Re: Why is there a Clash between the Tutors and the AFC

by notabigjump Wed 11 Sep 2024 - 16:51

mac wrote:
Anniemillo1 wrote:Would it make any difference for everyone to also send complaints to the SNU Complaints Committee because of the illegal actions taken by the NEC. It would be interesting to see if they found in favour of the members and then it was overturned by the NEC. They couldn't possibly not uphold the complaint because it is blatantly illegal.
Interesting questions/points but essentially academic now we're so far down the road.....

I agree it's too far down the road and even if they did, they'd have to issue potentially hundreds of NDA's. It would be an even bigger circus.

by Janhar Wed 11 Sep 2024 - 18:59

mac wrote:
Janhar wrote:Yes Mac it is being followed.
I am not an SNU member but I am a former college student with a lot of interest. I re discovered this forum when I received an email from this site about these events. If I am watching this blog others will be too. I hope some of them have the means to pass on this advice where it is needed. Don’t think that none of the “silenced” SNU members are listening. Some of them will be and hopefully some NEC Directors also.

I've mentioned that I'm hoping that not only SNU members - those who can vote individually - are viewing this conversation but also NEC members who may need to consider their positions if wrong doing is found by the regulating bodies already mentioned.

Thus far in this thread we've heard from barely a handful of individuals and as an ordinary website member here I don't have a clue how many unregistered viewers of the site there may be. Also thus far we've had nobody refuting any of the material posted in this thread so one might reasonably assume what's been said is essentially correct.

They are just afraid to speak out. The SNU statement was threatening with regards to staff being abused on social media and the words ”law” and “harassment” were used if I remember correctly. Also it said something along the lines of social media comment having been logged. Cannot remember the exact wording but it made my blood run cold.
Even anonymous commenters will be afraid their name might be revealed or their identity guessed. Also a lot of people will be unsure how to navigate the forum to comment if they don’t usually use forums. People are generally more used to other ways of posting online. They will be watching though. Also, I would not be surprised if people who are protecting the SNU have an eye on it and probably doing screen shots of much that is in this discussion.

by notabigjump Wed 11 Sep 2024 - 19:15

Janhar wrote:
mac wrote:
Janhar wrote:Yes Mac it is being followed.
I am not an SNU member but I am a former college student with a lot of interest. I re discovered this forum when I received an email from this site about these events. If I am watching this blog others will be too. I hope some of them have the means to pass on this advice where it is needed. Don’t think that none of the “silenced” SNU members are listening. Some of them will be and hopefully some NEC Directors also.

I've mentioned that I'm hoping that not only SNU members - those who can vote individually - are viewing this conversation but also NEC members who may need to consider their positions if wrong doing is found by the regulating bodies already mentioned.

Thus far in this thread we've heard from barely a handful of individuals and as an ordinary website member here I don't have a clue how many unregistered viewers of the site there may be. Also thus far we've had nobody refuting any of the material posted in this thread so one might reasonably assume what's been said is essentially correct.
They are just afraid to speak out. The SNU statement was threatening with regards to staff being abused on social media and the words ”law” and “harassment” were used if I remember correctly. Also it said something along the lines of social media comment having been logged. Cannot remember the exact wording but it made my blood run cold.
Even anonymous commenters will be afraid their name might be revealed or their identity guessed. Also a lot of people will be unsure how to navigate the forum to comment if they don’t usually use forums. People are generally more used to other ways of posting online. They will be watching though. Also, I would not be surprised if people who are protecting the SNU have an eye on it and probably doing screen shots of much that is in this discussion.

I hope they do watch and screenshot. This forum has excellent legal and company experts, who really know what's what. Cool

by Janhar Wed 11 Sep 2024 - 19:32

To notabigjump… Re your last post. Yes, I hope so too.

by mac Wed 11 Sep 2024 - 19:49

Janhar wrote:
They are just afraid to speak out. The SNU statement was threatening with regards to staff being abused on social media and the words ”law” and “harassment” were used if I remember correctly. Also it said something along the lines of social media comment having been logged. Cannot remember the exact wording but it made my blood run cold.

I very much hope that staff have not been abused but that doesn't mean one can not say what they have done provided it's factual - that's not abuse and it's not slander provided it's true. My guess is that individuals feel they have been harassed and browbeaten so maybe it's time to call it out publicly?

