicians to behave in an unjust and immoral manner. Thinking back to the expenses scandal, so many politicians were involved in abusing the position of power that we the people had granted to them. Whilst there was public outcry, this was only due to the clear abuse of money. Money, it seems, is the only thing that can motivate us enough to take a stand against the failings of politicians. The mutilation of public services, of education, justice and other areas appears to be so much less of an issue because it involves the abuse of integrity, not money.

This is not a modern problem. It affects all countries and it has done for many years now. In America, from Watergate to Bill Clinton’s “I did not have sexual relations with that woman” speech, and even closer to home with Gerry Adams’ declaration that “The day the IRA gives up its weapons is the day I resign from politics”, politicians find it acceptable to misrepresent and distort for the purpose of garnering support from the duped masses.

Perhaps we need not look at the politicians who are acting dishonestly but instead create a new ethos in our society, one which will not sit back and accept the deceit but instead hold politicians to account. Whether or not a constitutional overhaul is required, I am unsure. We cannot, however, let this situation become even worse. It will only breed voter apathy which is a much greater danger altogether.

SPORT: Six Nations preview

The last Six Nations before the World Cup is just around the corner. It is the last competitive opportunity for coaches to experiment with their squads before flying out to New Zealand this summer. The tension in the build up has been palpable, with none of the teams anywhere near ready to take on the might of the southern hemisphere’s ‘big three’. The desire to gain momentum ahead of the World Cup cannot be far from the coaches’s minds, so don’t expect anything too outlandish ahead of this weekend’s opening fixtures.

BY SEAN ASHFORD

The first game pits the injury-ravaged Welsh against a resurgent England team who, despite entering the competition as favourites, are still yet to achieve any level of consistency. With the loss of Laws and Croft from the forwards, the pack lacks the dynamism to get over the gain line at speed as well as reducing their mobility across the pitch. The result may be to revert back to the up-the-jumper approach taken by England sides over the last decade, which would be a shame because with exciting runners like Chris Ashton and Ben Foden out wide this England team has some serious pace. As for Wales, so dominant over the last 2 years, has recently become a significantly less potent weapon. Also due to injuries and loss of form in the back line, the Welsh backs appear not to have the ability to cut through opposition defences like they were able to during the last grand-slam year. Nevertheless, Wales are always dangerous from broken play, and with some exciting youngsters coming through such as Sam Warburton and Jonathan Davies they can never be discounted.

The second game of the weekend sees Ireland travel to Rome to face Italy. Like Wales, Ireland have serious injury concerns ahead of the tournament especially in the back row and back three. With Mike Ross starting in the front row however Ireland may finally have found a prop able to give a solid foundation in the scrum. Ross has benefited from the performances of Leinster in the Heineken Cup, and with the majority of the squad drawn from Leinster they should enter the competition with high hopes. In particular the performances of Sean O’Brian at number 8 have been quite simply awe inspiring. O’Brian has been the form player in Irish rugby this season and if he can carry this type of performance on to the international stage then, when Stephen Ferris returns from injury, Ireland will boast one of the most impressive back rows in the world.

The loss of form of the Munster contingent is a worry as is coach Kidney’s desire to stick with them. Nowhere is this more evident than in the second row where he has chosen Paul O’Connell and Donncha O’Callaghan ahead of Leo Cullen. O’Callaghan has been in poor form all season and O’Connell has achieved little since returning from injury than getting sent off only minutes into his comeback. The lack of Ulster players is also something of a surprise, with the exclusion of the in-form Ian Humphries and Dan Tuhoy in particular being unfortunate. However with most of the injuries scheduled to return before the end of the tournament, Ireland could conceivably peak just at the right time to gain momentum ahead of the World Cup. The outlook isn’t quite so rosy for the Italians however. Still lacking a genuine fly half, and with a very inexperienced (yet talented) scrum half, they could struggle to control matches. On the other hand, with the addition of the two Italian teams to the Magners League they have been exposed to more top class rugby this year and it will be interesting to see what effect this may have.

