In which Nickers talks about Campaigning, Collectivism, and wishes everyone a Happy New Year.

A slightly unusual blog this time, but rest assured that a ‘what Nickers did in his holidays’ style account will appear soon.

My main role, and the role of all student Officers is to be a political voice and a political representative. For all that election manifestoes are full of promises to improve bars, put your favourite show on at lunchtime or improve the budget for student activities, these things are only signs of a candidate’s ability to listen and their judgements on current issues. The real focus is on representing student views to the University and local community and for allowing students to make changes to their lifestyle, their community and their world. I’ve been quoted before as saying that the job of the Executive is not to run the Union but to make sure it runs itself. Similarly the role of the Executive is not to be the only ones who campaign for an issue, but to ignite debate, inform the Student body of the issues and allow for voices to be heard. This leads to one thing – collectivism. I believe firmly in the ideals of collectivism and unity – and here’s why.

I’ve been involved with various campaigns over the years and a few phrases ring through as being utterly absurd. The first was from a woman who didn’t support a petition asking for phones to be returned to halls as “I don’t sign petitions on principle”. The principle was presumably that she didn’t want her voice to be heard. At a recent conference the discussion turned to City Academies and a speaker said “There’s no point in discussing this… we can’t change anything”. Both of these events seem to me to have one thing behind them – the lack of self-belief in the person concerned. I’m in a privileged job where each day my goal is to allow people to develop themselves and explore their potential. The most privileged aspect of this is knowing that each and every student I meet has an enormous amount to offer. Collectivism can be described as a loss of identity – I think it’s much more a celebration of individual identity, both of the self and those around you. That’s what makes a Union of Students so powerful when it campaigns. A 100 signatures on a petition is not one piece of paper with lots of marks, its 100 people describing their convictions, their beliefs and their purpose and the it’s also a sign that each of those people have a sense of self conviction, self belief and self purpose. A united voice is a strong voice, and a united campaigning voice is a dangerous and exciting prospect.

The other more recent event that has spurred this blog is a text from one of my friends that read “Merry Christmas and well done on the Civil Partnership stuff – that’s great”. I don’t want to suggest that my friend’s sentiment was misplaced or that I wasn’t ecstatic when same-sex couples were granted these rights – but the issue here is of who ‘owns’ the campaign. The fight for civil partnerships was not just a fight by the LGBT community but one fought by those who believe in equality. Collectivism is about adding your voice where it is not expected. Apartheid was not ended by black South Africans alone, and when the closure of the Sociology department was announced at Reading the call was from Sociology students to everyone for support, not just for signatures within the school itself. The Students’ Union is made up of a huge number of groups, but what it should never be made up of is a huge number of divisions. A problem for Sports clubs is a problem for all students; a department closure affects everyone and the failure to provide adequate accommodation in one Halls should be accompanied by a cry from all.

2006 will be a major year for all students. The introduction of variable fees, upheaval in the way we can organise ourselves in Students’ Unions, and the continual march of the Education sector towards a commercial state. On the eve of this year I know that I believe these issues can be met, can be overcome and can be used to make the future better for Students. But this can only be done together. 2006 will be a year of change, a year of campaigning and, I hope, a year of collectivism.

Happy New Year to you all,
Nickers x

In which Nickers describes the second SEANUS Executive of the year and his travel back from Canterbury.

SEANUS Meeting two was a shorter affair than the first – though I did have to travel to Canterbury for it. Once there I intentionally walked to University of Kent to meet up with Katie and Liz rather than go straight to Canterbury Christchurch College to where the meeting was.

The meeting was attended by most of the Executive as well as Stephen Brown and Ellie Russell from the NEC. It was nice to have them there, as they’re always very willing to help us out.

We had a quick update on the current Campaigns and Projects. The SE Weighting campaign postcards have been distributed and will be sent from individual Unions. NATFHE have agreed in principal to support the campaign and there’s support from a Lib Dem member of the Home Office in our research. With 2006 heralding variable fees it is really important we all keep pushing the campaign.