Even anonymous commenters will be afraid their name might be revealed or their identity guessed.

I understand why folk may feel that way and it's a rational fear they may be forced out of an organisation they love and have served well.

Also a lot of people will be unsure how to navigate the forum to comment if they don’t usually use forums. People are generally more used to other ways of posting online. They will be watching though.

I am heartened they are following the conversation and I hope it's reassuring them that they're not out on their own. It's a shame they aren't contributing to this conversation though because more details, more facts and more viewpoints are what would be helpful in understanding more fully exactly what's been going on.

Also, I would not be surprised if people who are protecting the SNU have an eye on it and probably doing screen shots of much that is in this discussion.

I have no problems with anyone taking screen shots but more usefully they could become members here to put their side of the arguments which show how WE have it all wrong - if we have.....

That's an important issue. What is alleged, what anyone says others have done or not done, has to be factual, details have to be correct. Emotion about a situation is understandable but facts are what's needed.

by mac Wed 11 Sep 2024 - 20:17

quote: "Also, I would not be surprised if people who are protecting the SNU have an eye on it and probably doing screen shots of much that is in this discussion." If anyone is protecting the SNU then that's exactly the thing they SHOULD be doing.

The Spiritualists' National Union is "....a private company limited by guarantee...." which was incorporated in 1901. It's bigger, better and more important than any of us and the Union deserves to be served in a similar way to how we strive to serve The Great Spirit, the reason we are Spiritualists.

But if anyone is NOT protecting the Union but rather looking out for their personal or professional interests then they are NOT the individuals our Union and its members want around. Crying or Very sad

by Anniemillo1 Wed 11 Sep 2024 - 21:03

Hi, Does it state in particular who is abusing the staff? I believe they have had enough also.

by mac Wed 11 Sep 2024 - 21:20

Who is said to have abused whom and in what way?

by Anniemillo1 Wed 11 Sep 2024 - 21:50

Janhar put it in his post earlier.

'The SNU statement was threatening with regards to staff being abused on social media'

I have to say that I didn't at any time read on social media any abuse against the staff, so I just wondered who was abusing them.

by Slatewriter Wed 11 Sep 2024 - 22:29

mac wrote:Who is said to have abused whom and in what way?

I recall reading something myself about college staff receiving abuse down the phone from a few students calling for information.
Not sure where that was now, but these two related paragraphs come directly from the published SNU Statement made on Sept 3rd

Staff, officers and volunteers who have a right to undertake their jobs and work in a safe and respectful environment, and who are trying to help navigate a path through a difficult situation, have been subject to personal attacks, ridicule and harassment. This has been documented and shall be dealt with accordingly in due course, as the Union has a legal duty to protect its staff and workers.

We would like to remind everyone who comments on the situation - both directly and externally - that you are fully entitled to your opinion, but that freedom of speech is not an absolute right. It must be balanced with the laws of defamation of character (libel and slander), harassment and intimidation, and regulations relating to online abuse.

The whole statement can be found here
https://www.snu.org.uk/news/an-important-update-from-the-spiritualists-national-union-tuesday-3rd-september-2024

by mac Wed 11 Sep 2024 - 22:36

SNU statement

I've just looked back at the statement issued early on and I found a reference that may be relevant at the above link. Is this what is meant by "staff abuse"?

Oh, I've just seen that Slatewriter's posted the same....

by Janhar Wed 11 Sep 2024 - 22:49

”I am heartened they are following the conversation and I hope it's reassuring them that they're not out on their own. It's a shame they aren't contributing to this conversation though because more details, more facts and more viewpoints are what would be helpful in understanding more fully exactly what's been going on.”

I agree with the above written by you Mac. The problem though, is that we do not yet know what has been going on because those who do know are bound by NDA agreements.

by Lis Thu 12 Sep 2024 - 1:27

A little earlier on this thread Mac commented:

"Thus far in this thread we've heard from barely a handful of individuals and as an ordinary website member here I don't have a clue how many unregistered viewers of the site there may be. Also thus far we've had nobody refuting any of the material posted in this thread so one might reasonably assume what's been said is essentially correct."

As a general update:

This thread was started on July 25, 2024. Immediately following the first post, the forum saw a significant influx of new members, a trend that has continued, with multiple new members joining every day since then. All have viewed this particular thread and most have visited the thread many times. In addition, the forum has seen a massive increase in "guests" visiting the site. Again, these "guests" are viewing this particular thread.

