A new ANU presidential election as Fleur Hawes gets the boot

c_c said :

breakbrake said :

Saying things that are both critical and kind doesn’t make someone two faced or dishonest, on the contrary it means they see something from more than one angle and are honest enough to call it like it is.

If you were honest, you would have posted both the kind and critical comments in the same place, both attributed to you and your real name. Two-faced is exactly what you are.

breakbrake said :

‘they’re writing’ indeed. While I agree they should be critically reviewed and held to account as our student fees fund both bodies, it is a little hard to swallow that you post one sort of ‘sympathetic’ message on Facebook under your real name and then sink your claws in over here where you can’t be identified.

That’s moronic.

What you’re suggesting is that you can’t be nice to and sympathetic about someone and be critical at the same time. Basically “yes man” mentality.

And that’s funny because it goes directly to why I brought up the time sheets. Not to suggest any impropriety (because I’m confident there wouldn’t be) but that despite claiming the resignation came as a shock, it looks like there were warning signs earlier. And in that case how could they have not known of the problems until Monday? That the time sheets have been taken down would indicate some embarrassment and an admission that all was not well.

It’s exactly the mentality that you’re suggesting that likely led to this outcome in fact – that you can’t be nice and yet honest/critical at the same time.

Academic exclusion comes after repeated warnings and counselling. Surely there must have been people being honest and saying perhaps it wasn’t a wise idea to run last year, or that there was a big risk in not focussing on studies more?

Instead I’m willing to bet people were focused more on being friendly and that came at the cost of honesty and casting a critical eye over whether someone was suitable for the job. And that goes to what i was saying during the last ANUSA elections. Winning based on popularity alone is a bad criteria. It didn’t work for K Rudd and it hasn’t worked in this case. People need to look deeper.

Saying things that are both critical and kind doesn’t make someone two faced or dishonest, on the contrary it means they see something from more than one angle and are honest enough to call it like it is.

‘they’re writing’ indeed. While I agree they should be critically reviewed and held to account as our student fees fund both bodies, it is a little hard to swallow that you post one sort of ‘sympathetic’ message on Facebook under your real name and then sink your claws in over here where you can’t be identified.

c_c said :

Also your comments about this year’s Woroni are well out of left field, but given you couldn’t even comprehend this thread, perhaps they’re writing is a bit beyond you?

God I hate pointing out spelling/grammar issues, but if you’RE going to bag other people, at least be error-free when you do so?

breakbrake said :

c_c likes to pry and criticise – whether it’s Woroni (admittedly pretty darn shoddy this year) or ANUSA. He is constantly looking into other people’s ‘failings’.

You say “people’s failings” but in fact they are organisations (or delegates thereof) that are funded using student funds. And as of this year funded with compulsory payments from students of $230 a year. They have to be held accountable and be responsive.

If you had an ounce of comprehension ability, you would note that unlike many on this thread, I have highlighted how sad this outcome is and to an extent even, the costs of it are undeserved.

Issues relating to time-sheets and prior to that the complaints about the new Lena Karmel Lodge are of relevance to the professional conduct of and use of student funds by ANUSA and it’s officers as well as the representations they make on behalf of students. I see no fault in critiquing this.

Also your comments about this year’s Woroni are well out of left field, but given you couldn’t even comprehend this thread, perhaps they’re writing is a bit beyond you?

poetix said :

theaccusedthugsrelativeorfriend said :

Chop71 said :

She would have had more fun drinking beer and failing university.

She knew how to enjoy herself. Used to order a cocktail called a “wet pussy” http://www.drinksmixer.com/drink4979.html

…

The scene is a casino in say, Monte Carlo, about 1965, with Sean Connery as Bond:

‘Good evening. Name’s Bond, James Bond. And you are Plenty O’Toole, I presume.’
Girl smiles. ‘No, James. Fleur Hawes.’
Bond; ‘We can discuss that later on. Drink?’
Girl: ‘Why not?’
Bond: ‘So that’ll be one vodka martini, shaken, not stirred, and one…?’
Girl: ‘Wet pussy.’
Bond: ‘I just remember I have to meet someone. Enjoy your raspberry liqueur, milk and Irish Cream.’ (Runs from casino with a sardonically raised eyebrow barely concealing a look of panic.)

You are an odd person with strange habits.

I like it.

c_c likes to pry and criticise – whether it’s Woroni (admittedly pretty darn shoddy this year) or ANUSA. He is constantly looking into other people’s ‘failings’.