We reported back from National Council, Becky Hulme (NEC Observer) discussed NEC meetings and I reported back from LGBT conference.

For the unified RAGs day we’re going back to Unions and getting our RAGs groups to identify when they’re free and look at events that we can all run on our campuses or combine in one location.

Steve from UCCA chatted about the University imposing a no-smoking ban on their bar and the financial affect this had on them. Issues of autonomy from Institutions led to Steve writing up a charter between Unions and their parent organisations.

I suggested that we should try and be sharing some of our Governance review stuff among each other as many Unions are undergoing changes and it would be useful to see where everyone was. Bubble is collecting all this stuff together.

We had a chat about neighbourhood forums and how they work at various places. This ranged from being a moan-fest at Students from locals to some very sensible work together.

I’m going to be doing some work on Volunteer Accreditation schemes and possible looking at a regional award for volunteers. I was quite pleased to get this and Governance in to the same meeting which shows how truly sad I am.

We decided to support the WMANUS PGCE campaign and encourage Unions to ask their MPs to support EDM 1229 – so do it! There’s been stuff from Wes Streeting sent out and also details on the WMANUS website (www.wmanus.org).
And with that we headed off home – though the journey was filled with the relocation of NUS and the trials of Staff Parties. To finish, here are my two favourite comments of the day.

“and now… she is dead”
“Where do you live?” “Wye” “Because I want to know!” “Wye”

In which Nickers describes STADIA Conference with less detail than his other Blogs

I arrived at Liverpool having been at LGBT Conference for two days and stopping off overnight with my folks in Crewe, so started off at a slight disadvantage. The Coffee was of the usual NUS standards and shocked my system into the Student Activities Conference mood.

One of the nicest things about the event was being able to meet up with officers I’d met over the summer, particularly those from ‘Activities in Action’. This was very useful and allowed me to catch up with what lots of other people were doing in their Unions.

The pace of the conference was very good – lots of workshops and opportunities to chat which meant I learnt a lot. The workshops I attended were…

Refugee Issues – With RUSU’s STAR (Student Action for Refugees) group getting very enthusiastic and involved again I attended this workshop so I could support them.
PDP: Making it work for us – How Personal Development Plans can be used in Student Development and improving graduate employment prospects.
The powers that be – A very interesting talk from Graham Allcott, the director of Student Volunteering England who discussed policy changes in the sector.
Involving and Developing Students through Union Governance – After Volunteering, governance is my second favourite subject so I attended this. Was quite helpful – RUSU are way ahead on a lot of governance stuff talking to other Unions.
Rewarding Volunteers – a chance to have people praise the MASIV scheme and also to think about next term’s Volunteer’s party.

I must admit I was exhausted after 4 days of Conferences and so missed the last Workshop session on Tuesday… but the break did allow me to network at the social that evening and the 5th block didn’t have any workshops that jumped out at me.

As well as the workshops there were lots of network sessions, including a table network event where we all discussed a particular subject. I attended the one on community action with a view to setting up some projects for next term.

That was STADIA in a nutshell. I realise there isn't as much detail as normal but that's because a lot of the stuff will be used in the various meetings I have with staff rather than being democratic events in and of themselves. I'm always there for your questions though

Byee and happy break again!

Nickers x

In which Nickers closes the term with difficult decisions but optimism for the time ahead

With illness and conferences it’s been an odd few weeks – I’m working on the STADIA report at the moment and you’ll see that in a separate Blog. This covers the non-Conference work I’ve been doing, and I should really start with Student Council.

Student Council was eventful – thanks and praise should go out to Emily Beardsmore, the newly instated Chair, for facing a challenging meeting with efficient and decisive guidance. The call to censure Dave Lewis fell dramatically (10 votes against censure, 4 votes for), and I’m very glad it did – Dave works immensely hard and he is always centred on the members, not any personal sense of grandeur or importance. It’s just a shame this failed attempt didn’t get reported anywhere because it’s a real boost to the President’s popularity and the backing of Council signifies the backing of everyday students. All three of the proposed motions I spoke for passed without any opposition, so particularly the Governance work that the Union’s been doing can go ahead now. This is very exciting indeed; I’m hoping to share some of our practice with other Union’s in the area through SEANUS (next meeting 15th December) and get tips for the constitution and regulation review.