In short, this thread is being avidly followed by many, and the information to be found on this thread is being shared elsewhere.

Most who have joined as new members, are choosing not to post comments, perhaps for the reasons that have been put forward by others on the thread.

But many are actively watching, and learning, and passing on what they have learned, and are encouraging others to join the forum and read the thread, and further spread awareness of the concerns that have been raised by those posting on this thread.

Guests, are not able to post comments on the thread, but since they are able to view the forum's content, they are also able to disseminate the information being discussed on this, and other threads, for that matter.

The role of this forum is to offer members and guest alike, information about Spiritualism, and the matters that affect Spiritualism. The issues raised about the tutors of the AFC, and subsequently all the other concerns that have become apparent and written about on this thread are matters of great interest to many and the forum rightly offers members the right to comment, if they wish to do so.

While I too would like to see more of our new members following this thread joining in and sharing their knowledge and understanding of what is going on, I appreciate that many do not feel able to do so or are constrained by NDA's.

I should also point out that the President of the SNU and the members of the NEC are just as entitled to join this forum as anyone else, and to express their personal opinions or share their understanding of the current difficulties if they wish to.

So long as all who do post make clear whether what they are posting is their opinion, if that it what it is, or it is factual information they wish to share, then this forum has nothing to fear, and allegations of "harassment," "intimidation," or "defamation of character" are unjustified.

While "freedom of speech is is not an absolute right" it is a right that must be defended, and vigorously, so that those who express their opinions, or share their understanding of the facts, are not intimidated by threats of legal repercussions.

Nor should SNU members be constrained from expressing their thoughts or concerns because to do so may endanger their right to SNU membership, or their SNU qualifications and awards.

Threats of removal of membership, qualifications or awards, or, indeed, being banned from any SNU venues for speaking out, or seeking redress from perceived injustices, is appalling behaviour, and such treatment of the membership appears to be a misuse of both the purpose and intent of the powers of the SNU Constitution and Articles of Association.

Above all else, what this thread has shown, is that there is a significant and serious disconnect between the management of the SNU and 20 tutors, and also many of the SNU membership.

The concerns of the tutors and members appear to be genuine, heartfelt, and far-reaching in their implications. Complaints are being made to various authorities.

Whether or not those authorities respond to those complaints and concerns or not, it is surely time that the management of the SNU did, and did so constructively. Not with threats of legal action. Not with banning of members. Not with censorship on their Facebook pages.

Whatever the management of the SNU thought was its intent when it took the position it did with the dissenting tutors, made changes to by-laws, etc., etc., it is clear that the consequences of those actions have not been well received. People are unhappy, people are feeling hurt and unfairly treated. People are feeling gagged from expressing their opinion about what has happened. Freedom of speech is being denied.

It is, in my opinion, time for the management of the SNU to re-consider how it approaches all the concerns and complaints. The current approach is only serving to escalate discord and discontent. That can only bring Spiritualism and the SNU into disrepute.

by Admin Thu 12 Sep 2024 - 3:05

Some excellent posts last night, our time, and the latest from Lis this morning, our time, is a great reminder of what we are trying to do here on the forum.

Yes the membership of the forum has risen considerably since this thread started 85 people have joined us. We have also seen a huge increase in unregistered visitors.

This one thread has already recorded the second highest number of visits of all our forum topics, I believe it likely even the regulators are coming to it. It has just displaced What the SNU Did to Psychic News. So the doings of the SNU currently hold 2nd and 3rd place for forum views while Kai Muegge, startlingly, is top. I suspect there may be one or two others close by, particularly if you combine threads about people.

If people are taking screen prints of the topic, I cannot stop them, however I suspect some of them may have been used to support complaints, as well as ones while people decide whether they could act to gag the forum. I suspect that the forum may also have been referenced in those complaints. As Lis said we are free to anyone who wishes to join us. Since this topic opened all memberships have been approved despite the fact we normally have no idea who the people are behind the chosen name.

Obviously we try hard to ensure that what is written is neither abusive, harassing nor denigrating. Lis has explained this well and we believe that it is in the public interest (and that of the members of the SNU, plus the NEC) that these matters are made freely available.