Lolwut academic exclusion? It’s pretty difficult to get to that point. I think someone had their priorities wrong…student politicians are hilarious.

c_c said :

Merle said :

c_c said :

Here’s the official ANUSA Timesheets: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ao4D7QDn8Et5dHpxOWNUd0thSUMtTWhlT1B0dUU0S2c#gid=0

It’s well worth checking out because it reveals something scandalous, Ms Hawes did not work any hours between 19th Jan and 7th Feb and had not been working since Feb 25 to the day she resigned on Mar 6, even though her colleagues were all logging hours.

I think people can draw their own conclusions from this.

How accurate is that time sheet? Because there are days Hawes claims to have worked 21 hours, and Dallas Proctor reckons he worked 48 hours straight on 3-4 March.

Not sure and no longer able to check. The first part of the time sheet referred to the total for the week ending on a certain date while the rest was for individual days, so those larger figures were probably for weeks rather than days.

Since revealing the discrepancies last night in the time sheets, ANUSA has quickly locked out access to the timesheet. There’s a saying, “if you’ve got nothing to hide…” – obviously there is something.

What is your interest in all this?

Merle said :

c_c said :

Not sure and no longer able to check. The first part of the time sheet referred to the total for the week ending on a certain date while the rest was for individual days, so those larger figures were probably for weeks rather than days.

Yes, I understood that. Perhaps Proctor and Hawes (which sounds like a great name for a TV show) didn’t, because those figures were for individual days, which is why I specified 3rd/4th of March.

Whole thing looks dodgy, whether it’s covering up someone who was absent or was just lazy record keeping. Smart thing would have been to release a note explaining the discrepancy, or faking a 404 error for the file even 🙂 Just locking out access is a very obvious admission that something isn’t right and engenders about as much trust as Zed submitting a years worth of time sheets from memory.

c_c said :

Not sure and no longer able to check. The first part of the time sheet referred to the total for the week ending on a certain date while the rest was for individual days, so those larger figures were probably for weeks rather than days.

Yes, I understood that. Perhaps Proctor and Hawes (which sounds like a great name for a TV show) didn’t, because those figures were for individual days, which is why I specified 3rd/4th of March.

c_c said :

There’s a saying, “if you’ve got nothing to hide…” – obviously there is something.

Many sayings are a load of nonsense.

Merle said :

c_c said :

Here’s the official ANUSA Timesheets: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ao4D7QDn8Et5dHpxOWNUd0thSUMtTWhlT1B0dUU0S2c#gid=0

It’s well worth checking out because it reveals something scandalous, Ms Hawes did not work any hours between 19th Jan and 7th Feb and had not been working since Feb 25 to the day she resigned on Mar 6, even though her colleagues were all logging hours.

I think people can draw their own conclusions from this.

How accurate is that time sheet? Because there are days Hawes claims to have worked 21 hours, and Dallas Proctor reckons he worked 48 hours straight on 3-4 March.

Timesheets don’t prove that someone did any work. They just prove that they filled in a timesheet.

Ray Polglaze said :

Fleur Hawes says in the Woroni article that “at a lot of Universities, you must be a current student to stand for election; you do not have to be a student during your term, allowing the President to defer their studies whilst they focus on students”.

I think she has a point here. Maybe the problem isn’t with her but with the rules.

It’s perhaps relevant that Camila Vallejo, the Chilean student federation president who in 2011 emerged as one of the most respected figures in Chile and the world (see Time, Newsweek and the UK Guardian), was able to defer her studies to focus on her work as a student advocate.

Perhaps the ANU and the ANUSA need to take a look at their rules.

Perhaps, but while the rules are what they are, she needed to be complying with them rather than ignoring them.

This issue looks like developing into “another” timesheet saga.

c_c said :

Since revealing the discrepancies last night in the time sheets, ANUSA has quickly locked out access to the timesheet. There’s a saying, “if you’ve got nothing to hide…” – obviously there is something.

Maybe they just don’t want internet detectives trying to leverage them into a conspiracy theory?

I don’t have anything particularly interesting on my timesheet, but I wouldn’t put it on a public website because it’s nobody else’s damn business.

Merle said :

c_c said :

Here’s the official ANUSA Timesheets: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ao4D7QDn8Et5dHpxOWNUd0thSUMtTWhlT1B0dUU0S2c#gid=0

It’s well worth checking out because it reveals something scandalous, Ms Hawes did not work any hours between 19th Jan and 7th Feb and had not been working since Feb 25 to the day she resigned on Mar 6, even though her colleagues were all logging hours.

I think people can draw their own conclusions from this.

How accurate is that time sheet? Because there are days Hawes claims to have worked 21 hours, and Dallas Proctor reckons he worked 48 hours straight on 3-4 March.

