News from the South East Area of NUS

SEANUS Exec Meeting

2006-08-01T01:24:00.000-07:00

21st July 2006 Reading University Students’ Union

Present: Nick Smith, Reading (Chair); Greg Scott, Surrey; Emily Beardsmore, Reading; Katie Curtis, Winchester; Mike Haw and Mark Leach, Kent; Stephen Brown, NEC.

Apologies: Becci Heard, Canterbury Christchurch University

1. The group made a list of their main aims for the year. These included the campaigns for South East Weighting and Housing, a high level of communication and involvement, further support for FE Colleges, a Eurovision Party, a unified RAGs event and strong united campaigns for liberation groups.

2. Meeting dates for Winter Council and Further SEANUS Executive meetings were set.

They are as following:

Tuesday 29th August – SEANUS Executive meeting, Kent University

Saturday 14th October – SEANUS Exec/ Nickers’ Birthday, Reading

Friday 8th December – SEANUS Winter Council – Venue TBA

19th January –SEANUS Exec meeting, Winchester

3. Stephen Brown introduced the early plans for the National Demonstration, outlining its aims and describing how the NEC planned to build support by attending Freshers’ Fairs and other events. The group discussed ideas of transport and supporting FE colleges in attending and suggested that NUS produced some kind of ‘Demo Toolkit’. The group would discuss the demo further once more information from the NEC was available. Katie Curtis would contact Steve Coole (NUS staff) about supporting FEs in the region.

4. The discussion moved to the SE Weighting campaign’s presence at the demo. All promotion and support would be in the Area’s Sky Blue for unity. Mark would co-ordinate a Banner for the area and Mike would produce literature about SE Weighting for each Union in the area, with input from the Area’s Liberation Officers and Greg Scott for specific information on LGBT, Women, Mature, International, Black and Disabled Students. Nick would contact Unions about the plans and provide logos to be used on T-shirts etc. if individual Unions wished.

5. To aid communication within the Area A Jiscmail discussion list would be set up, with e-mails being taken at the demonstration so that student groups and officers could discuss their events and campaigns. Nick would take responsibility for this.

6. The SEANUS Website needs development to help support the Area’s campaigns. Mark will have discussions with website companies that provide for Students Unions about an Area site.

7. Following on from the mandate to support Unions in the area facing problems with their accommodation and backing the NUS’ campaigns on housing, there was a discussion about the types of landlord accreditation schemes in the region and elsewhere such as Manchester and Liverpool. Nick will contact Unions to ask about their schemes and offer suggestions at the next SEANUS Executive about how to carry the campaign forward, as well as writing a statement of beliefs on Housing.

8. It was noted that the Executive needs to do some work on the NUSSL beer deal and raising awareness particularly of Coors in time for National Conference. It was agreed the group could postpone this work until a later date in view of the demo and other campaigns.

9. In other business Nick reminded others that affiliation fees were due and invoices would be generated soon. The Exec agreed to look at the Which? Campaign on banking charges in conjunction with the Money Doctors scheme that has recently been set up in many Unions. Nick would take a lead on this.

Next Meeting – Tuesday 29th August in Kent University Students’ Union

Election Results

2006-06-21T14:12:00.000-07:00

SEANUS Convenor:

Nick Smith (Nickers)
VP Welfare, Reading University

Non-Portfolio Officers:

Mike (Gravy)
President, Kent University

Mark Leach
VP Education, Kent University

Gregg Scott
President, Surrey University

Becci Heard,
VP Education and Welfare, Canterbury Christ Church

LGB Officer:

Katie Curtis,
President, Winchester

Women’s Officer:

Emily Beardsmore
VP Development, Reading University

By-elections will be hold for unfilled positions in due course.

SEANUS Summer Council 2006

2006-06-11T14:11:00.000-07:00

“The best laid plans of mice and men gang aft a-gley”

You can prepare for most things at a democratic event. You can plan for opposition to your motions, for heckling in your speeches and for factional voting. You cannot prepare for the M25, and with many council delegates trapped for 5 hours on Maggie’s favourite car park the start was put back even more than if you factored in NMT (NUS Mean Time).

Scott Farmer (NUS staff member) gave an update on the way regions would work in the future and also how this interacted with Areas. I think it’s positive to see some of these big changes, and the focus shifting on organising Unions and bringing them together rather than the NUS being more of a stationers for campaign materials and a help line for legal issues, though obviously there is still a need for that direct support.

We had an idea-storm of the way delegates wanted SEANUS to move ahead next year. Clear planning including a SEANUS Calendar, more networking and sharing of best practice and working closer with local institutions were all high up on the wants. Updating the website and working together on commercial events (not least Summer Balls which are often problematic for many Unions) were also in there. I can’t remember them all but they will hopefully appear in full on here soon.

After a quick break we went to the motions. The Area re-affirmed its dedication to a South East Weighting campaign and a campaign on appropriate housing. The need for Weighting is increasingly obvious; I certainly know that some costs in Reading are as high or higher (in the case of transport for example) than London and students are deciding not to come to SE institutions where their loans, EMAs or other funding simply do not stretch far enough. With the motion, the Area is dedicated to hold termly events, have a presence for weighting at the National Demonstration and fight for a weighting on EMAs for FE Students.

The housing motion mandates the area Executive to support Unions facing housing problems, to actively support NUS’ campaigns on housing and co-operative housing projects and also to oppose the privatisation of halls accommodation.