Finally the game between France and Scotland rounds off the opening weekend. France have shown their Jekyll and Hyde characteristics over the last year, with excellent performances in last year’s Six Nations tempered by a devastating loss against Australia which shook French rugby to its core. They have the players to win the competition, with a perfect mix of pace and power across the team as well as a level of strength in depth that the Celtic nations could only dream of – just look at the players who can’t even make the squad in both the front row and the back line. However, as is always the problem with the French their unpredictability will ultimately prove to be their downfall. At home they are almost invincible, but will struggle once they leave Paris and with Marc Lievremont in charge it is highly unlikely to change any time soon. As for Scotland, 7 tries in 13 games under Andy Robinson tells its own story. Scotland lack any sort of try scoring ability, relying heavily on the boot of Dan Parks. They have momentum going into the tournament and they will cause problems for any team, however their inability to score will prevent them from winning far too many games for them to be a threat.

Overall then it would seem that England are entering the tournament in the best shape, with France and Ireland close behind. Scotland will certainly be competitive, leaving Wales and Italy to fight it out for the wooden spoon. This year promises to be one of the tightest tournaments for many years, with every team capable of beating the other. If Wales can defeat England on the opening night then expect fireworks right down to the last kick of the tournament.

NEWS: Constitutional amendments pass at last SU Council meeting of semester

SU Council’s last meeting before the Christmas recess passed three amendments to the SU constitution and unanimously backed the reports of each sabbatical officer. Tuesday’s meeting also witnessed lengthy debate both on last week’s student protest outside Belfast City Hall, and on the proposal for a Republican Congress society at Queen’s.

BY CONNOR DALY AND SEAN ASHFORD

Constitutional amendments were proposed by VP Equality and Diversity Samantha Tan, VP Community Jay Downs, and VP Clubs and Societies Niall Bole respectively. Tan’s amendment called to add to the commitment of excluding flags or emblems considered likely to be provocative or offensive, aiming for a re-worked version to be presented to the next meeting of Council. The second amendment to pass was that proposed by Downs, which will allow for regulated forms of competitions to be run within the Students’ Union. Having taken three years to pass Student Council, Downs emphasised that such games would only occur within the best interests of the Union. The passing of Bole’s proposed amendment, deferred by last month’s meeting of Council, means that potential clubs and societies will now be fully discussed by the Clubs, Societies and Student Development Committee before being put forward to Council.

Reports by Union sabbatical officers were backed unanimously by councillors. VP Campaigns and Communications Fiona Kidd expressed delight at reports that DEL Minister Danny Kennedy may consider options with the intent to keeping the current cap on tuition fees. VP Welfare Adam Union told Council that the SU has successfully managed to reclaim the £300,000 owed to the Student Support Fund, describing this as a “big victory” for the Union.

SU President Gareth McGreevy explained to Council that his report was submitted late as a result of his recent meeting with Business Secretary and Lib Dem MP Vince Cable at Westminster. Responding to McGreevy’s report, a member of the Free Education for Everyone (FEE) group challenged the president on his reaction to last Thursday’s student protest outside Belfast City Hall and standing orders were suspended to discuss the protest. VP Kidd condemned any illegal action on the day and expressed the Union’s relief that no Queen’s student was arrested. Various councillors openly supported Kidd, with one councilor saying the student fees issue is not “bigger than the law”. VP Downs described this debate as “farcically unfair” because neither side had time to present a formal argument, and called on Council to defer a proper debate until the next meeting scheduled for Monday 7 February, to which the majority of councillors agreed.

During the meeting a number of councillors expressed their discomfort with the attempted passing of a Republican Congress, with some claiming the group may be linked to the socialist republican political party Éirigi. Another point raised concerned the group’s constitution and conditions for membership, which some councillors claimed to be restrictive. In response to these claims, the student proposing the group said that there was a distinct difference between Éirigi and the Congress, and on the alleged restriction to membership he added that this was “something we’ll have to look at”. At this point VP Bole proposed to defer any voting on the group until further discussions were held between himself and the Congress to which a majority of councillors agreed.

Do you really care?

Do you really care?