Not sure and no longer able to check. The first part of the time sheet referred to the total for the week ending on a certain date while the rest was for individual days, so those larger figures were probably for weeks rather than days.

Since revealing the discrepancies last night in the time sheets, ANUSA has quickly locked out access to the timesheet. There’s a saying, “if you’ve got nothing to hide…” – obviously there is something.

c_c said :

Here’s the official ANUSA Timesheets: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ao4D7QDn8Et5dHpxOWNUd0thSUMtTWhlT1B0dUU0S2c#gid=0

It’s well worth checking out because it reveals something scandalous, Ms Hawes did not work any hours between 19th Jan and 7th Feb and had not been working since Feb 25 to the day she resigned on Mar 6, even though her colleagues were all logging hours.

I think people can draw their own conclusions from this.

How accurate is that time sheet? Because there are days Hawes claims to have worked 21 hours, and Dallas Proctor reckons he worked 48 hours straight on 3-4 March.

NickD said :

c_c said :

It’s well worth checking out because it reveals something scandalous, Ms Hawes did not work any hours between 19th Jan and 7th Feb and had not been working since Feb 25 to the day she resigned on Mar 6, even though her colleagues were all logging hours.

I think people can draw their own conclusions from this.

That she knew that she was probably going to need to resign, though she was holding off on doing so until she knew the final outcome of the appeal?

Not so much that, but JB makes reference in his original post to her colleagues not knowing about her problems until the Monday before she resigned.
If she was taking all this time off, putting extra burden on them, makes you wonder how that could happen? Did they not care or was it a case of too much confidence and being too friendly to ask?

Ray Polglaze said :

Fleur Hawes says in the Woroni article that “at a lot of Universities, you must be a current student to stand for election; you do not have to be a student during your term, allowing the President to defer their studies whilst they focus on students”.

I think she has a point here. Maybe the problem isn’t with her but with the rules.

It’s perhaps relevant that Camila Vallejo, the Chilean student federation president who in 2011 emerged as one of the most respected figures in Chile and the world (see Time, Newsweek and the UK Guardian), was able to defer her studies to focus on her work as a student advocate.

Perhaps the ANU and the ANUSA need to take a look at their rules.

Not convinced. University is not a training ground for future politicians. If she wants to be here, she needs to prove herself in the classroom. She is just making excuses for herself. She should be ashamed of herself.

c_c said :

It’s well worth checking out because it reveals something scandalous, Ms Hawes did not work any hours between 19th Jan and 7th Feb and had not been working since Feb 25 to the day she resigned on Mar 6, even though her colleagues were all logging hours.

I think people can draw their own conclusions from this.

That she knew that she was probably going to need to resign, though she was holding off on doing so until she knew the final outcome of the appeal? I presume that she wasn’t being paid for the hours she wasn’t working.

Here’s the official ANUSA Timesheets: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ao4D7QDn8Et5dHpxOWNUd0thSUMtTWhlT1B0dUU0S2c#gid=0

It’s well worth checking out because it reveals something scandalous, Ms Hawes did not work any hours between 19th Jan and 7th Feb and had not been working since Feb 25 to the day she resigned on Mar 6, even though her colleagues were all logging hours.

I think people can draw their own conclusions from this.

p1 said :

Ray Polglaze said :

Perhaps the ANU and the ANUSA need to take a look at their rules.

I think if you can’t enrol in, attend classes for, and pass at least one unit (and I’m not talking about rocket surgery here, just whatever the easiest thing offered that semester is) then you probably shouldn’t be paid to run the student union. Sucks to be her, but I managed to fail the odd unit (let’s not be specific how many) over several years (with deferments, par time enrollments etc) and never actually got kicked out. Allowing complete deferment will only encourage the type of party hacks someone said she isn’t.

I will say that she always had time management issues, even well before entering politics. So frankly it wasn’t a good move for her. And the exclusion was a result of academic failures before she became President so it was a dim move to run frankly if those issues were not resolved yet. This is why I was saying months ago the wrong people run and the wrong people get elected. I think this proves it.

I entirely agree with you, it is perfectly possible to combine the role and still study, it just takes the right person. The last ANUSA President Leah Ginnivan passed her final year of her degree while balancing a very heavy ANUSA workload, as evidence in this document: http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=anusa%20president%20time%20sheet&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CC8QFjAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Funione.anusa.com.au%2FCommon%2FFiler.ashx%3FFID%3D22&ei=y0dYT-nVIMieiQfJ6ayzDQ&usg=AFQjCNEtmD8j_DhZ3iV8hIE-RsgCeD3sHA&sig2=x-P4GboEULQJyHj2r06pNA

So it is doable, just need the right people who know their limits, know their strengths and have the right skills.

