Death of NUS democracy Mk2… a report from the National Union of Students ‘Extraordinary’ conference.

The National Union of Students was dealt a blow last week when an extraordinary conference voted for the leaderships ‘Governance Review’ – a constitutional reform of the national union with some very dangerous implications.

The conference itself was an undemocratic stitch-up from the very beginning: Many students unions did not hold elections for the conference with lots of delegations being hand-picked by leadership-loyal sabbatical officers. The majority of affiliated Further Education institutions could not send anyone at all(!) due to the cost of attending more than one conference in the year. All of this was a deliberate attempt to sideline opposition.

The leadership was unable to get the necessary votes at last year’s Annual Conference to pass the review, and are trying to push it through 2 of these unrepresentative extraordinary conferences this year – this is being supported uncritically by Hull University Union.

There are a myriad of things wrong with the proposal and contrary to Labour Students’ rhetoric there is nothing substantially different to the one voted down by last year’s annual conference:

1.       Trustee Board – The most contentious part of the review. The trustee board would give power to non-student ‘professionals’ that would ‘advise’ the union on legal and financial matters. The only difference between these people and actual ‘advisors’ would be that they could vote down and effectively veto any action they liked on legal and financial grounds.

2.       Liberation Spaces – there would be no liberation spaces on this board – as if financial and legal matters are not liberation issues!

3.       Zone Conferences – Hailed by people in the leadership as an extension of democracy by devolving policy making is nothing of the sort. Zone conferences would decide what would be discussed at National Conference. BUT, each affiliate union can send only one delegate. One delegate per union to decide on the policy that is debated at conference? Undemocratic.

4.       The National Ballot – Not a bad idea in itself. However, as in many students unions, right-wing leaderships can always wreck any decent ballot (for arguments sake, one demanding a free-education demo) by setting the quota unreasonably high.

5.       New National Executive Council – In one respect the proposals are good – an increase in positions and 7 spaces exclusively for FE representatives. However, this is entirely undermined by the fact that these are now ‘volunteer’ positions and consequently unpaid. The NEC is already drastically underpaid and many members have to take up extra work to supplement their income. In between studying and working, when do we expect these students to campaign? Contrary to NUS’s claim this will empower ordinary students – it will necessarily exclude them. In addition to this the review proposes they only meet 5 times a year. Certainly not enough to debate policy properly.

The rightwing leadership of the union does not care about student involvement. If they did, why would they replace students with trustees on national bodies? Why would it try and push this through small, undemocratic extraordinary conferences? And why is the first time you read about the review on THIS blog?

The student movement is at a crossroads, and the NUS leadership would have us believe there are only 2 ways to go – to reform or not to reform. This is obviously not true. We’ve been fighting for radical reform for decades AND we’ve proposed alternatives to the leadership but they’re not discussed. We need to fight for OUR change, and against theirs. So on to our proposals…

More time for motions at conference, so students have the time to debate the issues, more spaces and greater remuneration on the National Executive for greater representation. BUT it’s not simply about changing the structures! The endemic problem in the union is the leadership’s inability – or more likely unwanting – to see the real problems.

We cannot achieve anything by getting pally with Blairite ministers, if they agree with us then we aren’t demanding enough! Nor can we achieve anything if we are constantly fighting a rear-guard action against attack after attack from governments who ironically some of these NUS leaders represent! But more importantly we need to look abroad at the places like France and Greece that have mass student participation, AND win.

Accountability:

It’s important for all delegates elected to account for their actions to the student body.

Hull-Left and Education Not for Sale activists Chris Marks and Stephen Wood’s NUS delegate manifesto’s can be found here (http://www.hullstudent.com/elections/content/index.php?page=63615). As can the manifesto’s for the 9 candidates that attended last week’s Extraordinary Conference. Here they are along with the factions they voted with or supported. 

Tom Digby (Labour Students)Emma Kinloch (Labour Students)
Iain Keers (Labour Students)
Helen Gibson (President HUU/Labour Students)
Chris Marks (Hull-Left/Education not for Sale)
Uslaan Khan (Federation of Student Islamic Societies)
Richard Jackson (VP Academic Representation/Independent)
Mark Alcorn (VP Scarborough/Independent)
Irving Anderson (Independent)
Ben Wilcox (Independent)

For other reports of the conference:

http://www.free-education.org.uk/?p=570 (ENS website)

Let’s have it out!