Whilst it’s easy to get caught up in the banner waving, slogan shouting populist movement against the proposed increase to tuition fees, does the large turnout at the anti-fees rally earlier this semester mask the fact that students at Queen’s are simply too lazy to actively take any steps to protect their own interests and the interests of their fellow students?

Far too often at events organised at Queen’s over the last number of years, be it by the SU, clubs and societies or even by the university itself, students have consistently show a phenomenal degree of apathy towards the issues which, for probably the only time in their life they can taking a leading role in shaping policy and direction of an important public body (as let’s face it who really expects Stormont to change the world). At far too many events you’re more likely to see a tumbleweed slowly meandering across the room than you are to see students actively engaging in real and meaningful issues.

 For instance at this week’s debate between MLA’s representing the political parties of Northern Ireland students were given first hand an opportunity to talk to the people who shape policy in the areas which most affect us and convey any problems or suggestions which we have to our elected representatives. Even when presented with this golden opportunity most students displayed a remarkable ability to remain indifferent, yet I’m sure these are the same students who were first out of class at the protest against the Browne report. Only it seems that when students can see a tangible impact on their ‘drinking fund’ will they bother to escape the weekly pilgrimage to the Eg, Bot or wherever else to do something meaningful with their limited time at university.

If you take the previous sabbatical elections at Queen’s, to use the VP for Welfare election for example, Adam McGibbon was elected with 1,700 votes.  This represents only 14.7% of the students eligible to vote on QOL, yet it’s almost a certainty that at least 90% of students at Queen’s were on a computer that day, be it their own or at the library etc. This begs the question of why not take only a few minutes out of your life for one day to contribute to your university as opposed to spending hours blankly staring at facebook or some other such meaningless example of modern day crap. Are we really more interested in reading other peoples musings over fleeting social events in contrast to the affairs which have a direct and long lasting impact on all students across campus?

If the movement against fees is to have any sort of legitimacy then action must start from the ground up, and that means students are going to have to spend less time nursing hangovers and spending more time standing up for their beliefs because unless action is taken now future generations will be left with such a heavy financial burden that it will destroy the university experience in its entirety.

And this is not to absolve current and past student representatives from blame for the horrendous degree of political apathy which permeates even faculty at Queen’s. As an example, when contrasting the amount of advertising given to political events with social events (case in point being the odious Harry Potter themed night at the union) then how are students to be encouraged to attend when the important event is being advertised on a small and insignificant black and white poster, lost amidst the inane babble and sickeningly ostentatious posters and flyers which cry out ‘come on and get pissed’. Even the events themselves are examples in how to destroy the momentum built up at a national level, as across Britain students have been repeatedly taking to the streets and staging sit in protests. Contrast this to Queen’s were we had a ‘nice’ civil debate instead, excellent for those who attended but significantly less impactful that the most populace movements of other universities. Whilst I personally enjoyed the political debate, surely with only a matter of weeks to go until the key vote on the fees question (compared with the months such a vote will take in the Assembly), Union representatives should be focused more on engaging students as a show of strength to those in power both in Westminster and Stormont. Although I don’t know exactly why Queen’s utterly failed to stage any type of sit in protest, or any form of protest for that matter, in conjunction with those happening across the UK recently, perhaps the Union representatives should evaluate their positions and see if their allegiances lie with the students they are supposed to represent or maintaining the status quo within the university which has, over successive years bred the apathy which plagues students today.

This isn’t a criticism of student leaders as given the sheer unwillingness of QUB students to participate then it makes their jobs extremely hard. However, to use a football analogy, it is not the crowd who are responsible for how the players perform but the performance of the players which engages the crowd in the game. If the players play poorly, then the crowd goes silent and the drifts to a dull conclusion.

Doubtlessly Queen’s masses of armchair students will be unperturbed by the indifference with which they themselves have become entrapped in, yet these are the people on whom the fate of future generations of university students across the UK are relying upon to oppose the draconian burden which they will have thrust upon them. After looking at the turnout in successive elections, events and general participation in all things student related, the sad truth of the matter is that the post-2012 generation don’t stand a chance.

By Sean Ashford

Ulster Rugby star forced to retire

Ulster rugby player and Queen’s student David Pollock has been forced to retire this week due to a long standing hip injury.