NoAddedMSG said :

I feel a bit sad for her – she has lost her job (ANUSA president gets paid), her uni career, and quite possibly her housing as well.

I don’t feel sorry for anyone in student politics. They’re self-serving narcissists who all share one goal.

Yours, a reformed student politician.

Ray Polglaze said :

Perhaps the ANU and the ANUSA need to take a look at their rules.

I think if you can’t enrol in, attend classes for, and pass at least one unit (and I’m not talking about rocket surgery here, just whatever the easiest thing offered that semester is) then you probably shouldn’t be paid to run the student union. Sucks to be her, but I managed to fail the odd unit (let’s not be specific how many) over several years (with deferments, par time enrollments etc) and never actually got kicked out. Allowing complete deferment will only encourage the type of party hacks someone said she isn’t.

theaccusedthugsrelativeorfriend said :

Chop71 said :

She would have had more fun drinking beer and failing university.

She knew how to enjoy herself. Used to order a cocktail called a “wet pussy” http://www.drinksmixer.com/drink4979.html

…

The scene is a casino in say, Monte Carlo, about 1965, with Sean Connery as Bond:

‘Good evening. Name’s Bond, James Bond. And you are Plenty O’Toole, I presume.’
Girl smiles. ‘No, James. Fleur Hawes.’
Bond; ‘We can discuss that later on. Drink?’
Girl: ‘Why not?’
Bond: ‘So that’ll be one vodka martini, shaken, not stirred, and one…?’
Girl: ‘Wet pussy.’
Bond: ‘I just remember I have to meet someone. Enjoy your raspberry liqueur, milk and Irish Cream.’ (Runs from casino with a sardonically raised eyebrow barely concealing a look of panic.)

Without passing judgment, for the appeal against exclusion to be happening now, she must have stuffied up in Semester 2 2011 (when she was President) and also at some other point earlier on.

As others have stated, a little less focus on university politics, and a little more focus on study, might have avoided this situation?

why not? she paid and failed, like many students before her.
Just take a year or two off, get a job and earn some money and then come back and STUDY

+1
Too much emphasis is placed on having to complete Uni immediately. If she takes this as a learning experience she’ll be much better for it and can come back again and have another go. Not to say that it won’t be hard for her in the short term, but it’s not the end of the world.

c_c said :

Diggety said :

This is probably the best thing that could happen to Fleur Hawes (and possibly us).

Student politics/activism spawns terrible human beings, and in some cases that is foisted upon us later by their more aspirational political careers.

Case in point: the monkies throwing turd at each other in parliament house at the moment.

Some of these comments are messed up. Fleur’s intentions were in the right place, she worked hard. She wasn’t a hack just looking to pad a resume, she’s genuine. But she was also naive, immature and wasn’t great at organisation. And without these, even the most well intentioned and intelligent can be brought down.

I think people should show some regard for her feelings and take it easy.

I don’t know how academic exclusions work but I suspect it makes it very difficult to enrol at another University, or have existing course credits recognised. Meaning she may be without an academic future, yet have the bulk of a degree sitting on HECS. And she sure as hell doesn’t deserve that.

why not? she paid and failed, like many students before her.
Just take a year or two off, get a job and earn some money and then come back and STUDY

Well, they probably saved her 100k in HECS fees by putting an end to it and kicking her out.

I note in expectation of someone pointing out my own harsh comments about ANUSA and student society members including Fleur, that those comments were directed at their professional capacity and performance as individuals elected to a formal office. None of the comments went so far as to wish some personal ill on an individual, nor that such an ill would be deserved.

c_c said :

Diggety said :

This is probably the best thing that could happen to Fleur Hawes (and possibly us).

Student politics/activism spawns terrible human beings, and in some cases that is foisted upon us later by their more aspirational political careers.

Case in point: the monkies throwing turd at each other in parliament house at the moment.

Some of these comments are messed up. Fleur’s intentions were in the right place, she worked hard. She wasn’t a hack just looking to pad a resume, she’s genuine. But she was also naive, immature and wasn’t great at organisation. And without these, even the most well intentioned and intelligent can be brought down.

I think people should show some regard for her feelings and take it easy.

I don’t know how academic exclusions work but I suspect it makes it very difficult to enrol at another University, or have existing course credits recognised. Meaning she may be without an academic future, yet have the bulk of a degree sitting on HECS. And she sure as hell doesn’t deserve that.