Another motion was to mandate the Area Executive to inform CMS on the background to Coors in preparation for their potential renewal through NUSSL for the multi-million pound beer deal. The Coca-Cola debate at this years Conference was fierce, and many delegates felt confused and uninformed. Hopefully, by having unbiased information available by February 2007 this can be avoided to some extent.

There was a reform motion put in to help the way the Area runs. Now the Area can have between 1 and 3 Councils a year, will (once ratified) have a Mature Students position, and rename the liberation groups “LGBT” rather than “LGB” and “Disabled Students” instead of “Students with Disabilities”.

Election results to be blogged later.

Nickers xx

Motions to SEANUS Council Passed and including Amendments

2006-06-11T14:05:00.000-07:00

Pastoral Care before Financial Profit – Student Housing

This Area Notes
1. Students are often forced into poor housing whilst studying.
2. Halls of Residence are often chosen because they are associated with a
particular culture of pastoral care and social interaction.
3. Institutions are increasingly using outside firms to provide
accommodation.
4. NUS is looking into co-operative housing schemes.
5. There have been several cases of discrimination towards students in
relation to accommodation.

This Area believes
1. Students deserve safe, hygienic and secure accommodation within which
to study and live.
2. Private Halls are, by their nature, more interested in students as
customers than as students and positive contributors to an institution’s
community.
3. That the co-operative housing project researched by the NUS is a positive
step forwards for the movement and provision for students.

This Area resolves
1. To support the NUS’ plans for Co-operative Housing.
2. To oppose the privatisation of Halls of Residence in the Area.
3. To mandate the Area Executive to support CMs facing difficulties with
their accommodation.
4. To actively support the NUS’ campaigns on housing.

---

Motion for South East Weighting campaign

This Area Notes
1. Outside London, that the average price of campus accommodation is
higher in the South East Region than anywhere else.
2. That a student in the North East pays on average £30 less each week on
campus accommodation.
3. That because London students get a London weighting they pay less as a
percentage on their loan on accommodation than South East students.
4. That all evidence therefore suggests that the cost of living in the South
East is significantly more expensive than in other regions, and does not
have the same benefits as London in terms of extra loans.
5. One in three students say that the cost of living affects their choice of
University (Gumtree).
6. That students from FE are being hampered in their choices for Higher
Education because of regional disparities.
7. Students are increasingly taking on part-time work to fund their time at
University.

This Area believes
1. That constructive campaigning using a range of medium and tactics is the
best approach to gaining SE Weighting.
2. That the SE Weighting Campaign should have a presence at the National
Demonstration in October.
3. That groups represented by liberation campaigns, international students
and Part-time students have specific requirements and that often any
financial inequality affects them the greatest.
4. That student debt has severe consequences on health, the ability to take
part in student life.
5. That the cost of living in the South East also has an affect on the
recruitment and retention of lecturers and other institution staff.

This Union resolves
1. To make South East Weighting a main priority campaign for 2006/7.
2. To mandate the SEANUS Executive to develop a range of events, no less
than one per term, to campaign for a SE Weighting and to publicise them
by the end of September 2006.
3. To ensure that all liberation groups are considered in these campaigning
strategies.
4. To ensure that the SE Weighting campaign has a presence at the National
Demonstration in October.
5. To support all NUS campaigns on student hardship.
6. To ask the University and Colleges Union for their support in this
campaign and to work alongside them in securing South East Weighting.
7. To campaign for South East Weighting on EMA’s.

---

Coors information Motion

This Area Notes
1. That Unions and the student movement as a whole have a responsibility
in the areas of ethical, environmental and social good practice.
2. That such areas are often complicated and information can be
inaccessible.
3. That NUS Services Limited (NUSSL) has a strong influence on the products
that many Area Union’s stock.
4. That NUSSL often has decisions informed by their Ethical board.
5. That there has been much debate and controversy over ‘Coors’ as a
supplier for NUS, especially in the area of Trade Unionism and their
alleged funding of extreme Christian groups.
6. That the NUSSL “beer deal” is up for tender this year and the license with
Coors may be renewed.

This area resolves
1. To mandate the SEANUS Executive to work alongside NUSSL, it’s Ethical
and Environmental board and the Ethical and Environmental Committee of
NUS to produce information about Coors for its members.
2. For this information to be distributed to member Unions electronically at least one month before National Conference.

---

Reform Motion

This Area Notes:

The Constitution is slightly out of date
The need for Mature Students Representation
The financial constraints of CM’s
The recent change in name of the LGBT and Disabled Students Campaign

This Area Believes:

That Mature Students make up a large part of the HE and FE sector and have to have proper representation in the Area
It is not financially sensible for the area to meet as a whole more than twice a term
The more collaboration between our National Liberation groups and SEANUS, the better for students in the Area

This Area Resolves:

To create the position of Mature Students Officer on the Area Executive
To amend the Constitution so that Area Council happens a maximum of once a term, and not less than once a year
To change the name of the SWD Campaign to ‘Disabled Students Campaign’
To add T to the LGB Campaign
For the Area Convenor to carry out all the Constitutional amendments

Nickers non report from National Council - trains, burgers and Big Brother.

2006-06-01T06:03:00.000-07:00

My non-report from National Council goes something like this:

Travelled to Loughborough.
Meeting was inquorate after an hour.
Meeting was suspended as per the Standing Orders.
Had a very tasty burger and chips.
Came home and had a nice chat on the train with Dave Charlesworth (NEC Elect), Alex Kemp (Disabled Students Officer Elect) and Andy Mitchell from London Met.
Upset Derfel Owen by telling him that George had left Big Brother.
George then DID leave Big Brother.

And that's about it. We had a discussion about AUT, everything about which has since either changed or been sent out in "The Brief".