Chris Marks  (HUU NUS delegate 08/09)

 

Hull University Union opens its doors to racists and fascists!

One of the few redeeming features of last year’s executive was the introduction of a No-platform policy on racist and fascist groups. The aim of this policy, which is also in place in many other students unions, and ALL national Trade Unions, is to stop Far-right fascist organisations like the British Nationalist Party and the Islamist Hizb ut-Tahrir using our student union to legitimise their disgusting politics by banning them from organising in it and from participating in its structures.

Outrageously this year’s Union Executive has voted 6-1 against ratifying this policy for another year (the only one in favour being President Helen Gibson). Obviously there are many arguments on both sides of the debate, so we’ll try and clear out some here.

1. "Freedom of Speech; you’re just as bad as the fascists if you ban them!"
This old chestnut is rolled out by liberals time and time again. Fascism is not your standard political current. It uses violence and thuggery to accomplish its political aim – the destruction of democracy, secularism and the working-class movement. The Working Class in the East End of London in the 1930’s had no chance to ‘debate’ nor should they have done. They organised against the rising tide of the British Union of Fascists with mass Solidarity action and they stopped the brown-shirts marching through the majority Jewish slums. Don’t let the BNP’s smart suits and election broadcasts fool you. These bastards are the same racist, authoritarian, sexist and homophobic scum they always have been. Evidence enough is that one of our fellow student activists in Huddersfield was repeatedly punched, kicked and called a ‘dirty red’ and ‘lesbo’ by far-right thugs in the street (http://www.free-education.org.uk/?p=536)! If history has taught us anything, it’s that doing nothing is the worse course of action. The rise of the BNP and of fascism is as a result of worsening conditions amongst the working class. The BNP exploit this. By arguing with the BNP you are also missing this point – people are pissed off with a system that exploits them day in, day out.

2.""Let’s beat their arguments in a debate!"
What arguments? “Send the buggers back” and “let’s twat some p*kis” are not arguments that need to be had! Seriously, debating someone who still maintains the world is flat is more worthwhile AND won’t leave minority students venerable to abuse in their students union. A question to those 6 who voted against no-platform, and who agree with this argument: Do you think the 6 million + Jews as well as members of the LGBT and disabled communities died during the holocaust because they didn’t have the right arguments? Because the logic of your argument does lend itself to implying that they did.

There is a catch to us supporting no platform however, in the sense that it’s only a small part of defeating fascism, a tool or a tactic if you will. Groups like the BNP are correct when they point to problems of poverty, healthcare, transport etc, REAL issues. This has to be combated not just by No-platform, but also a wider political appreciation of these problems and their solutions. We will be organising a number of anti-fascist activities this year, including most probably a couple of trips to demo’s and obviously getting involved with local anti-fascist activity.

Open Policy forum is where this should begin to be rectified, although the shame is still thoroughly on the UEC that voted against no-platform. For those not familiar with the way Open Policy forum works here it is. It’s a meeting open to all students where any student can put forward a policy motion. These are debated and then voted on with the top 3 policy motions going to referendum conducted on the hullstudent.com site, voted on by ALL students. All anti-fascists should attend the next policy forum and vote for No-Platform to be sent to referendum and ultimately the HUU policy books.

Shut our union’s doors to fascists!

Welcome to the new acedemic year!

Firstly, sorry about this rather belated post, no real excuses apart from waiting to find out exactly what'll be going on in the University this term.

Another reason for this post being so late was that we originally wanted to report on Union Council although have decided, for the time being at least, that participation would be useless and worst and boring at best.

I'd also like to thank all the students who signed up during the Societies Fair. We spoke to loads of people and it certainly seems that the drought of left-wing, activist students has finally subsided! It was good to see the Socialist Workers' Student Society and Young Socialists present, and we plan to have a joint open meeting with the latter in a couple of weeks: Watch this space!