1. Exclusion won’t block her from other universities.

2. My comment was not criticizing Fleur, rather the game she was playing. Many are well intentioned from the start, but student politics do not accommodate good intentions (or prioritize student welfare for that matter).

3. “I think people should show some regard for her feelings and take it easy.” – c_c

Read your own comments/articles, then try telling everyone else that.

4. Fleur will be fine.

Fleur Hawes says in the Woroni article that “at a lot of Universities, you must be a current student to stand for election; you do not have to be a student during your term, allowing the President to defer their studies whilst they focus on students”.

I think she has a point here. Maybe the problem isn’t with her but with the rules.

It’s perhaps relevant that Camila Vallejo, the Chilean student federation president who in 2011 emerged as one of the most respected figures in Chile and the world (see Time, Newsweek and the UK Guardian), was able to defer her studies to focus on her work as a student advocate.

Perhaps the ANU and the ANUSA need to take a look at their rules.

c_c said :

Some of these comments are messed up. Fleur’s intentions were in the right place, she worked hard. She wasn’t a hack just looking to pad a resume, she’s genuine. But she was also naive, immature and wasn’t great at organisation. And without these, even the most well intentioned and intelligent can be brought down.

I think people should show some regard for her feelings and take it easy.

I don’t know how academic exclusions work but I suspect it makes it very difficult to enrol at another University, or have existing course credits recognised. Meaning she may be without an academic future, yet have the bulk of a degree sitting on HECS. And she sure as hell doesn’t deserve that.

Plainly, unless there has been some gigantic conspiracy or miscarriage of justice, she does deserve that.

The point of going to university is to be educated through enrolling in classes, attending the classes, taking exams etc. It’s pretty conventional and well understood stuff, and all else (drugs, sex, booze, politics etc) while a lot of fun, is secondary. So Fleur worked hard. it appears though, that she worked hard at being a student politician, but not at her classes. Being a student politician seems like huge fun, but it won’t get you credit for courses. Maybe she should’ve focussed her energies in more profitable directions.

She’s an adult. She made her choices about how to spend her time and energy, presumably freely and without coercion. Now she’s banged up against a bit of cold hard reality. Welcome to the world of grownups Fleur.

Diggety said :

This is probably the best thing that could happen to Fleur Hawes (and possibly us).

Student politics/activism spawns terrible human beings, and in some cases that is foisted upon us later by their more aspirational political careers.

Case in point: the monkies throwing turd at each other in parliament house at the moment.

Some of these comments are messed up. Fleur’s intentions were in the right place, she worked hard. She wasn’t a hack just looking to pad a resume, she’s genuine. But she was also naive, immature and wasn’t great at organisation. And without these, even the most well intentioned and intelligent can be brought down.

I think people should show some regard for her feelings and take it easy.

I don’t know how academic exclusions work but I suspect it makes it very difficult to enrol at another University, or have existing course credits recognised. Meaning she may be without an academic future, yet have the bulk of a degree sitting on HECS. And she sure as hell doesn’t deserve that.

I’m not so sure about her political career being cut short.

IIRC, Paul Howes used to hang around Sydney Uni during his yoof. He didn’t actually enrol or attend classes…he just hung around and agitated for stuff, attended demonstrations, annoyed the citizens etc etc. And now he and a couple of his mates pretty much run the ALP from behind the scenes without being elected by the people, appearing in parliament or anything like that.

I wish he truly ruly was an actual faceless man. If you see his face…

This is probably the best thing that could happen to Fleur Hawes (and possibly us).

Student politics/activism spawns terrible human beings, and in some cases that is foisted upon us later by their more aspirational political careers.

Case in point: the monkies throwing turd at each other in parliament house at the moment.

NoAddedMSG said :

I feel a bit sad for her – she has lost her job (ANUSA president gets paid), her uni career, and quite possibly her housing as well.

Yet if only she had gained some prioritisation skills, she’d likely not be in this situation.

NoAddedMSG said :

I feel a bit sad for her – she has lost her job (ANUSA president gets paid), her uni career, and quite possibly her housing as well.

Sad but exclusion only happens after repeated formal warnings in writing and meeting with staff. So many chances to stop it from reaching this.

I feel a bit sad for her – she has lost her job (ANUSA president gets paid), her uni career, and quite possibly her housing as well.

Chop71 said :

She would have had more fun drinking beer and failing university.

People called Fleur never drink beer.

Chop71 said :

She would have had more fun drinking beer and failing university.

She knew how to enjoy herself. Used to order a cocktail called a “wet pussy” http://www.drinksmixer.com/drink4979.html

we couldnt figure how that worked been a feminist

She would have had more fun drinking beer and failing university.

Fail. Literally…