Any questions (about, I presume, the rail links from Reading to Leicestershire or the price of LUSU's burgers (£2.50 + 80p for bacon and cheese) then let me know.

Nickers xx

Motion for Reform from the SE to National Council

2006-05-23T11:36:00.000-07:00

As promised,
Nickers

Motion: 2
Heading: Reform of National Council and Regional Conferences
Submitted by: Nick Smith SE Rep
Seconded by: Richard ‘Bubble’ Budden Areas Rep

Council believes:

That clear lines of communication are vital between all sections of an organisation to ensure there is true representation and engagement.
That effective campaigning work requires a sense of collectivism and ownership by all involved.
That the NEC should be held accountable to its membership.
That, second to Annual Conference, National Council and Regional Conferences are designed to do these tasks.

Council further believes:

That none of these tasks are satisfactorily fulfilled by National Council or Regional Conferences.
That the year of change group has provided information on some areas of reform within the NUS, but has had a much wider remit than just democratic reform.

Council resolves:

To mandate the NEC with responsibility for “Strong and Active Unions” to review the function of Regional Conference and National Council.
To research both with Sabbatical Officers ending positions in Summer 2006 and those at the Autumn Regional Conferences 2006 as to what they want the roles of Regional Conferences and National Council to be.
For National Councillors to assist in this research in their respective regions, especially that of out going officers.
To present ideas in the form of motions to Member Unions at least two weeks before the Motion deadline for National Conference 2007.

Nickers reports on a smaller SEANUS Executive meeting than usual

2006-05-08T02:27:00.000-07:00

Farnham is a strange place to get to from Reading, you have to walk between two stations to get there, and I still ended up waiting half an hour for a five-minute train journey. Though there was only a few of us at this SEANUS Executive meeting it was very useful as it gave some clear idea of how SEANUS Council would work and I got to hear my own voice, which many people tell me I enjoy.

We had campaign updates where progress on the Ethical guide was reported as well as Coole’s very comprehensive Student Charter. There was discussion about the plans for South East Weighting in its second year and we decided that at the National Demo we should make sure we had a presence that SE students could rally behind. It’ll be a priority for next year’s Executive to make this a reality.

There are lots of ways to get involved Nationally, but these can seem confusing to first time Sabbs. Considering we elect a SEANUS Executive and NEC observers before the start of July when most officers come into office, it’s important that we explain what the different roles and their purposes are. The plan therefore is to send a letter to every officer elect (or officer re-elect) to give a quick introduction to all the roles available to run for, a quick explanation of what SEANUS is and also our main campaign, SE weighting.

As we’ve not claimed Finances from Unions for 2005/6 and we’ve not spent as much as we thought, we’re offering a lesser affiliation cost for this academic year (£75 flat for HE, £10 flat for FE). In addition, there will be a reduced rate for Unions paying for 2005/6 and 2006/7 together PLUS an extra bonus £10 off for early payment. Who’d have thought collectivism and campaigning would be such incredible value?

As a National Councillor I’ve seen the shambles that is NUS’ second most important meeting after Conference, and want to put forward some ideas for change. I discussed this with those present (and subsequently with other Officers in the area) and I’ll be posting it on this blog shortly. Unfortunately the National Conference motion deadline is before Regional Conference, so I’m relying on people giving ‘remote’ input that way.

After Bubble went to a WMANUS Conference that he found less than palatable we sketched out plans for an informal and interactive Council for the summer, more information on which shall be winging your way soon.

That was about it – then we met the lovely Veronica King for a few drinks and dinner, put the world of student politics to right, discussed local elections, Fermat’s last theorem, our relative love lives or lack thereof and headed back.

Give me shout if you have any questions

Nickers xx (n.a.smith@reading.ac.uk)

Well Done Bubble!

2006-04-26T02:03:00.000-07:00

It's perhaps a bit late - but congratulations to Bubble on getting elected to the NEC as a Block of 12 member. We'll be making you work in it!

Nickers' Valentines Day - Playground Politics at National Council

2006-03-05T10:06:00.000-08:00

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.

Motions

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.

Nickersn.a.smith@reading.ac.uk

Katie's Report from National Council- Take 2

2006-02-23T02:15:00.000-08:00

National Council Report
14th February 2006
ULU

OPENING REMARKS
National councillors and members of the NEC assembled in ULU for the second national council of the year. Kat Fletcher welcomed everyone and wished us all a happy valentines or chip and pin day if we preferred. The question of whether the NEC should vote was queried again, as it is policy from conference but not constitutional, so the NEC was advised to use their discretion.

Ben Ward (National Council Chair) was unable to attend the meeting, so a new one Josh from London was elected for the meeting. Council approved minutes for the last meeting, and apologies for absence were given.

Daniel Randall (NEC), Suzie Wylie (NEC) Damien Kavanagh (NEC President USI) were approved.

However at this stage we were still a few NEC members short for quorarcy, Jess Kosmin, Kat Louis, Jo Salmon, Benson, Dan Chillcott, James J Walsh, Judith Niven, and Jamal arrived late. Flick Cox did not turn up at all for the whole day and did not send apologies, but she did turn up on question time on Thursday night!

ADOPTION OF BY-LAWS
These were approved with one amendment to enable council to overturn the chairs ruling.

NUS ACCOUNTS AND ESTIMATES
Council were presented with the accounts and Joe Rukin asked for questions

Why the change in headquarters cleaning costs (it has decreased)?

Because of a new open plan building, there is less cleaning therefore less expenditure, this does not mean that staff will be paid below minimum wage.