I'm going to post each issue as separate pieces so people are able to comment on each individually without getting wires crossed. These are the main issues as we see them. (Yes, there are quite a lot of 'main' issues, but unfortunately history seems to have left HUU in the dark-ages politically) So, in no particular order: 

• ·         HUU Governance Review
  
• ·         No Platform Policy and anti-fascist work.
  
• ·         Campaign for free education
  
• ·         National Union of Students
  
• ·         Emergence of other Left Groups on campus.
  
• ·         Men's Officer
  

Once again, thanks to all who showed interest and signed up during Freshers’ week, and we WILL keep in contact. Other than that please remember comment is free even if you disagree with what we write/do. See you around campus!

Comradely, 
Hull-Left

International Workers' Day

Today on International Workers' Day I voted in the local elections, I wonderhow many other students will be doing the same. I hope many do and while in Hull Left we fully recognise that electoral politics is only a small part of consistent activism, we still cast our votes in the ballot and see definite merit of candidates standing on a platform advocating working class politics.

Unfortunately the choice we have is not great at the moment both in Hull and nationally. Nationally we have a Labour government attempting more and more to destroy the link they party shares with the working class and the Labour movement. The 10p tax scrap and the ensuing outrage is a long line in defeats for the working class within the party which as last Thursday showed the unions when organised are willing to challenge.

In Hull are Lib Dem council is not doing anything better. Scrapping free school meals, closing down care homes, giving crap wage increases to bin men, and maybe even selling out the fire fighters. The Lib Dems market themselves to the right as the fresh alternative to conservatism; they might only privatise ¾ of everything or only fuck the majority of the poorest people over. To the left they get out their “socially liberal” credentials and talk about Iraq, ID cards, 42 day detention. They are not the choice for the disaffected or apathetic worker or student; they have no interest in us, just looking for the next step on the career ladder.

Today I voted Labour in Newland as the only alternative to a right wing, anti working class agenda peddled by the other two main parties. My vote for Labour was a very critical one, the Labour council here before the lib dems have little to stand up for and the people of Hull are right to have little respect for them. They are though the only party with the trade union movement at its core. The Unions represent millions of people and through assertiveness those of us as members, (in Hull Left we see membership of a trade union as a step in protecting your rights at work and fighting for better deals for young workers) can have more influence under Labour then anyone else. The strikes of last Thursday sent out a message that public sector workers will not settle for a pay cut, and they will strike and we in Hull Left support all workers who take industrial action for a fairer deal.

So students that do vote today should critically back the Labour candidates and if we do see them in power or as our councillors we must hold them to account without fail, and get our voice and our movement heard!

Let's all murder some babies...

An occupational hazard of being a left-activist in Hull is that more often than not, very simple arguments you’d thought you’d won a long time ago rear their ugly Dickensian heads to take another pop. This Tuesday evening it was the turn of the ‘pro-lifers’ under the guise of the Christian Network to turn up the heat. The speaker - a PhD student from Oxford but who was not a woman - was from a very shady organisation known as the Christian Medical Federation, a group that presents bigoted religious views as medical fact. Seemingly above the ‘moral’ standards that they preach, this organisation has lied continuously about the effects of abortion (see www.ministryoftruth.me.uk/tag/christian-medical-foundation).

While the talk given was very academic and set out as a ‘conversation’, the conclusion was very moralistic... and there was no conversation (the bloke spoke for about 30mins, then we we’re allowed questions, then he spoke for roughly another 20mins). The speaker claimed that abortion was entirely moral and not at all political - this was a major problem - It is entirely political. The reasons women terminate pregnancies are not because they are "immoral beings", but because of emotional and socio-economic circumstances, but like most pro-life activists this was dismissed as irrelevant. Perhaps if working-class women had more faith they would forgo any choice over their own bodies?

Hull-left activist Steve Wood made the point to the speaker that if his dream of criminalising abortions was to come true, then the rich would still be able to afford decent black-market abortions on the sly whilst working-class women would be forced back to the alleys, but he wasn’t budging. At the end quotes from the good-book were given as a salute to the Christian majority in the room, and for those of us who were wondering when the attempt of conversion was coming, an invitation to attend future prayer meetings and the like.