After signing a development contract with Ulster in 2006, there were great hopes for the former Royal School Dungannon pupil, and over his 45 appearances for the province his performances lead Ulster’s operations director David Humphreys to describe him as a future Ulster captain. However over the last 18 months a persistent hip problem has plagued his career resulting in his retirement at the age of 23.

Pollock also received five caps for the Ireland 'A' team as well as captaining both Ireland U-19s and U-21s in their World Championships in 2006, before leading Ireland U-20s to an unprecedented Six Nations Grand Slam success in 2007.

In a statement Pollock said “It is with great sadness that I announce my early retirement from rugby. Whilst it was always my intention to resume my studies at Queens, I never intended it to be quite so soon. My hip injury, however, has not resolved and I have been advised I am no longer able to achieve the level of fitness required to play professional rugby. I count myself very fortunate to have represented Ulster at every level from schoolboy to senior team and leading out Ulster in the Heineken Cup against Stade Francais in Paris was one of the proudest moments of my rugby career. Rugby with Ulster has afforded me the privilege to play with and against many great players; whilst doing so I have forged friendships and acquired memories that I will treasure for a long time to come”.

David Humphreys also added that “David’s injury problems in recent years has meant that we only saw glimpses of his talent in the Ulster shirt. His retirement is a huge loss for Ulster Rugby but fortunately for David, he has a long-term future mapped out in the medical profession and a new challenge awaits him away from rugby.” 

Pollock now intends to return to Queen’s to continue to work towards his medical degree which he was two years into when offered a contract by Ulster.

Confusion at School of Politics

The School of Politics, International Studies and Philosophy was thrown into turmoil recently over the submission of coursework via the Turnitin anti-plagiarism software system, as many students found themselves missing their submission deadlines due to a previously unheralded change in procedure.

The Turnitin software is designed to prevent students from plagiarising work and has been in use now by the School for a number of years. However, unnoticed by most students the procedure for correct submission was changed this year as students were required to hand in their coursework accompanied by a receipt obtained upon the uploading of the coursework onto the Turnitin system.

Despite the fact that no communications were sent to students to alert them to this change in School policy, the rule was strictly enforced and as a result many students found their coursework essays being rejected until they were accompanied by a receipt by which stage many had gone past their pre-existing deadlines. The situation become so dire that an email was sent round to students informing them of the need of a receipt, however many students failed to receive this email and the problem continued until a meeting of the Education Committee on the 18^th November agreed that students would no longer be required to have the submission receipt accompanying their work.

In response to the problems which were experienced, School Manager for the School of Politics, International Studies and Philosophy, Conor O’Neill, stated that “I can confirm that in view of the recent uncertainty concerning this matter, with some students not being aware of the obligation to use Turnitin, that the School has agreed not to enforce this requirement for submission of coursework during this semester. It has also been agreed that there will be no penalty imposed on students who have submitted assignments after the deadline, due to not having a receipt.”

When questioned on whether it was an error not to inform students earlier of this change, the School stated simply that all the information about this change had been contained in the module guidelines which all students had access to and that this was sufficient.

Politicians debate at Queen's

As protests continue across the UK in opposition to the proposed increase in tuition fees, students at Queens were given an opportunity to present their opinions to representatives of the five major political parties in Northern Ireland at an event held in the Students’ Union. Not only were students given a chance to express their opinions on fees, but the panel also faced questions on the issues of cuts to university funding and graduate employment.

The major issue which dominated the discussion throughout the course of the evening was on the most pressing topic of student fees. Whilst there was a general consensus on the opposition to the Browne reports recommendation for £12,000 fees and the need for university education to be open for people based on their ability to learn and not their ability to pay, the representatives were divided over how to remedy the possible hole in Northern Ireland’s finances it would leave with Danny Kennedy, UUP Minister for the Department of Employment and Learning, emphasising in particular the follow up to the Stuart Report in which Joanne Stuart would analyse the findings of the Browne report and suggest the implications that an application of the report would have on the Universities in Northern Ireland.