After a few days away (2 days sick, at LGBT Conference over the weekend for SEANUS and then at STADIA for a further three days) I returned to sort out my hundreds of e-mails. I attended the Nightline social which was really nice and have been planning out the events for next term. Highlights include, of course, the Volunteers party, a week of supporting student activities, even more RU Ready Training and RAGS week during week 6 (this looks like it’ll be fantastic – I don’t want to spoil any surprises but the committee are already working very hard on it).

One of the nicest things that has happened in the last few weeks was the chance for Dave and I to chat to a couple of guys in Mondial over our lunch break about the Union, 3Sixty and our plans. We really don’t get enough time to do this, and I certainly left it feeling glad to have had the opportunity to chat to some ‘grassroots’ students instead of answering e-mails. More of this next term I hope…

There have been very serious issues with the RUSU Forums and difficult decisions have been made. This is a very unpleasant business and I hope that students are understanding about the situation.

The potential closure of Sociology has led to a swift response from the Executive – I’ve been getting people to sign our petition as the first stage of the opposition campaign. If you haven’t signed it I really hope that you do so – it’s one of several available at Reception.

My STADIA report will appear shortly, but for now I’ll leave you with best wishes for a happy and restful break and an expectation of great things for next term.

Nickers x

In which Nickers talks about his excursion to National Council as one of the South East Reps

National Council Report – Monday 14th November 2005, Coventry

I wasn’t really sure what to expect at the first National Council but what occurred didn’t surprise me. It was a mix of useful motions and sensible debate piled next to bureaucracy for the sake of appearing clever and profiling veiled as representation. I deliberately took a bit of a step back on the day so I could gauge how it all worked and I hope my report doesn’t seem overly negative or positive – my feelings are very much mixed about the event.

As a heads up to exactly what National Council is…

“National Council directs the work of the NEC and can hold them to account for their activities and responsibilities during the year between Annual Conferences. The Council meets at least three times a year and can ratify decisions taken at liberation and other conferences, as well as making recommendations to Conference regarding the accounts and estimates. Any ratifications that are not passed by National Council revert to the next Annual Conference. National Council may also pass policy, in exceptional circumstances.”

…As taken from the NUS Website. One thing I was surprised at was the absence without apologies of many NEC – the blasé attitude of some towards the event suggested that the ability of Council to hold officers accountable wasn’t quite as forceful as officer online leads you to believe.

Here’s a bit of a rundown of the day…

The first point of business was the Election of the Chair, and this went to Ben Ward who was also chair last year. One of Ben’s things seems to be added structure to Council and the agenda moved to some By-laws that he’d worked upon. These all seemed very sensible to myself – they reminded me in many ways of our own Standing Orders at RUSU, but what occurred was that they were applied for this Council only and then revoked so people could have a proper look. This was slightly frustrating – the issue was one of accessibility. The by-laws stated that all paperwork should be available in good time for Council, but the by-laws themselves weren’t and this became a debate. How far you can criticise something that aims to improve access for being inaccessible I’m not sure… I hope that the by-laws do get passed without too much fuss for good next time. Also at this time was a discussion of whether NEC can vote at Council. The first democratic NUS Event I went to was last year’s Extra-Ordinary conference in Wolverhampton and I can remember the NEC right to vote being removed then (subject to ratification at Conference). This was done but not written in the constitution so NEC did vote throughout the meeting. To me this seems like working in the framework of the law but not its spirit – though fair play to Sian and Veronica who chose to abstain from all votes as Council requested the NEC to do. The agenda was changed and the affiliation of new areas was bought forwards so that Bubble could have his vote as Areas Rep… the vote was unanimous and Katie and I cheered.