I have gone through my notes, of what news has drifted in overnight, but there is nothing that adds much more to what has been posted here. Excepth it may be interesting that the Elective Auditor is just an ordinary SNU Member ,so they must feel themselves to be between a rock and a hard place at this moment. I feel for them in this difficult position. Maybe the external auditors should have noted this breach, but that depends upon the nature and scope of the audit terms of engagement. It also occurred after the Financial Year they wer reporting upon.

I do note this declaration by the SNU, to Companies House on the 2nd September 2024

CS01(ef)
Confirmation Statement
Company Name: SPIRITUALISTS' NATIONAL UNION(THE)
Company Number: 00071661
Received for filing in Electronic Format on the: 02/09/2024 XDAT8BFS
Company Name: SPIRITUALISTS' NATIONAL UNION(THE)
Company Number: 00071661
Confirmation
Statement date:
31/07/2024
The company confirms that its intended future activities are lawful

The Filing of the annual return to the 31st December 2023 is not due yet.

I do not think this refers to the breach on the Articles of Association

by OnlyVisitingEarth Thu 12 Sep 2024 - 7:20

I for one am glad that this website exists and look forward to a time of peace so I can peruse the other threads on here. Between a full time job and my spiritual work I have little time to sit down and read other people's thoughts and ideas on Spiritualism, that I intend to sort out. One of the things I will miss from my trips to the college will be the chats about spiritualism and the spirit world with tutors and fellow colleagues, I cannot go back if the 20 tutors are not reinstated, as it will not be the place I knew and loved.

After reading other posts across social media it seems to be me that there is a real fear of reprisals from those in charge. From what I understand the bylaw of "Bringing The SNU And Spiritualism Into Disrepute " is the key issue, as stated in other posts there is no list of what brings the SNU and Spiritualism into disrepute, so those in charge and only them have complete control what is on that missing list and members now know rather than feel that there is no real chance of appeal because those in charge have control of the complaints committee. I might have got that all wrong but it seems from comments here and elsewhere state that the original complaints committee has been disbanded and another one put in place and it appears that the president was/is involved with the new committee.

Every position I have ever held will give me on signing the contract a list of misdemeanours which will get me written warnings and dismissal. If the SNU is a company surely they must abide by the Laws governing companies and state what is allowed and not allowed on a list, yes I know there are bylaws and these seem to growing by the week and it seems changed ad hoc to suit those in charge to suit their own personal needs or so it feels to me.

I feel as a member of the SNU that this is one of the biggest reasons why members and non members fear speaking out because of the absolute control those in charge of the SNU have over what is deemed "bringing the SNU and Spiritualism into disrepute" and it looks like they are making this list up as they go along to fit their agenda

We only have to look at our own political problems here, in America and elsewhere in the world to see what can be done when there is a total lack of confidence in the government and I can't help feeling that there is a fast becoming a vote of no confidence in those in charge of the SNU, but how do we speak about this freely?

Many of us are sitting and talking to our spirit helpers and trusted colleagues, yes there is the thoughts voiced "That things will turn out as they are meant to be and we need to just sit and trust in the Spirit World".

No! I'm sorry I was taught by many of those 20 tutors to think for myself, that I have free will and as said on here earlier, by Admin I think maybe the Spirit World and my own helpers want me to stand up and do something about it. I might be a small cog in the wheel of all this, but even the most expensive watch in all its glory cannot work without the smallest cog inside it.

I know that if nothing is done about the present situation within the SNU then I have no choice but to hand back my membership, throw my awards in the bin and walk away, I cannot in all honesty stand up on platform and promote a branch of spiritualism that can do this to top class ambassadors of that branch of Spiritualism.

This is not the Spiritualism I was taught at their very college, this is a mockery of everything I hold dear, I feel even now wrong in putting on my emblem of the SNU, Light ...Nature...Truth... and standing up with what those in charge of the SNU are doing to the Union

by Lis Thu 12 Sep 2024 - 8:27

Thank you "OnlyVisitingEarth" for your heartfelt thoughts on this very difficult and disturbing situation.

I, too, as as a Spiritualist for almost 60 years, say that what I am watching happening in the SNU, and the conduct of those who are currently in charge, bears no resemblance to the values and conduct that I understand is what is Spiritualism or what is proper Spiritualist behaviour.

Where is the "spiritual" in what has been done? I can see it in the actions of the tutors striving to maintain standards, and protect the interests of the students. I can see it in the many attempts on the part of various people to get the management of the SNU to listen to their concerns, hear their complaints, to respond appropriately and with respect and consideration.