Bank charges, why are they estimated lower?

Not overdrawn, therefore no bank charges, doesn’t look like there will be.

New positions- additional regional officers- wanted for London region, would this be a possibility?

London unions expressed concern that for the amount of students at the varying institutions they were severely under-represented as a region, and asked for potential increase in staffing to go to London students.

Apart from another couple of queries from national councillors about the area budget and the suggestions of combining zones into the accounts, that was it. The NEC however used this time to justify, criticise and query the national treasurer and themselves.

Benson, decided to justify his expenditure, which has been widely rumoured.
The JET meetings, which he attends, have cost £2000; he wants a separate travel budget. He needs more money for international student campaigns. He resented the fact he had to go “cap in hand” to the NEC and “beg” for money even though he has been the only member to be given more money. He has been working in isolation, which has caused problems for other members of the NEC who want to collaborate.
He then announced that he sees no point in lobbying on issues that don’t affect him, and nus are not doing enough.

Kat Fletcher responded that it was a duty of the NEC to push collectivism as a key principal of the national union of students.

These conversations went round in circles for far longer than has been detailed here. Benson still feels unsupported, and I think wants national councillors to know this.

COMMISSION SESSIONS

EDUCATION Julian Nichols, James J Walsh, Gemma Tumelty, Ellie Russell.

Strike looming with the AUT, NUS are urging students to talk to universities and find out what is happening at their institutions.

Following a report in the London Student with a £6.5 billion gained from tuition fees next year, question on where the money will be going. It the responsibility of the SU’s to support the students and let them know who to direct anger at when strike action may occur.

Franchise students, institutions and the NUS need to work together to support these students at f.e colleges ensuring that they get proper representation.

Websites of interest

Quality takes time page on www.officeronline.co.uk
www.qaa.ac.uk

WELFARE COMMISSION Veronica King, Julian Nichols, Peter O’Leary

CO-OP housing project
Looks likely that Manchester University are giving NUS one of their halls to be developed. An accommodation strategy needs to be in place.
If other institutions are interested in doing a similar thing, a feasibility study needs to be taken, URBED are who NUS use.

Loughborough
NUS continuing to pursue the legal ramifications with the help of shelter and their our model motions available should students wish to pass policy

ARE YOU GETTING ENOUGH?
April is STI awareness month, and NUS is keen to lobby the government on the issues, something that has never been done before.

BNP
After the acquittal of Nick Griffin, the cartoons published and the reaction of the debate around free speech there is an increased need to take a stand.
The BNP have wristbands in red/white and blue, look out for them on your campuses!!!
BNP are setting up a trade union, which seems weird as is it is against their values.
Still need legal advice to unions abut supporting UAF, which we shall receive shortly.

PRIORITY CAMPAIGNS IN THE REGION

How can we communicate with NUS about what we are doing?
How can NUS communicate with us?

Looking at NUS priority campaigns participate/f.e/on course

Ideas: Reading SU- Pledge Day, ranged from students pledging to join a society, vote in the elections. All the pledges are displayed in the union and will be up until the volunteer party.
Balloon launches based on debt rises

Although we were supposed to be discussing how we could roll out the campaigns in our area, the south region in general had some problems. As national councillors we are supposed to encourage regional participation in campaigns, however we felt like we had little ownership on these campaigns. We need more support from NUS, the role of national councillors is confused at present. I personally feel that SEANUS is focussed on our needs as a region, and it becomes harder to roll out nationally.

THE MOTION SESSION

Supporting students in challenging unfair college practises.

There was a notification of parts from Mel Ward, who wanted to remove all of the further believes section, and resolves 3. A debate ensued and there were speakers for and against, arguing about how it wasn’t the place for council to decide, and the debate needed to have national conference a requested vote was called for so we each had to say our number and our vote, the NEC chose to vote or abstain. After 2 counts the parts were removed. I voted in favour of removing the parts.

Without the parts the motion was passed. Again I voted for.

National Directory
This motion was to regionalise the national directory. James J Walsh took parts, and wanted to remove all resolves. It was quashed and the motion was passed. I voted for, but it was a fairly ridiculous motion.

Timing of national Conference
This motion was submitted to plan the time of national conference when it was vacation time. Kat Fletcher presented a point of clarification saying that the Wintergardens were booked in 5-year blocks. This motion was passed and I voted for.

EMERGENCY MOTIONS

The BNP in Blackpool
The BNP is apparently looking into using the Wintergardens as a venue for its conferences; it resolved to put pressure on the Wintergardens regarding their stance, not accepting a booking from a fascist organisation. Kat Fletcher said more could be done, not only should we contact the Wintergardens but also contact everyone else who uses the space for conferences warning them of the issues presented. It was passed, I voted for.
Transparency of NUS accounts to regional conference and national council
This was our motion, I proposed it and it was passed but not before Coventry SU took parts to remove council believes 3, that national council and regional conferences are excellent ways at directing the national movement and its campaigns. It was passed and the parts were removed. It wasn’t something that we weren’t thinking anyway to be fair!! Overall the motion was passed, yay the southeast.

MOTIONS OF CENSURE

Under directives of the southeast we presented a motion of censure for Joe Rukin after the Kingston affiliation contact. We were not the only ones. Joe had received 3 motions of censure and each one had to be discussed. A censure pretty much means a slap on the wrist.

