Rory Dunne, James Kelly and John Tighe
James Kelly
Q: When asked by The University Times to produce evidence that a course-integrated internship scheme was possible within Trinity’s academic system, you restated your belief that it could be achieved. Have you had any correspondence at all with academics or providers to back this up?
Q: You have promised to provide everything that students require to eat for a week for under €20 by buying in bulk. Where in College would you store large quantities of perishable food, and how could you ensure that everyone who wanted their food supplied by the Union could be catered for? Is there not scope for demand to excede what the Union can supply?
Q: You have highlighted that IS Services have formed working group on smart-phone access to the College network. In that case, what’s the point of making its realisation a major campaign promise? Surely the formation of the working group constitutes a willingness to pursue the project independent of any campaign that you may wage?
Q: That you have prioritised a constitutional review means that you have identified issues with the current SU constitution. Without being too diplomatic, what specifically are those issues? Do you feel that the SU constitution really makes a tangible difference to the everyday lives of students and is worthy of the extensive attention it would require?
Rory Dunne
Q: When questioned on your manifesto promise to support sports clubs, you cited the situation whereby clubs pay the same rate as external groups for rental of College facilities. Have the relevant authorities indicated any willingness to officer concessions in that regard?
Q: As has been discussed at length, you have offered to donate 10% of your salary to the Student Hardship Fund if elected. You have already explained the rationale that informs the promise, but would that tactic place undue pressure on the other four sabbatical officers to do the same?
Q: Students of Trinity may soon vote to disaffiliate from the USI. Many of your policies relate to the bureaucratic and everyday aspect of SU politics, neglecting to explain how you plan to lead a successful campaign on a national scale if required to do so. Can you provide an outline of a plan of action for such a circumstance?
John Tighe
Q: Your policies more or less all deal with representation. Given that a number of candidates have identified day-to-day service provision as a high priority, have you not missed part of the point by neglecting to enter a dialogue on the Union’s local-level responsibility?
Q: You said in your video interview that you would be happy to see the fee (or FEE) issue brought to the attention of students through your campaign. Is that the campaign’s primary aim, and how do you propose to raise any issue through low-key campaigning?
Q: In the same interview, you were reluctant to rule out attending FEE occupations if denied a mandate to do so by the student body. Give it to us straight: If you were elected and SU Council voted against a motion to mandate the President to attend an occupation, would you still attend? A yes or no will suffice.
