Conference-gate; what next?

In March, I was thrown out of USI Congress by my union delegation (Queen's University Students' Union) for voting in a few that contradicted my students' union policy. I  wrote about it at the time, and if you're reading this having not heard about what's happened, I'd advise you to read it only so we're on a similar page for the rest of the post.

When we got back, there was some clarity needed on how I was going to be 'punished'. Again, I wrote about it at the time, and again, I'd recommend you read that post before reading the rest of this.

Last night, the President of QUBSU proposed two motions at the Annual Business Meeting of QUBSU Council (our last meeting of the academic year) to ban me from standing as a QUBSU delegate for national conferences. One would ban me for standing next year, and the second, for the following year (amusingly, I'll have left university by then, but no matter). 

The vote was cast by secret ballot, with the President and I both given the chance to make two statements each. No one else was allowed to speak on the proposed motion.

The QUBSU Council voted down the motion to ban me for the year 2014/2015 (29 votes against, 24 votes in favour) and voted in favour of the motion to ban me for the year 2013/2014 (31 votes in favour, 23 votes against). They've told me that I now cannot stand as a QUBSU national conference delegate for next year.

They can't do this. 

In our union's constitution, it stipulates that delegates to NUS Conference and USI Congress shall be elected by cross campus ballot as in the Council elections (page 38). It also states that any student may offer themselves as a candidate in any Executive Management Committee Election provided that they complete a Nomination Form and return it in person to the Returning Officer before the close of nominations for the Executive Management Committee Election (page 35). The elections for conference delegations are held in a similar way to elections for Council and elections for the Executive Management Committee (ie, the sabbatical officers).

10. CONFERENCE DELEGATION ELECTIONS

National Union of Students (NUS) and Union of Students in Ireland (USI)

10.1 Delegates to NUS Conference and USI Congress shall be elected by cross campus 
ballot as in the Council Elections.

10.2 One delegate to NUS Conference and two delegates to USI Congress may be 
appointed ex-officio.

10.3 All Election materials shall be regulated as in the Council Elections (see Rule 2, 
Section 7).

10.4 Nomination Forms shall be of similar format to those used in Executive Management 
Committee Elections and must be accompanied with a deposit of £40, which will be 
refunded after attendance at Conference. (2007 is the base year for this amount 
which will increase annually by the rate of RPI).

10.5 The Returning Officer shall post on authorised noticeboards at least 14 days before 
the date on which the Delegation Election is to be held a notice declaring:-

10.5.1 the number of delegates to be elected;
10.5.2 the dates and times for closure of nominations;
10.5.3 the dates and times of polling.

10.6 Nominations shall close on the eighth day before the date on which the relevant 
Election is to be held.

The equality and diversity policy of the union (page 77) states that the SU seeks to provide equality to all, irrespective of political opinion, and that the policy applies to all members of the students' union. There is also a mention of a complaints procedure (but nothing saying what it actually is) for those who feel that they have suffered any form of discrimination through the use of the union's representation services (page 79). Rule 4, Appendix 1 of the constitution stipulates that elected student officers (ie. the President and the other sabbaticals) shall be bound by the University’s Student Conduct Regulations, the Equality and Diversity Statement and other Equality Policies of the University and Students’ Union (page 50). 


Secondly, there is no process in the constitution to punish someone for voting against live policy at national conferences. No process. No mention of it. And considering it takes a special meeting and a 2/3 majority of student councillors or EMC members to remove an elected officer from their position (page 54), the move taken last night was unfounded, without precedent, and unconstitutional.

To sum up, the constitution of QUBSU, and in particular:


1. The combination of Rule 2 10.8 (which says that delegate elections will be held in the same manner as elections for the Executive Management Committee(; Rule 2 10.4 (which says that nominations for delegate elections are like those for EMC); and Rule 2 9.6.1 (which says that anyone can run in an election for EMC);

2. Chapter 1 8.2 (which says that the government of the union shall be based on the democratic principle that every ordinary member shall have the fullest opportunity to participate in union affairs);

3. Rule 10 2.2.4 (which says that political belief is a protected characteristic under the Equality & Diversity Policy;

4. Chapter 1 3.2, 3.9.2 & 3.9.4 (which states the aims of QUBSU as supporting equality of opportunity, freedom to participate in union elections, and the freedom of expression);

they had no grounds to do what they did, and I'll be happily handing in my nomination forms next year when nominations open for delegate elections to national conferences.

1. 
   

1. 
   

NUS Conference 2013

Trigger warning for frank discussion of rape apologists and mental health.

This year was my first NUS Conference. I was a QUBSU delegate, along with five other people- four students and two sabbatical officers. NUS wasn't what I thought it would be. At all. In some ways in was better and it some ways worse. 

I'll begin by talking about one of the things I was most proud of. A mass walkout occurred twice, when a known rape apologist and SWP member took to the stage (first for an election speech for one of the FTO positions, and then for Block). Obviously some people could not walk out due to access issues/the fact they were candidates, but I was immensely proud of the fact that we did this. It was cross-party, cross-faction, cross-political persuasion, but I am very proud that one thing we could agree on. NUS made it pretty clear- we don't have time, nor do we have respect, for those who are rape apologists. They have no place in our organisation, and rightly so. I am proud of us. 

