RAG and VIP Zone RAG ideas: 1) Stem cell donation - The idea is to raise £1000 and donate it to charity. It will allow Portsmouth students to help save lives. It was not made clear what she wants from the £1000 but that she wants RAGs support. The end point reached was that it should go online. 2) Have a pyjama day - This idea will be organised by RAG and all students will be able to get involved. The idea was well liked but it should be made more specific where they want the money to go to. It can't be expected for RAG to run the event for them. The course reps will be the ones on the day collecting the money. Vote: All in favour. 3) RAG zone - Other students should be allowed to vote in RAG zone. Compared to ours, other zones are wider. There should be more of a student voice present, however are there enough students outside of the committee that will be interested to attend RAG zone. The elected committee members do not give a good viewpoint of other members of the society. There could be a poll put online however only dedicated RAG members would vote - perhaps it should be made mandatory for recruits to vote or it could be mentioned in the next EGM. 4) Media Equipment - The idea was that the cameras should be made priority for UPTV as they use them more often than other societies. At the moment any student group can take out the equipment. UAB rejected the idea because the cameras are for everyone and not just for UPTV. UPTV have not got a great track record when it comes to returning the equipment on time and this could easily happen again. Therefore the idea that UPTV have priority over the cameras would make the whole booking system pointless. Everyone objected to UPTV having priority. Other: There should be stricter sanctions put in place for when RAG committee members have not turned up to something when they said they were going to (and have given no apology). They are after all committed to the role and should expect to take the responsibility. Perhaps it would help by sitting them down and talking to them. There seems to be no middle ground - it's either kick them out of the committee or talk to them. There is an option of banning them for a few weeks or still implement the 'three strikes and they're out' principle.