In a move which clearly unsettled a number of the panel, NUS-USI President Ciarnan Helferty asked the member directly which way their MP’s would vote on the proposed bill, with Conall McDevitt (SDLP) and Chris Lyttle (Alliance) openly stating that their MP’s would vote against it, with Peter Weir of the DUP declaring that they most likely would oppose the bill. Sinn Fein’s John O’Dowd, whilst declaring his opposition to fees, said only his party would involve themselves at opposition at Assembly level, and the UUP failed to win any seats at the last election.

The discussion then turned to the cuts to be imposed on the university budget, with the need for economic growth to firstly make up the budget shortfall which faces the governmental departments, but also to increase the number of job opportunities open to graduates. Whilst Sinn Fein stressed their opposition to cuts in all sectors, the other members were more accepting of the cuts, yet all appeared to take issue with the level of cuts and lack of proper planning for economic growth, with a slight increase in fees, £20million in efficiency savings in the DEL and a programme of social partnership all being suggested.

Whilst the parties appear to share a degree of common ground over cuts to important areas, and more pressingly student fees debt, there appeared to be little attempt at unifying the various strands into presenting one single united front in order to protect Northern Ireland from the worst of George Osborne’s slash and burn tactics as political point scoring seems still to be the order of the day for NI politicians. 

REVIEW: Less Than Jake – TV EP

As far as novelty albums go, the TV EP by US ska-punk giants Less Than Jake has to be one of the most unusual yet exhilarating attempts in recent memory.

BY SEAN ASHFORD

For thirteen minutes you are treated to a litany of catchy tunes paying homage to the TV shows which we all loved as children. Anamaniacs; That 70’s Show;Spongebob Squarepants; they’re all here. Indeed these three are some of the highlights of the album, with the traditional themes blended perfectly with the mix of punk sounds and brass that has made Less Than Jake one of the most consistently fresh sounding bands around, despite making music since 1992.

True the TV shows in question are more American culture than our own and for the most part the names might struggle to ring a bell, but you don’t have to have watched them to understand and enjoy the wonderful exuberance with which LTJ perform such classic shows such as Diff’rent Strokes and Married…with Children.

This EP captures much of the momentum gained from last year’s excellent GNV FLA and the TV EP seems to be a celebration, a fun filled mix of tunes which will do that rarest of things in music. It will make you smile.

OPINION: Conservatives by name or by nature?

Throughout its history the Conservative Party has taken on the role of the anti-party of British politics. An anti-ideology party based firmly on maintaining the established order, conservatism representing a characteristic inherent in human nature, and whether one supports them or not their electoral success cannot be disputed. However, with the recent spending review and the new direction which leader David Cameron has taken the party, has the Conservative Party become the opposite of what its name suggests and instead become a reformist party?

BY SEAN ASHFORD

Firstly, we must consider that the political climate which exists today is very different to that which previous incarnations of the Conservative Party have faced. Strong bonds to political parties are in decline not just in the UK and Ireland but across the western world. In 1964, 40% of people in the UK identified very strongly with a particular party, whereas today this figure has crashed to less than 10%. Modern issues do not simply align themselves along the traditional right-left divide, with issues such as immigration, the environment and Europe becoming ever more prevalent in modern political discourse.

However the reaction to and the embracing of these contemporary issues may at first glance appear to represent a new form of conservatism, but it is in the traditional conservative ideals of national defence and law where we must look to see if the change really has permeated the core principles of the party.

In the recent spending review national defence and the police force were just as susceptible to cuts as any other governmental department. With large numbers of police being reduced, as well as mass job losses at the MoD, my own immediate reaction was one of shock. How could the conservatives cut what has for been many years been revered as a sacred cow?

Contrasting what has happened with defence to areas of the public sector, it becomes apparent that conservative ideals still dominate even their most well concealed attempts at pragmatic economic reform. The cuts being made in the defence budget, whilst appearing dramatic, are actually more easily managed than perhaps any other department. During the Labour years, far too many defence contracts were allocated not on what would be the best value for money but for what would be most beneficial for Labour politically. Most obviously, the two aircraft carriers which cannot be scrapped as it would cost too much are both scheduled to be built in an under-privileged industrial area of Gordon Brown’s own constituency at greater cost than is necessary.