But I don't see it in the conduct of the SNU management. I don't see it in the proposed changes in the bye-laws. Nor in the powers that seem to be now to be given to the President as chair of the upcoming AGM.

I certainly don't see it in all the threats of legal action unless people cease and desist speaking about their concerns - cease voicing their understanding of what has been happening, expressing their discontent.

I don't see it in the gagging of SNU members on various Facebook pages and forums, while at the same time the SNU management stridently speaks of how people are "fully entitled" to their opinions. It seems that as a body that management denies its own members the right to speak and uses the argument that in speaking out those people are bringing Spiritualism and the SNU into "disrepute."

There certainly are people who seem to be bringing the SNU and Spiritualism into disrepute, but it isn't the SNU membership, the AFC students, or other independent Spiritualists, that are the ones doing so.

by mac Thu 12 Sep 2024 - 8:44

Very well said. I admire your honesty and your approach.

We've been told the regulatory bodies know about the situation but whether they will have the will or the resources to take action remains to be seen.

It seems at this point that all the talking about what's going on must be just-about over. I did say the individuals concerned may always have intended to tough it out and thus far they've succeeded.

By the time the AGM is over the likely future operation of the SNU should be clear. Possession is nine tenths the law. The SNU's operation will have changed. Whether there will be any possibility of overturning the proposed changes using legal means is unclear.

by Jbodoski Thu 12 Sep 2024 - 10:58

Surely the membership is only gagged if they accept these gagging orders. The NEC are trustees working on behalf of the members. If they choose to stay quiet, then and I say this with no malice, they deserve the outcome. I spoke up many times about mistreatment and bad practices, including paying the president my reward the wilderness hence the reason I left. Swapping a term to 4 years seems to me like the president is securing her pension.

by notabigjump Thu 12 Sep 2024 - 11:01

Jbodoski wrote:Surely the membership is only gagged if they accept these gagging orders. The NEC are trustees working on behalf of the members. If they choose to stay quiet, then and I say this with no malice, they deserve the outcome. I spoke up many times about mistreatment and bad practices, including paying the president my reward the wilderness hence the reason I left. Swapping a term to 4 years seems to me like the president is securing her pension.

Along with new whistleblowing laws etc, NDA's are frowned upon by tribunals and courts. It's draconian and not favourable to organisations to use them nowadays.

by mac Thu 12 Sep 2024 - 14:56

Jbodoski wrote: The NEC are trustees working on behalf of the members.

As I understand the situation based on Jim's explanation of company law, the members of the NEC are Directors of the SNU business and have clearly defined responsibilities and accountabilities. Whether or not they are also trustees I believe they OUGHT to work on behalf of the SNU's members and associates but whether they have been doing so is moot. The Directors may, of course, disagree and say I'm wrong.

If they choose to stay quiet, then and I say this with no malice, they deserve the outcome. I spoke up many times about mistreatment and bad practices, including paying the president my reward the wilderness hence the reason I left.

It's unkind to finger anyone upset at their treatment but fearful of the potential outcome should they speak out against those involved.

I asked some postings ago if the non-disclosure agreement was intended to be a permanent gag on individuals or simply an agreement to say nothing while the complaint was under review - we've all heard what happened about the disbanding of the Complaints Committee when it's alleged they found in favour of the tutors.

As regards the 'gagging orders' we see that high-profile NDAs have often accompanied large financial settlements but I hadn't heard of them being used the way they were imposed in the case of the twenty tutors who were simply making complaints. Whether a financial penalty would be the outcome if an NDA of this kind was broken I have no idea - but I doubt it. It looks to me like insisting on NDAs was simply browbeating the twenty individuals and then not allowing a proper complaints procedure to run anyway. I think that treatment would be sufficient justification for those affected to disclose the details of their complaints.

by mac Thu 12 Sep 2024 - 15:07

notabigjump wrote:

Along with new whistleblowing laws etc, NDA's are frowned upon by tribunals and courts. It's draconian and not favourable to organisations to use them nowadays.

But they're not illegal or unlawful although used as prerequisites before even listening to formal complaints DOES indeed appear draconian.

Based, though, on what we've heard about the approach to managing the SNU's operations it looks to me that the bods in charge don't give a fluff how they or the SNU is perceived. Were it otherwise this whole, sorry business would not be at the point it is right now.

