Welcome to Glass’s continuing coverage of the QUT Guild Student Representative Council (SRC) Meetings. The third council meeting of the year was held on Wednesday, 26 March 2025, at E259 on Kelvin Grove Campus.
As always, these meetings are a platform for Guild Executives and student representatives to table and vote on motions that directly impact student life at QUT. All enrolled students are welcome to attend, observe proceedings, and even put forward their own motions.
If you want to see change at your university, putting forward a motion to the SRC is one of the most direct ways to do so.
Glass will continue to report on each SRC meeting throughout the year, bringing transparency, accountability, and student voices to the forefront.
Council Meeting Minutes
You can find the meeting minutes here.
You can also access the meeting agenda and documents associated with motions raised in this folder.
AND WE’RE OFF!
The meeting was called to order at 6:21 PM by Chair Jaime Moretti, commencing with an Acknowledgement of Country.
The Chair conducted a roll call, confirming the following officers in attendance: President Emme Muggleton, Secretary Sebastian Page, Treasurer Gaurang Aggarwal, Engagement Office Ojas Munjal, Education Officer Erin Milne, Environment Officer Georgie Dobbs, First Nations Officer Mitchell Swift, Women’s Officer Samara Kyrtsana, Queer Officer Lauren (Ren) Johnstone, Disability Officer Ethan Johnstone, Engineering Faculty Councillor Michael Pendergast, Engineering Faculty Councillor Jordan McAlister, Business & Law Faculty Councillor Yuanyi Tham, Science Faculty Councillor Aaron Atkinson, CIESJ Faculty Councillor Elowyn Gampe.
The following apologies were observed: Welfare Officer Steven H Wu, CIESJ Faculty Councillor Isabella Folley, Science Faculty Councillor Adi Vas,
The Health Faculty Councillor submitted Sarah Vilumsons was marked absent without apology for the second consecutive meeting, officially receiving her second strike under Guild attendance rules.
The meeting proceeded without any reports, readings, or motions from the Disability or Queer Officers.
UPDATES ON CASUAL VACANCIES
Kavya Chary ran unopposed for the position of Health Faculty Councillor. In her address to the Council, she spoke about her background as a Master of Public Health student and expressed a strong interest in improving communication between students and faculty. She described the role as a valuable learning opportunity and a meaningful way to contribute to student representation. Kavya was successfully elected.
Vishnu Raj was nominated for the vacant Business and Law Faculty Councillor position but failed to attend the meeting. As a result, the position remains unfilled.
NEXT UP: MOTIONS
This Council meeting featured no motions with notice but hold up, there were still a few without notice waiting to be unpacked.
- The Guild backs up the call for legislating domestic and family violence.
The first motion without notice was brought forward by President Emme Muggleton and seconded by Women’s Officer Samara Kyrtsanas. The motion called for the QUT Guild to support a campaign advocating for stronger legislative measures to criminalise domestic and family violence (DFV), and to promote public awareness around the issue.
In presenting the motion, Muggleton stated the Guild’s intent to back the Make DFV a Crime campaign and to champion legal reforms that hold domestic violence offenders accountable. She emphasised the importance of both, legislative change and community education to address the issue comprehensively.
Speaking in support of the motion, Kyrtsanas pointed to the ongoing impact of generational trauma and criticised the current legal framework for placing the onus on victims to prove their abuse. They argued that this process often extends the trauma experienced by survivors. “In 2024 alone, Queensland recorded 526 DFV incidents in a single day,” she said. “Survivors are being left without protection let alone justice.”
Education Officer Erin Milne also addressed the Council, linking domestic violence to systemic sexism and economic inequality. “We need to increase autonomy and independence so women can stand up against violence,” they said. Further noting financial dependence as a major barrier preventing women from leaving abusive situations, pointing to the gender pay gap, superannuation disparity, and lack of affordable housing.
In her right of reply, Muggleton said “The motion speaks for itself,” describing it as a crucial first step. She noted that students had already approached the Guild, urging it to take a stance.
The motion passed unanimously.
2. Clubs and Societies Committee Adopts New Code of Conduct?
A motion to implement a formal Code of Conduct for the QUT Clubs and Societies Committee (CSC) was introduced by Treasurer Gaurang Aggrawal and seconded by Secretary Sebastian Page. The policy aimed to address longstanding gaps in accountability, ethical governance, and student protection across all Guild-affiliated clubs.
Aggarwal used his speaking time to read the full motion and accompanying policy, outlining how the framework would be enacted. Page spoke in support, stating that the absence of formal guidelines had created a clear need for structured, consistent standards across all clubs.
Queer Officer Ren Johnstone (she/they) spoke in support, noting the absence of any formal guiding document for clubs and highlighting ongoing issues with event accessibility. Engagement Officer Ojas Munjal also backed the motion, drawing from his experience as a former club executive. “Having a structure is long overdue, this will make it easier for clubs to operate effectively” he added.