Censure 1. On budgets that have not been set by the national treasurer, so no savings have been made. Motion of censure fell.
Censure 2. Kingston. Nickers delivered a speech, Joe apologised. Kat Fletcher advised council that this motion warranted a censure. Council voted in favour.
Censure 3.Comments made to the National Press following the resignation of a finance committee chair. The motion fell.
Commendation 4. Sian Davis and Veronica King were commended for not voting at the last National Council. This proved to be very contentious as the NEC are still not sure whether they should or should not vote. The motion fell. And the arguments continued in ULU bar.

As council was already running late, the meeting was adjourned after this. We went to ULU bar and the conversations/arguments continued there.

So there you go, that’s my second regional report from national council

Katie

Bubble's National Council Report

2006-02-21T13:39:00.000-08:00

National Council – The Second Instalment

So I rocked up to ULU not quite sure what to expect this time from National Council, and unsure if this time we would have heating, luckily it was a lot warmer than Coventry.

Before I start I will rant about the seating arrangements. Again the NEC were all around tables in a U shape with councillors facing them, much like an audience. It was not very ‘debate friendly’ and I felt like a member of an audience for large parts. This has to be sorted for next time as it really is a joke, and creates an ‘Us and them’ scenario.

It was an NUS event so we started about half an hour later than we should have, and just about scraped to quoracy. We elected a chair for the meeting as Ben Ward was unwell, with Joshi from Kings beating Tom Stubbs. Numerous NEC apologies were received, the only person who did not show up and we did not receive apologies from was Flick Cox.

So it was time to get started we went through the minutes and agreed we needed motion titles and decided ‘typos’ should just be emailed. So we accepted these then we got to the Byelaws, and after very little debate this time round we accepted these, with the addition that a decision of the chair can be overruled.

Now the fun, or should I say NEC meeting began. After this part of the debate many were asking me ‘Why do you want to be a part of this, are you sadistic?’ Yes it was that bad. After some genuine questions about the estimates and figures from councillors, including myself asking where was the Area Support fund, which has now miraculously increased to £4,000 without anyone telling us, we got bogged down in ‘My campaign is more important than yours’. This part was very hard work, with councillors listening to Benson moan about why he was unhappy, why his budget was wrong and how he had not received papers on time etc. Benson then pulled what can only be classed a classic line. Whilst trying to explain NUS needs to do more for International students he said something like: ‘Why should I bother sending my students to lobby on 2010 it doesn’t affect them at all’ and went on to say the priority campaign was therefore a waste of time. At this point my mouth dropped and I didn’t know what to do, I almost felt like bursting out in laughter at how ignorant a member of our National Executive could be but instead found myself and nearly every other councillor just shaking our heads in disbelief. Kat challenged Bensons views and spoke about collectivism, but by that point I think it is fair to say most councillors had already hit their head against the brick wall 3 or 4 times.

After the NEC meeting that we all observed we broke into commission zones to discuss the Report and Plan…again. For me this was a little frustrating as I had done the same only a few days before at Regional Conference. I attended the Society and Citizenship zone with only a few others as it ran alongside the Education zone. With only 2 pages in the Report and Plan update it was a very short session, where we found out around 12 Unions had signed up to the twinning project.

We broke for Lunch, and after this it was back to Commission zones, this time I went to Strong and Active Unions. I asked questions about the developments occurring within BUSA after their AGM and then we had quite a large discussion about NUS Extra and listened to people’s doubts and concerns.

We then split into groups to discuss how to develop the priority campaigns in our different regions. I chose to sit with the North, as Areas Rep, to listen to their issues and see if basically they could do with an area. They have some good stuff going on like balloon releases, and ideas like ‘Top Up’ on drinks in the Bar by not filling it to the top and asking people to pay more for the extra bit. It all sounds good, I still reckon an area would help them, but I would say that.

We accepted ANGUS, as the 3rd region now in NUS. East Anglia is now fully ratified and can really start to function. Look forward to working with you

So we moved to Motions, and this is where ‘business picked up’.

Motion 1 – Supporting students challenging unfair college practices
A motion about supporting our students across the board, I was all in favour, except that the Further Believes section was all about ID cards and was essentially a completely separate motion snuck in. Mel Ward called parts to remove Further Believes 3, and resolves 3, all mentioning ID cards. Jamal spoke against claiming Labour Students were being put up to this by Tony Blair. Wes responded by saying his V-chip was burning in the back of his head, he thought ID cards were not actually that bad, but that essentially they were an issue within themselves not thrown into a different motion. After some argument we went to a recorded vote, and the parts were removed by 20-18. I voted to remove them. The motion as a whole then passed through

Motion 2 – National Directory
A motion to regionalise the National Directory from Steven Mullen (NW). I personally still use last years directory which is already regionalised so was already in favour of it. Gemma Tumelty made a statement which turned into a speech against asking for the motion to be withdrawn as she already has a load of feedback to go through in the office on this so she did not want us to mandate anything. Yet another factor of the importance of National Council then?? I am happy to say we passed the motion through, I voted for, and so the National Directory should be regionalised for next year.

Motion 3 – Timing of National Conference
Basically about the fact NUS Conference this year is not during the holidays for some FE colleges so we should try and ensure as many delegates can attend as possible. Kat explained that we work on a 5 year deal with the Winter Gardens and essentially have to take what they give us but agreed we should ensure maximum participation. It passed, I voted for.

Emergency Motion 1 – The BNP in Blackpool
The BNP are looking at the Winter Gardens as a possible venue for an Annual Conference and we were all agreed we should put pressure on the Winter Gardens not to accept a booking from them. Kat then went onto say we should speak to the Labour party, the Conservatives and other major organisations that use the Winter Gardens to also do the same. It passed unanimously, again I voted for.