So the first 40 minutes or so felt like just an exercise in bureaucracy and showing off who knew the constitution best. But it did get better…

Commission Sessions

So that questions could be asked about the Report and Plan, Council split into groups for the next section. Firstly there were 3 discussions: Welfare, Strong Students’ Unions and Liberation Campaigns. Katie attended Welfare, Claire went to Strong Students Unions and I attended the last one and everyone else in the room was a liberation officer or on the committee… I have a huge interest in Liberation work, but it’s not my background so I didn’t feel I could engage fully at this session. However, Sian and Jo Salmon updated us on what was going on in the priority campaigns. The Women’s campaigns are aimed at fighting the gender pay gap and supporting women in the workplace and a pro-choice campaign. Sian described her work for Student’s With Disabilities (SWD) including the Sexual revoLOOtion stuff about providing disabled toilets with condoms and sanitary products, involvement in student activities for disabled students and ‘Don’t Diss my ability’ which campaigns against negative attitudes about SWD. There wasn’t really much controversy about these campaigns as work seems to be going well on both. We had some NUS coffee and reconvened in two groups ‘Education’ and ‘Society and Citizenship’. I went to Education with Katie. I was somewhat annoyed that the whole conversation seemed to be about why Julian Nicholds (VP Education) was referring FE questions to Ellie Russell (VP FE) when she wasn’t there. If the best response is to be given surely the best person needs to give it?

After Lunch the National Treasurer Joe Rukin gave a statement from Will Page who officially offered his resignation. I don’t think this came as much of a surprise, but I must say that I don’t think some of his comments about the NEC weren’t really fair, I’m not sure anyone should have to declare which political party they vote for if it doesn’t affect the way they vote, debate or represent students.

We had updates on the Welfare, Education and FE campaigns which was interesting, but not much new from the Regional Conferences. All the information is on t’Website so I’m not going to replicate it all here.

We moved into the Motions session next, which, as expected was the most exciting bit of the day by far. The motions can be summarised as…

1) Access to National Council – for Council to become more accessible. I voted FOR and it PASSED.
2) Stagecoach and NUS Extra – this caused the most debate and points of information. Stagecoach a well known funder of the homophobic pro-Section 28 campaign has a discount on NUS Extra currently. The motion was to remove them. I voted FOR (with some waving of my hand) and it PASSED.
3) Support for Terence Higgins Trust (THT) – the motion was for NUS to support the removal of luxury item status from condoms as championed by the THT. This would reduce or remove the VAT on them. I voted FOR and it PASSED.
4) 7/7 terrorism attacks – this was a motion of thanks to the NEC for their work on the post 7th July response. I voted FOR and it PASSED
5) No to terrorism and Racism – in a similar vein, supporting the NEC’s response and re-iterating the dedication of the movement to work against racism and terrorism. I voted FOR and it PASSED and quite right too.
6) OFFA – campaigning to support the Office of Fair Access and increase its powers. I voted FOR the motion PASSED.
7) NUS Successes – I liked this one, a mandate for the NEC to talk about when they do cool and groovy things. I don’t think we do concentrate on the good works enough – they do happen but we aren’t really told (unless you’re facing disaffiliation). The motion PASSED and I voted FOR.
8) Blogs – A moan at officers who don’t update their blogs and a crackdown on it. To be honest, I have an issue with the idea that a blog every two weeks that says nothing is better than one every month that is done properly. Sian noted that people moan about the number of blogs, but not their contents, and it does seem that it’s more accountancy than accountability. I don’t think this was really considered in the motion, but some NEC (Sian, Gemma, Dan Randall and Wes particularly) do manage to blog regularly and fully. I ABSTAINED and the motion PASSED.

At the last section, the Reports Motions there was a motion to censure Gemma Tumelty for organising Regional Conferences during Ramadam. Jamal spoke against the motion and it was withdrawn.

And that was that! I then went to Warwick University to meet with my friends Jenny and Maria and had a very nice evening. If anyone’s got any questions then give me a shout.

Nickers