Opposition came from Business and Law Councillor Yuanyi Tham (she/they), who raised procedural and substantive objections. Criticism was directed at the motion’s timing, with concerns about its circulation only hours before the meeting. Tham argued that a policy affecting such a broad student cohort should be submitted with adequate notice and consultation. The content was also scrutinised, with specific reference to vague language, perceived overreach in proposed social media controls, and ambiguity surrounding the definition of political activity. Tham questioned whether elements of the policy could be used to limit student expression, noting, “It’s giving authoritarian vibes, a student union is inherently political, where do we draw the line?”
Connor Knight, attending as an observer, delivered a detailed critique of the proposed policy. He warned that the lack of specificity in several clauses posed a risk to students’ rights — particularly around free speech and public criticism. Knight took issue with a clause stating that public statements made in an official capacity must align with Guild policies, calling it a potential tool for silencing dissent. He also challenged language requiring executives to protect the Guild’s reputation, asking whether this could be used to suppress legitimate criticism even in cases of Guild wrongdoing. “The more vague a policy is, the more dangerous it becomes,” he said, cautioning against adopting a framework that could be interpreted in ways that restrict expression or penalise those who speak out.
Following the discussion, a procedural motion to adjourn the debate for 10 to 15 minutes was moved by Disability Officer Ethan Johnston and seconded by First Nations Officer Mitchell Swift. The Council took an informal break and continued deliberating off the record.
Upon resuming, the motion was formally withdrawn. Councillors acknowledged the importance of the issue but agreed that any policy addressing it would require more time, consultation, and careful drafting to ensure it meets the needs of clubs and protects student rights.
3. Guild Condemns BCC Crackdown on Homelessness
CIESJ Councillor Elowyn Gampe (she/her) introduced a motion condemning the Brisbane City Council’s recent actions targeting people experiencing homelessness, following reports of $8,000 fines issued to those living in Musgrave Park. The motion, seconded by Milne, called for recognition of housing as a human right and criticised the ongoing criminalisation of homelessness.
Gampe described the situation as a failure of leadership across political lines, highlighting the use of language suggesting people “choose” homelessness. She pointed to rising housing inequality and the inaction surrounding vacant housing stock. “The solutions are clear but there’s no political will,” she said in her right of reply.
Milne spoke to the harsh conditions in Musgrave Park, including police harassment, lack of electricity, and restrictions on community aid. She noted the disproportionate impact on Indigenous communities and described the measures as a direct attack on society’s most vulnerable.
From the floor, Page described the situation as “despicable” and criticised the LNP’s refusal to engage in parliamentary debate on housing. Queer Officer Ren Johnstone (she/they) added that removing the visibility of homelessness does not resolve it and challenged the harmful notion of “deserving vs undeserving” victims.
The motion passed.
4. Guild Passes Motion Opposing Fossil Fuels
The No More Coal motion was introduced by Environment Officer Georgie Dobbs and seconded by CIESJ Councillor Elowyn Gampe at the March SRC meeting, calling on the Guild to take a clear stance against the fossil fuel industry.
Dobbs referred to recent climate events, including the California wildfires and Cyclone Alfred, as evidence that the climate crisis is not a future threat but a present reality. She argued that Australia’s continued reliance on coal and its plans to expand fossil fuel projects contradict the urgent need for transition. “There is no real transition happening,” Dobbs said in her right of reply. “These resources are being exploited for profit, not for the public good.”
During floor discussion, Knight noted the political complexity of the issue, while First Nations Officer Mitchell Swift raised concerns about the practicality of an immediate shift away from fossil fuels. “We dig everything from the ground and dump it back,” he added, questioning the long-term sustainability of alternatives like solar energy and their environmental costs.
Despite several abstentions, the motion passed.
5. Guild Opposes U.S. Interference in Academic Research
The QUT Guild voted unanimously to oppose political interference in academic research, following reports of a U.S.-issued questionnaire sent to Australian researchers. The document, linked to the Trump-aligned administration, reportedly asked researchers to disclose funding sources and whether their work included topics of diversity, inclusion, and environmental issues.
Business and Law Councillor Yuanyi Tham, who introduced the motion, warned that such actions posed a threat toacademic freedom and could damage international research collaboration. Tham noted that the United States is a majorfunding source for Australian research, contributing 25% of financing in biomedical fields alone.
Milne backed the motion, describing it as part of a wider trend of political overreach. Milne urged student bodies to take an active role in resisting attempts to control academic discourse and confirmed that Guild members would be present at an upcoming protest rally.
Aggarwal proposed an amendment to the motion, adding a call for the Australian Government to increase public research funding in response to any potential shortfall.
The amendment was carried out without opposition.
The meeting wrapped up at 8:23 PM. Glass will be back with coverage of the next SRC meeting, so stay tuned. Because if you don’t follow student politics you might still be affected by it.