Emergency Motion 2 – Transparency of NUS Accounts to Regional Conferences and National Council
Stating that Management accounts should be made available to National Council and at all Regional Conferences, with explanations to ensure financial accountability. One set of parts was called to remove the statement ‘National Council and Regional Conferences are excellent ways at directing the national movement and its campaigns’. I abstained on this part as I think they should be, but unfortunately are not as it currently stands and so need to be re-jigged so they are a way of directing our National Union. People voted to remove the part and then the motion passed through.

Onto the Report motions, or more accurately the Censures, and Commendations.

Censure number 1 from the South West on Joe Rukin
This was a censure for the fact there were no budgets set and so savings had not been made. Joe responded by saying as Conference had rejected the estimates last year there was not a lot that could have been done but stressed how we had developed since last year. I voted against the censure as the estimates this year were very well put together and Joe had nothing to work from and no chance to properly set budgets. National Council voted against the censure.

Censure number 2 from the South East on Joe Rukin
For an email Joe sent about Kingston SU that was meant for a NUSSL staff member but was accidentally sent to an officer at Kingston where he described them as ‘hostile and awkward’. I voted for this censure, as it is unprofessional and has caused a lot of problems for us within the region. Kingston are due to go through with a referendum and we had done a lot of work with the officers to ensure that we had a level playing field, and the feeling about this was very good until the email was sent, and we were back to square one. The censure went through, so it was a slap on the wrist for Joe

Censure number 3 from the North East on Joe Rukin
Regarding what happened surrounding Sam Rozati and things published on the Education Guardian online and in some student press about the state of NUS’ finances. After Joe denied some of what he was accused of Kat stated that this had been dealt with in an NEC meeting and they wanted to draw a line under it and move on. I thought this was reasonable as Joe had already been given the ticking off, so voted against the censure and this also fell.

Commendation from the East Midlands for Veronica King and Sian Davies
Okay this is where it got a bit silly. A commendation was put through for Veronica and Sian because they did what National Council asked the NEC to do at the last meeting and abstain from voting whilst there was the big hoo-ha over whether the NEC could vote or not. Very straightforward you would have thought, Council saying thank you for listening to us and the membership. But some NEC members, mainly Peter Leary and James J Walsh took issue with this accusing them of being apolitical and demonstrating how they should have every right to vote at National Council and constitutionally they could so therefore Veronica and Sian should not be commended. To be honest I thought it was a bit of a joke and afterwards proceeded to have a further argument with James J and Peter about this. The commendation was voted down, mainly by NEC members as National Councillors sat like observers yet again and many abstained. I voted for the commendation and think it is a real shame something as simple as 2 individuals listening to what others asked them to do, and what Councillors saw as right can be turned into an NEC fight and people willing to do others down.

So Council ended on much the same note as it began, NEC dominated. I do question its effectiveness and at times felt I could be doing so much more in the office than listening to an NEC meeting. National council has to change or else it is just a waste of money. I think National Council should be another ‘think-tank’ for our campaigns and how we deliver them. Turning National issues into local issues, and vice versa with a chance of hearing the issues occurring within the different regions and working together looking at ways to solve some of these.

A side note from the day is that Dan Chilcott, Sian Davies, Veronica King, Ellie Russell, Kat Fletcher and Gemma Tumelty abstained on all votes. And well done to them for doing so, in my opinion.

Apologies for the length but when you have to report, you have to report it all lol

Richard ‘Bubble’ Budden
Areas Rep

Liz's report from 15/12 meeting

2005-12-19T01:16:00.000-08:00

Seanus Report from Liz
Meeting on 16th Dec 2005 Christchurch Student’s Union

In attendance

Bubble (Chair)
Nick
Katie Hawley
Liz Tomlinson
Flo
Becky Hume
Emma (FE Canterbury College)
Steve Coole (UCCA)
Stephen Brown (NEC)
Ellie Russel (FE VP NEC)

Apologies
Jess, chileya,

Campaigns/Project Updates

The South East is officially an area

Regional Rag day-has not gone ahead this time. Will discuss further under agenda item 6.

South East Weighting- Still our biggest campaign. Postcards have been filled out at each university and will be sent in a the next few days in batches from each university. The campaign will take time and we will keep the pressure on the government. Plans coming up next term include an MP question time at Canterbury College. Julian Brazier is behind our campaign. Next is also targeting local press and working towards pitching the campaign to VC’s, heads of colleges etc.

Rights at work bubble is contacting the local TUC

International language courses-Steve has been looking into this. Research still going on into what each university offers.

Ethical/environmental/recycling Nick is dealing with this creating policy. Recycling is to be discussed at next nec meeting

Thames Valley University-Has asked if they could affiliate to Seanus as they have campuses within the south east region. Seanus Exec agreed unanimously on this matter. Seanus were also informed that Greenwich wishes to affiliate with Seanus.

National Council Reports-three members of Seanus were all at national council and Seanus was able to get a view from all three members.

NEC Observer Report-Becky Hume gave the observer report.

LGBT Conference-Nickers went to LGBT Conference on behalf of Seanus.

RAG-A new date will be set for a Rag event by the 10th January. It will be for South East Specific Charity. All members of Seanus to contact their Rag officers to find a good date.

Smoking In students Unions-Steve brought up a problem that was brought to light due to a smoking policy. The student union has no real control over what happens in the union building as the university owns the building. After discussing the issue it was clear the no union was really sure about what control the university had over them. Each union agreed that a policy or a review was needed about student leading and controlling the organisation. Also the idea of a student autonomy charter was needed. Steve to leas on this

Sharing practice in Governance-all unions are going through governance. All in different stages. Each union to feed into bubble the main areas they are looking into.