So what should we learn from this experience? Well, the next time I take my free water outside Asylum on a Wednesday night, I’ll remember the motives of the people handing them out. Far from benevolent youngsters organising BBQ’s and football matches, these are people with a very clearly defined position on our rights as students, or more specifically, as women’s rights as women: Abortions should be illegal, and if you have an abortion, you are immoral.

We were shocked at the lack of Union representation at the event – especially as access to abortion is a student welfare issue. Indeed the only opposition came from Hull-Left activists and members of the women’s committee (notably minus the women’s officer elect).

No need to spell out where Hull-left stand on this:

Unconditionally for a women’s right to choose ; Unconditionally against religious bigotry on our campus!

For more information check-out...

http://www.socialistfeminist.org.uk/

Open Policy Forum

I thought I would start off this blog by talking about my experience of The Open Policy Forum.

Open Policy Forum is a new thing this year that aims to let students decide on policy within HUU and replaces the previous system of motions being put to Union Council and just being voted on by its 32 strong membership. Many of you may have heard of the referendums that come out of the decisions at the forum. Referendum questions are submitted at the forum, speeches are made for and against and then we all get two stickers to put by which referendums we like the most. The three with the highest vote go to referendum. So far OPF has had a peek turnout of maybe 50 perhaps more. So 50 people get together there could be anywhere between about 4 or up to 20 ideas (I think one week there were around 16) submitted and up for discussion.

Depending on how many people are interested in the issue it can go to several rounds of speeches, this has happened on such diverse issues as bus trips to Hull for Scarborough Students, the Mens Officer and the Russian Revolution. So this year there have been a number of referendums that have gone forward and then every student had the chance to vote online. You may have seen the rather limited advertising around the union for each referendum or perhaps you are like me someone who reads hullstudent emails every once in a while, and may have seen it through that. Or there is the rather high chance you have never heard of them.

Some of these referendums have passed some have not, I am hoping at the last council meeting this Tuesday, we shall be informed of what policy has changed/remained the same as a result of the referendums.

The referendum idea, engaging students etc is positive, however the format of the OPF and then the subsequent apparent down playing of the referendums certainly is not. As I have said very few students come to the OPF and when particular groups or societies have put something forward they come purely to vote for that one proposal, get it on the ballot and then they disappear. To get students involved these referendums as is done in other Universities should be discussed in a big general meeting. This meeting should be well advertised with a clear agenda, and then the Union Executive Committee, Councillors etc would have every opportunity to discuss it and promote it to people. You may have been at the AGM last year if so you know how woeful the attendance was and how we could not hold any kind of vote, but did get to… watch a power point!

Unfortunately the results of the last referendum do not appear to have the amount of students voting on it listed on hullstudent. I shall be a pessimist and say this is partly because very few people did. So a small number of students have say passed something on:

The Union believes Turnitin is an insult to both students and lecturers and would like to lobby the University to remove it.

Personally I am in favour of getting rid of Turnitin so this result is good, students and lecturers should unite to get rid of this insulting and illegitimate system, but it is a hollow victory when it is proposed from those above and will then be instigated again by those above.

The results of the referendum then go to the Trustees of which two sabbatical officer sit. They then have the final decision over whether these things go through. Now if they agree fine we can get on with the policy, rallying students to it and hopefully getting a victory. However if say a policy was proposed and passed such as:

HUU believes we should abolish the Trustees

I am doubtful that they will vote for this and get rid of their own body. I use the example to show that if we are to have democracy, which is democracy from below decided by the students, we are heavily constrained by the bureaucracy and structures within HUU. So while they may clearly oppose that, who is to say what else they may oppose, on grounds of cost or the action it would undertake. If our two sabbs are also against the policy there influence may also stop a good policy that had huge majority support going through.

There are several policies, that have gone through and we have heard nothing about them since. We as the student body need to assert ourselves firmly within HUU. We are the ones who can bring about change and while these structures are crap and we continue to fight for change, we want more of us involved and more of us asking, “Why is this is all crap?” If we keep the Union, Sabbs, Council (which includes me and one other member of Hull Left) constantly having to be held to account for why we only get around 100 votes in a referendum, why a lot of students did not see there was an election for council or NUS Conference etc. What were Hull’s motions for NUS Conference, who got a say in their construction? Did they pass?