The NEC's silence is deafening.

by mac Thu 12 Sep 2024 - 15:39

I hadn't known - until Jim pointed it out to me and explained the position - that the SNU is a business, a business registered in Companies House where it's been that way since 1901.

Historians here will know how it's been operating since then, whether it's been a Union of Spiritualists and for Spiritualists and its churches and centres rather than a business running in the way many/most of us think as business. I suspect it's been the former rather than the latter. It's possible though that things have been gradually changing over recent times and the current situation might mark the break from primarily looking after Spiritualist members' interests to primarily looking after the SNU's business interests. If so then perhaps what we're seeing - and some have been experiencing - is the use of modern-day business practices - eg non-disclosure agreements - and changes in operating modes, eg changing the bye-laws and changing officers' periods in office.

Maybe the old SNU is disappearing and will be replaced by a somewhat different version of it.

by Janhar Thu 12 Sep 2024 - 18:59

mac wrote:I hadn't known - until Jim pointed it out to me and explained the position - that the SNU is a business, a business registered in Companies House where it's been that way since 1901.

Historians here will know how it's been operating since then, whether it's been a Union of Spiritualists and for Spiritualists and its churches and centres rather than a business running in the way many/most of us think as business. I suspect it's been the former rather than the latter. It's possible though that things have been gradually changing over recent times and the current situation might mark the break from primarily looking after Spiritualist members' interests to primarily looking after the SNU's business interests. If so then perhaps what we're seeing - and some have been experiencing - is the use of modern-day business practices - eg non-disclosure agreements - and changes in operating modes, eg changing the bye-laws and changing officers' periods in office.

Maybe the old SNU is disappearing and will be replaced by a somewhat different version of it.

I don’t see the SNU as changing. It appears to me to operate as it has always done. I have not been a member for years as I like to be free of regulation but nevertheless I have always respected SNU standards and regulations and understood the purpose of them even though I find them too obstinate about exploring different methods. I still value their standards to this day and will defend them to the hilt on that. At the moment they have a very determined lady as their President. She clearly feels strongly that she is the right person to rectify what she sees as mistakes in past decision making and she clearly wants 4 years to make sure it all becomes just as she thinks it should be. This seems to include having no nonsense from those who would disagree with her.
The SNU is and always has been set in its ways.The purpose of that has been to maintain standards. It has to change its attitude to survive. These days people will not put up with that style of leadership. The tutors need more respect. Please understand that this is my own opinion based on my own observation. I am not in a position of confidence with any current tutors and I have been told nothing. I no longer attend the College regularly because I no longer work as a medium and have no desire to be in class. However, I miss the college and the tutors so much I have occasionally done a course just to be there but have not done that for a few years now. I know some of those 20 tutors from courses I have done. They are great teachers and excellent mediums. I therefore know that all 20 of them will have a very valid reason to complain because the ones I do know would not have done this otherwise.

by mac Thu 12 Sep 2024 - 20:34

Well it does appear that some changes in the SNU are underway, be they large or small.....

I agree the returning President has ideas she's determined to drive through and changes are often unsettling. Beyond their being unsettled though, the tutors situation has become a highly divisive one which has upset many folk in general - it appears to me. And there is even more upset beyond that issue - again it appears to me. I'm writing in those terms because I do not know what members out there are thinking or saying and how many are concerned or upset.

As with yourself I have had no need for the Union over the past 40 years since "my awakening" to the reality of our survival beyond death. My path has been different from many others' paths I suspect yet I have often encouraged seekers to consider Spiritualist teaching. I personally am fully supportive of the aims of Modern Spiritualism.

What happens next will be down to Union members but the AGM is fast approaching after which it may be too late to oppose changes that members are not happy about.

by mac Thu 12 Sep 2024 - 20:53

Janhar wrote:

The SNU is and always has been set in its ways.The purpose of that has been to maintain standards. It has to change its attitude to survive. These days people will not put up with that style of leadership. The tutors need more respect.

Old systems are often set in their ways just as old folk are! If the old ways better maintain good standards then change is not necessarily the best thing.

As for the style of SNU leadership, exactly which one are you suggesting they won't put up with - the old way or the new way? The AGM is fast approaching after which who knows which style may have prevailed?

by Sponsored content