Student Safety- Everyone encouraged to work and sit on their local council safety boards as it has been working well at both Christchurch and Farnham

Volunteering-The group discussed the possibility of having Seanus recognition of some sort. Ideas such as a letter of thanks from Seanus and also working with Volunteer UK. Volunteering accreditation was also discussed as part of student’s degrees. Reading has also got a system in place and is going to send out information on this to members of Seanus.

EDM 1229- All members of Seanus Exec were encouraged to support the campaign and bubble will also be sending letter on behalf of Seanus as well.

NUS Conference Amendment time-Seanus was reminded that all motions were now up on the NUS website.

Next meeting will be taking place some time on January.

Nickers' view of the second SEANUS Executive

2005-12-17T02:53:00.000-08:00

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”

Seanus Rag Day

2005-12-16T03:06:00.000-08:00

Hello all, and festive greetings to you :)

Well we had another Seanus Exec meeting yesterday, (thanks to Ellie and Stephen for coming)
I was having some thoughts on the Rag day for next term, what do you think about the following?

16 - 20 January 2006-SAFE Anti-Robbery Week 2006 Crimestoppers and the Home Office are jointly running 'SAFE 2006' - an initiative to help young people avoid becoming victims of robbery and to deter potential offenders.

January 27th Holocaust Memorial Day (thinking candlelit vigil and film showing)
13 - 19 February 2006 Contraceptive Awareness Week The objectives of the Week are to influence health professionals, the public and the media in raising awareness of contraception and issues affecting contraceptive choice.

1 March 2006 Self Injury Awareness Day Raising awareness about the syndrome of self injury / self harm, and tackling the taboos surrounding the behavior of hurting yourself to cope with stress and upset.

8 March 2006 International Women's Day The United Nations General Assembly celebrates International Women's Day to recognise that peace and social progress require the active participation and equality of women, and to acknowledge the contribution of women to international peace and security.

Let me know either by email or by blogging, thanks Nickers, it is quite easy once you get the hang of it...

Love and huggles

Katie xoxox

Katie's Views of National Council

2005-12-05T05:03:00.000-08:00

Hello all,
Apologies for my slow response, trying to get the hang of the system, and now whoo hoo I’ve done it.
As both Nickers and Bubble have said we went to national council on the 14th of November up in cold cold coventry. I didn’t really know what to expect at my first council, I pictured it a little like our union council, which it was, but with profiling and mountains of beauracracy. I’ll admit that I was naïve in thinking it wouldn’t be quite as obvious. However I, like Nickers took a step back and used the time to absorb what was going on

As Nickers has mentioned the first point of business was the election of a chair, and the By-laws followed this. As council had only just received papers of the proposal time was needed to read through what exactly was proposed and subsequent problems were found with several points. One pricnipipally being that they should be available in good time, and this obviously hadn’t happened, so a debate ensued. I personally think that they work well in principle, anything that helps add order to council can only be a good thing.
The question of whether NEC members can vote came up again, it was the first I had heard that the NEC following an Extra-Ordinary conference had their right to vote removed following a consitiutional change which had no occurred and so was fairly pointless. The majority of the NEC voted, and only Sian Davis and Veronica King abstained.
The agenda was shifted around slightly so that we could vote on the affilation of new areas, and Bubble was boted in – hooray!!
The Commission SessionsI attended the Welfare Zone discussion which I feared would be almost exactly the same as regionals, however there were some good discussions and we used it more as a sounding board feeding back our opinions of new government legislation in regards to abortion, and it gave Veronica a chance to tell us all about her new sexual health campaigns. She was very excited about this!
FREE 'CLAMOUR' SEXUAL HEALTH PACK NUS and Interact Worldwide are delighted to have teamed up to present 'Clamour' our Sexual Health & Rights Campaign Pack 2005.<http://resource.nusonline.co.uk/media/resource/Clamour%20campaign%20pack.pdf>

Other news from the day….

Will Page NEC member resigned, sighting dissolution with the NEC and NUS. He believed that factions should exist within NUS, basically that people should be brave enough to stand by their beliefs, even if they are political. Most of the NEC were unsurprised but there were some raised eyebrows at several comments made.

Motions
Nickers has already said what they are so I’ll say how I voted…
1) Access to National Council –. I voted FOR
2) Stagecoach and NUS Extra –. I voted FOR
3) Support for Terence Higgins Trust (THT) –I voted FOR
4) 7/7 terrorism attacks –I voted FOR
5) No to terrorism and Racism –. I voted FOR
6) OFFA –. I voted FOR7) NUS Successes –I voted FOR.8) Blogs – I voted FORAt the last section, the Reports Motions there was a motion to censure Gemma Tumelty for organising Regional Conferences during Ramadam. Unfornately Gemma had to leave early which I didn’t give the best impression of her, but it was withdrawn. The guy who submitted the proposal for censure wanted to voice his frustrations and I don’t think this was the best way to do it.

And that was pretty much the day, Kat and Ellie came in all excited about the Foster report at 4:40pm and National council was ended after 5 minutes.

I then began the epic journey back to Canterbury…gotta love South Eastern Trains
Love and hugs
Katie

LGBT Conference - Coventry 26-27th November

2005-12-04T10:35:00.000-08:00

After the fun and the cold of National Council at Coventry I was looking forward to spending another two days shivering in their hall, and I was to be disappointed as they put us in another venue where heating had (kind of) been invented.

I’d registered late which lead to some confusion with me explaining to Steering that Areas did actually have a vote and I wasn’t a mere observer (though thanks to WMANUS for helping me explain this), and some interesting shenanigans getting a room (if you see me about then feel free to ask about my very scary and very sleepless night).