If we can do this then we can make our union accessible, and work with students, not let a minority of people decide everything with little opportunity for you to even ask the simple question of:

Why did we not have a say?

institutions and discrimination

First of all I'd like to make this completely explicit; I am only representing my views, and not representing the views of others or any group.

It is widely perceived that Universities are one of the most liberal minded institutions around; that academics because of the size of their book shelf are not prejudiced or ignorant of the continuing strife of those who seek liberation from oppression within society. Unfortunately this is not the case on our campus. Over the year as part of my role as the Disabled Students Officer for the Students Union I have encountered, not isolated cases of discrimination, but wide scale cases of disablism. From the Business school, to Philosophy, and the Politics department, there have been instances where academics have upset, bullied and degraded disabled students. But it doesn't stop there; even in halls of residence disabled students aren't safe from disablist remarks and actions. One student had been ridiculed for "not being disabled" because her peers could not see her disability and when she complained to her wardens, they were in favour of moving her out of her residence as she was the problem, not those who were making disablist comments.

In terms of addressing the issues, the University have done little to rectify them. I want to make it clear when I am talking about the University, I am referring to academic departments, not disability services who do a fantastic job and don't receive the praise that they should do. Back to the point though, the University do very little to try to rectify the issue, they make excuses why individuals treat disabled students as second class students, and then they go on the "we work closely with disability services" line, when in fact they dismiss them as "PC hippies getting in the way". Disability services can't head the fight against the institutional disablism, it has to come from students.

"So what has this got to do with HUU?" I hear you all ask. Well it has everything to do with HUU; the union should be fighting this institutional disablism within the University; and the Union itself (I'll raise this point later). Furthermore the students union should be fighting any discrimination on all fronts. The Liberation campaign has been attacked this year from conservative forces within the Union and more surprisingly, from those who hold high positions within the union. We should champion the work of the Liberation campaigns so all students, not jut the few that have never been persecuted for who they are, are equal; and yes that does mean being confrontational when it has to be and yes that does mean getting rid of the men's officer. However we should not be misguided in what the Liberation campaigns should be about, they should NOT be about raising money for charities, they should be about raising awareness and changing attitudes of those on the ground, students, staff and academics.

More to follow soon...

The birth of something beautiful...

A couple of questions...

Do you want to leave uni with debts in excess of £15,000?

Do you think students should be given help with living and childcare throughout their course?

Do you think students should be treated fairly at work?

Should our unions be run on the sly by right-wing sabbs?

And finally, do you think it’s worth students actually FIGHTING for REAL student issues like these?

One of the main reasons for starting this blog was to break the right-wing status-quo that is student activism at Hull, to provide a base and network for left-wing student activists and to hopefully to get some active. So, why are we here? We believe in grass-roots activism – ordinary students standing up together and being counted. We do not believe in a few select individuals talking to government ministers behind our backs, especially when this government has shown nothing for contempt for students.

So, putting aside laughably useless lobbying, what do we think we can do that will actually work in our favour as students (not as political careerists). Well, on the continent fellow students have successfully fought for their rights through militant direct action like demonstrations and occupations of university buildings. In Denmark students have won universal grants and in Greece and France students have taken on their governments and won. Obviously this involves mass grass-roots action, and that means ordinary students.
This blog hopes to inform, but we also want you to join us. Student politics isn’t all about the council and the union, but also about getting involved in political activity free from the structures of the union. Various local and national events that we student activists get our hands dirty with will be posted here as and when they happen.

Yesterday some of us went down to the picket lines of the National Union of Teachers and the University and College Union (UCU). These workers were on strike over an appalling pay offer by the government, which - taking into account inflation – is essentially a pay-cut. The reasons we as students feel it necessary to show our solidarity is because workers face the same threats as us: cuts to our allowances and conditions. It should also be said that the lecturers union, the UCU, has a better position than our own Students Union on stuff like fees, calling for free education and a return to free living grants.

We will be updating this blog regularly with reports, news items, actions and other bits and bobs of relevance. If you’d like to comment - go ahead, you don’t even have to agree with us!

Suggestions and contributions to this blog are encouraged, as are more activists!

In solidarity.