Playground Politics as NUS National Council 14th February 2006

The NUS is a political body, but there are several types of politics at work within it. There are the ideological politics, those that strives to help students, represent them, develop and protect their lifestyles. Then there are the petty politics, more akin to discussing who can come to whose birthday party and far more in love with the ideas of processes and structure than responding to the student body. National Council contained both of these, but far and away the majority of it was the second type, a type that will only hinder the movement and seed disappointment and disunity among us.

The audience arrived for the performance from the NEC (with appropriate seating) only to find that the compere was ill. Joshi from Kings was elected as chair for the day – he’s a top bloke who I’ve known for a few years now so was very happy to have him guiding the proceedings.

After apologies from everyone apart from Flick Cox, the minutes were accepted, and we also accepted the byelaws that improve Council’s accessibility and caused so many problems last time (see my last report), with the additional change that the Chair can be overturned.

The first National Council began with re-arranging paperclips, this one began with re-running an NEC meeting and playing Campaign Top-Trumps, with most Councillors left confused, bored and frustrated. The NUS accounts and estimates were discussed, but this became a heated argument between Benson, who felt the international students campaign was unfairly under funded, and other NEC members. The co-op housing project was slammed and the rants escalated. Benson at one stage declared; “Why should I encourage international students to support the 2010 coalition?” which caused my mouth to drop in amazement. Ellie “Secret Weapon” Russell was immensely sensible, and she calmed things a bit by pointing out that there wasn’t a “campaign Hierarchy” and Kat Fletcher reminded NEC that they worked collectively and that budgets were set together at the start of the year. There was talk of zoning the estimates in line with the rest of the movement in future, which seems very sensible. I turned to Bubble and asked why on earth he wanted to be on the Block of 12 after events like this, where playground politics are all too evident and it seems we’re a National Union of Primary students not FE and HE ones.

Commission Sessions

I attended the Society and Citizenship commission group, but there wasn’t much to discuss, though we touched on international twinning.

We broke for lunch and a much needed pint.

In the afternoon Katie and I went to the Welfare commission session. We discussed the Co-operative Housing project, which I think looks wicked, the support of Loughborough students who are being discriminated against by being told they couldn’t live in certain areas as well as Sexual Health and the BNP.

Katie, Clare and myself went with London and the SW group to discuss how we can support the priority campaigns in our region. This aspect of being a National Councillor is often forgotten, not least by national councillors. Essentially I think the areas need to be doing this as much as the councillors (I know I’m on area Exec so this doesn’t excuse me) but it’s all about making things relevant. Education Funding and SE weighting, the Participate campaign and the 2012 Olympics – there are so many ways to make priory campaigns mean something in real terms. If I’m still active in the region next year (which I’m sure I will be) this is something I want to work on.

After some coffee and jam rings we moved on to the motions, where the two types of politics I described at the start both reared their heads, and I saw some members of the NEC who I’d previously had a huge amount of respect for in a new light.

Motion 1 – Supporting students in challenging unfair college practices

I thought this was a pointless motion – it’s my understanding that what Students’ Unions (and the NUS) generally do is support students in challenging unfair practices from their institutions… Parts were taken to remove a big chunk on ID cards, which I supported as I felt the debate was too big to have anywhere other than Conference. I voted FOR with the parts and the motion PASSED.

Motion 2 – National Directory

This was a motion to change the National Directory back so it’s put into regions. I voted FOR, but I think this motion was far removed from the type of political debate and direction we should be having at National Council. It PASSED, but I wasn’t fussed either way.

Motion 3 – Timing of National Conference

Making sure that National Conference is held outside of term-time whenever possible. Considering the huge numbers of FEs this is quite a task, and Kat gave us some background on the bookings (Winter Gardens are booked 5 years in advance). I voted FOR and it PASSED.

Emergency Motions

Motion 1 – The BNP in Blackpool
A motion to oppose the BNP in Blackpool and pressure the Winter Gardens into not accepting a booking from a fascist group in future. Kat Fletcher suggested we contacted other organisations who use the venue and get them to do the same. It PASSED.

Motion 2 – Transparency of NUS accounts.

This was our motion, which I wrote and Katie spoke very well for. It basically asked that NUS management accounts be presented as Regional Conferences and National Council. Parts were removed to take out a line where I said “That National Council and Regional Conferences are excellent ways at directing the national movement and its campaigns”. I spoke against this, because these meetings are designed to do just that, even if they aren’t always successful. The parts were removed. I’ve always said that National Council should be more than just an opportunity to profile for the next year’s Block of 12, but looking around the room and in light of these parts it’s clear that the majority of National Councillors do just use it for that. This was playground Politics to be ashamed of, and several Block candidates fell down my voting list. The motion PASSED with the parts.

Report Motions

These motions basically hold NEC to account or praise them.

Joe Rukin had three motions of censure against him
1 – from the SW concerning how budgets were put together. Joe explained his starting position very well, and considering how clear the accounts were I voted AGAINST the censure. It FELL.
2 – from the SE with me speaking for. Kingston received an e-mail from Joe at a time where they may potentially disaffiliate where he described them to a member of staff from NUSSL as ‘awkward and hostile’. Kat Fletcher agreed with the motion and it PASSED. I think this shows that occasionally National Council can do what it needs to, and hopefully persuades Kingston that when NUS do things they shouldn’t they get slapped on the wrist.
3 – from the NE about comments made to the National Press. These were taken out of context and had been dealt with. I voted AGAINST and it FELL.

Commendation of Sian Davies and Veronica King.

The playground bell ran and the NEC showed themselves in an appalling light, and I lost a lot of faith and respect in some officers because of the way they acted. Policy exists saying that NEC shouldn’t have a vote at National Council, but in the constitution they still can. The principal that they should be unable to hold each other to account through censures or vote against their own censures is clear. Sian and Veronica were praised for acting in the spirit of this and abstaining from all votes last council. Several other members of the NEC behaved appallingly, and it felt to me like Sian and Veronica were being condemned for their actions. At one stage there was table banging and raucous applause from the NEC as the Councillors looked on in disgust. I hope the NEC were pleased with themselves as it became clear at that point the gulf between them and those holding them to account and being the ‘foot troops’ among the region expanded. The motion FELL, mainly due to NEC voting against it and Block of 12 candidates avoiding any conflict. I voted FOR as did Katie and Bubble.

It’s clear that I can’t do a proper commendation for these people, but well done to Gemma Tumelty, Sian Davies, Ellie Russell, Veronica King and Kat Fletcher for Dan Chilcott for abstaining from all votes and being led by current students not forthcoming elections.

When I first ran for National Councillor I said in my speech that the NUS’ upper echelons dissuaded student officers from getting involved. This is still my view. I wish I could say that I am proud of all the National Executive, but this number is getting smaller the more events I go to, and that is simply wrong.

Nickers
n.a.smith@reading.ac.uk