I am no supporter of the Conservative Party, but a pragmatic approach to contract allocation has to be seen as being a positive step, but not necessarily a reformist one. It would be more accurate to describe such acts as being pragmatic, which again harks back to my opening point that the Conservatives are an anti-ideology party. Of course there remains the issue of what exactly the aircraft carriers will do as they will not have any aircraft now that the harrier is being retired. Seemingly the only planes they will have are of the paper variety, made out of half a million public sector workers P-45’s.

According to analyst Anthony Quinton, at the core of all conservative values is the idea that societal problems are not amenable to “improvement” by the application of social and political theories. To put it another way, to put faith into what you cannot foresee is not a pragmatic solution to a problem. Rather they would retain faith in the institutions already in place, adapting the pre-existing mechanisms of the state to cope with the problems which arise over time. Surely therefore it is unreasonable to say that Cameron is a new type of Tory politician. The spending review, whilst radical in scale, is in essence the embodiment of Conservative policy.

The maintenance of a small state which places the onus on individual responsibility is no more radical than a situation in which the Labour Party came out in support of the trade unions. The problem with this is that the Tories have always been seen as ‘the nasty party’, and these cuts will do nothing to help people forget this moniker. When you hear Ian Duncan Smith telling the jobless to “get on the bus” and find work, reflecting very closely Norman Tebbit’s “on your bike” remarks of 1981, you can’t help but wonder whether the Conservatives really have changed, and only time will tell as the coalition struggles to find a stable plan for the future following the spending review.

NEWS: Hundreds at Queen’s protest against Browne review

Hundreds of Queen’s students today protested against the recent Browne review at Mandela Hall and outside the university. Student representatives from NUS-USI and the Students’ Union initiated the Union General Meeting at noon and asked students to back their motion to reject Lord Browne’s proposals. NUS-USI President Ciarnan Helferty called not only on students but on families as well to outright reject any proposal to increase tuition charges at Northern Ireland universities.

BY SEAN ASHFORD AND LAURA MCANENEY

In what has been described as the biggest protest on Queen’s campus in well over a decade, students gathered at the Union’s Mandela Hall where representatives pledged to fight against the lifting of the cap on fees, currently at £3,290. Last week’s Browne recommendations on higher education funding suggested that universities in England be permitted to raise their tuition charges to anything as high as £12,000. Mr Helferty told a crowded Mandela Hall, “We can’t stand idly by” as politicians set about implementing Browne’s plans for a free market education system.

Proposing the motion in appreciation of the recent Stuart review was NUS-USI Deputy President, Lorcan Mullen, and students were given the opportunity to speak on and in favour of the motion. No one present at the meeting opposed the motion. Speaking on the motion in Mandela Hall was last year’s Green Party European election candidate and former QUB student, Stephen Agnew. Agnew described Browne’s suggestion to raise the fees cap as a policy driven by ideology and not necessity and, emphasising the power of devolution in Northern Ireland, called upon local politicians at Stormont to oppose the Browne review.

Before leaving Mandela Hall to make their way to the gates of Queen’s, students in attendance were asked to raise their student cards to vote on the motion, a motion which was clearly carried; only one abstained. Adhering to health and safety policy, students were then split into various groups and made their way out of the building.

Hundreds of students lined outside the gates of Queen’s University and along the length of the Students’ Union raising ‘Down with Browne’ and other similar placards in the air, chanting, among other things, “Freeze fees – yes please.” Politicians and representatives from the Alliance, QUB Greens, SDLP and Socialist Party lent their support to the protest, and a statement was read out from Independent MLA Dawn Purvis, as well as statements from individual representatives of Sinn Féin and the DUP who were unable to attend.

For over an hour students were continuously joined by more protesters throughout the proceedings, all adamant in their fight against the Browne proposals. A question and answer session with MLAs was expected to take place in the Space area of the SU but did not materialise due to commitments at Stormont. NUS-USI President Helferty and SU President Gareth McGreevy told students they were not willing to stand by and watch the Browne proposals implemented and vowed to challenge elected representatives to justify any increase to tuition fees.