The opening presentation was good for reminding exactly why we have liberation campaigns, and I hope it becomes available and used by all communities within the student movement. The statistics concerning suicide, depression and mental health among LGBT students is shocking, and where University can be a safe environment for some, it remains scary and lonely for others.

The first workshop session I attended was about LGBT History month – an initiative set up last year and which had over 100 events associated with it in a single year, meaning their target for 2006 is over 1000. I really hope institutions in the South East Area do consider holding events during February and I’m more than happy to help out with this as much as possible. Check out the website (www.lgbthistorymonth.org.uk) for more information – I really do recommend LGBT groups doing some action for this.

Lunch was followed by a second workshop run on the School’s Out, and especially the ‘Stamp Out Homophobia’ campaign that Claire from BUGs has been running. It was really inspirational to see a student achieving so much on a national level – I’m sure we’ll be seeing more from her… Again check t’internet (http://www.schools-out.org.uk) for more on this campaign.

Steering report – some suspension of standing orders that were written for a 3 day (not 2 day as this was) conference. How I love bureaucracy…

The first motion session (and I know you’ll have skipped down to this bit) was Education. I could replicate the whole thing here, but you can find the final motion document online.

Main Motion; Wes Streeting spoke for - a very clever bit of speaking playing on his Labour Students reputation I thought (English Grad that I am I spent all conference deconstructing speeches). All amendments passed and were:
City Academies; This was to oppose City academies that are funded by Christian fundamentalists (3 out of the 11). There was some discussion about opposing city academies full stop and this was removed. Favourite speech of the weekend when someone said ‘There’s no point opposing this… we can’t change anything…’ causing much under-the-breath muttering from myself.
FE representation; increasing it and supporting LGBT societies within them. A bit of blatant profiling occurred in the subsequent speeches, something that continued throughout the conference to my annoyance.
An accessible education for all; Working to with School’s Out and increasing the teaching of LGBT history and culture in schools.
LGBT Students, fair access and OFFA; does what it says on the tin.
LGBT People in Education and Employment; making sure research includes inequalities for LGBT people.
Sex, It’s an Education; Sex Ed for LGBT students is pretty dire, even compared to straight students. Although lesbians are in one of the lowest risk categories for STDs the education they get is pants.

Julian Nicholds summated and we went to dinner.

After the smallest portion of lasagne in my life we returned for the second motion which was Transforming our campaign.

Main motion; Kat Louis spoke for – this motion was aimed at making the LGBT campaign and LGBT conferences fairer, more representative and more accessible. The first four amendments passed and were:
Zoning; this was to add zoning (like NUS National Conference) to the LGBT conferences. I’d supported this motion and it passed.
Take it out; an amendment to stop names being published in online copies of motion documents, inadvertently outing anyone whose name is searched for on Google. I was shocked by the speech against this motion – I think everyone should be able to participate in LGBT events whether ‘out’ or not.
Conference changes; making the Winter Conference a training event and the Summer Conference a more dedicated policy setting body. Some to-ing and fro-ing but passed.
Structure; trying to get a fairer system of representation. After parts the finished amendment wasn’t perfect but it was much better.

Amendments 5 and 6 fell because of the guillotine. There had been a very frustrating half hour where the guillotine was extended and we then mucked around with Standing Orders for all that extended time – I can’t remember who went up and said that Standing Orders impeded democracy but they were spot on.

James-J summated and the day ended apart from the social. This was very good apart from people laughing at my appalling dancing and the lack of real ale or bitter at the bar.

The next morning saw the Womens, Black, SWD, Trans, Bisexual and FE Caucus’ meeting. I don’t fit into any of these so managed to get to church first thing. 11.25 heralded in the Regional Meetings, where I described the still available post for SEANUS LGB officer and we had a chat about organising a Southern Universities trip to Brighton on 11th February.
Motion Session 3 which followed was Welfare. Stephen Brown spoke for the motion and Pav Ahktar spoke against it, concerned with some inaccuracies.
There was time for 5 amendments to be debated and again they all passed.
Hate Crime; increasing reporting rates and tackling homophobia in schools.
Transsexual health; Improving access to health information for Trans people
Bi-phobia in our campaign and community; tackling the mistreatment of Bisexuals.
There’s SWD in LGBT; again, increasing accessibility and support for this under-represented group.

After lunch, the committee reports gave some a good chance to moan at the committee, as did the Finance report though both were passed.

The third workshop was about hate crime and was delivered by a very nice young policeman. Not really sure what I got from this session to be honest.

The final session was the motion Society and Beyond and the one of the Emergency motions. S&B had 6 amendments all of which passed.
Civil Partnerships Act; supporting the Act and opposing those who oppose it
Supporting the religious rights of LGBT people; something I felt VERY strongly about and was desperate to get a speech for but failed. Wes Streeting summated and said everything I was going to so I wasn’t too upset (and in the spirit of the in-jokes that permeate the NEC Blogs; hello to Wes’ mum).
Equality is Equality and Pensions; both about campaigning for LGBT equality in society.
Internationalism and Europe; both about opposing homophobia over seas and supporting LGBT communities.

The Emergency Motion was about getting bi-lingual campaign materials.

And that was that – all very thrilling to read I’m certain! Any questions give me a shout,

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

2005-12-01T05:14:00.000-08:00

National Council Report – Monday 14th November 2005

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

n.a.smith@reading.ac.uk
07980 986 7088

2005-11-30T10:25:00.000-08:00