Another thing I was immensely proud of was the vigil that was held for Steven Simpson. Organised at the last minute by Rosie Huzzard, Sky Yarlett and Finn McGoldrick (the NUS LGBT Officers) spoke at the vigil, as did two members of the Disabled Students' Committee. There was a lot of anger, and there were a lot of tears. It was incredibly moving, incredibly emotional and I'm very proud that it was held. 

Now, unfortunately, to talk about the things that disappointed me during conference.

First off, accessibility. My first NUS conference was NUS Women's Conference 2013, and at it, though I found some problems with accessibility, a few members of Women's Committee worked really hard to draft and propose a motion on improving accessibility, and I definitely think that next year Women's Conference will be even more accessible. But NUS Conference was not, in any sense of the word. There were access breaks, thankfully, but the days were very long. I missed debates on motions that I really wanted to be at, simply because I just couldn't do it. The unavailability of water, the fact that there were no reserved seats at the end of rows to facilitate those who feel they will probably have to run in and out for whatever reason, the endless, endless whooping and cheering, even though this was rightly called out by chairs numerous times, was so disappointing. It was also very disappointing to see the leadership actively do this numerous times. I understand people make mistakes, but at Women's Conference, it was noticeable that any time someone whooped, they usually ended up covering their mouth and you could see them telling themselves to try not to do it- at least people were trying. I'm not entirely innocent on this either, and I'm annoyed at myself. A conscious effort by all is definitely needed if we are to improve on this- and not improving on this would be a disgrace. 

Secondly, the conscious and visible control that the leadership tried to have over the conference as a whole was not a secret. There were numerous attempts to stifle debate, and specific members of the leadership got up to publicly insult individuals, which I feel is an abuse of the platform. I'm not saying that I necessarily agree or disagree with the specific views that were expressed, just that I think it was an abuse of the platform and was extremely disappointing as a first time delegate to see, especially because it was people who I have had a lot of respect for doing so. 

The control shown by the leadership translated into policy debates that resulted in policy being voted/agreed on that I was surprised by. I thought NUS Conference would be considerably more left wing. I would say that for the most part (at least, this is what I thought), within NUS it is an argument between the centre, the left, and the further left, but when a Tory is cheered and whooped at, repeatedly, it begs the question as to what our common aims are. We might not as a conference agree on free education (which frankly makes me shudder), we might not agree on gender balancing, we may not agree on a lot of things, but I thought the one thing we did agree on is that the current coalition is systemically destroying the UK as we know it. But we cheered and clapped for a candidate getting up and insulting other members, and seemed to forget that he is a member of the party who is taking down everything we stand for. Just an observation- though I feel it is an important one.

Another thing is that I didn't necessarily agree with everything 'the left' did, either. I don't think it was conducive to anyone to stand up and call all of NUS 'scabs'. That said, as a whole I think this person made a great speech and I was very proud of her- but I wouldn't be being honest, which is what I'm trying to do here, if I pretended I was comfortable with that word being used. Similarly, I thought the Carbon Rod stuff was funny- but there were a few things in the speech that made me feel uncomfortable, specifically the bit about access. I agree with much of the speech about the demo and its failings, but I don't agree that the leadership pointing out how horrendous the access stuff was when the scuffle happened in the park after the main demo was point scoring, or anything but genuine anger and concern. But of course- some will disagree with me on that. [NOTE: I've talked to people since writing this post, and I realise it was a misunderstanding. They weren't getting at what I thought they were getting at in terms of the access stuff- which is good, because I was shocked at the time, and it makes a little more sense now. I mean, they might not like the leadership and they may criticise NUS but they're also not assholes, which is why I was surprised in the first place.]

I've always thought that within NUS we respected difference, to an extent. The people I have worked with (generally) respect when we differ on things- whether it be policy or campaigns or whatever. We disagree and we put it behind us- in terms of those who are my friends, our friendship is not changed, and in terms of those who are primarily my colleagues, our professional relationship is not changed. But this wasn't the case at this years conference. Insults were thrown about, publicly, on the platform, and that was horrendous to see. I do understand that people will not respect those who do not respect them- I used to be like that. Now, for the most part, I feel sorry for those people (as in, those who do not feel that I am owed respect). I am angry initially, of course, but thankfully I have learnt to let go of the anger because I know that the only person it's hurting is myself. I think that learning to do this is vital if you're going to survive in the NUS/student politics environment, simply because if you didn't, you would have a breakdown- keeping hold of that much anger is too much for any person to do. I feel sorry for people who do not respect things that are fundamental to my existence in that they cannot extend the courtesy to others that others extend to them, I feel sorry that they are so caught up in their own lives that they feel their homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist (or whatever the disagreement may be on) views are fine, even though they compromise and insult the very core of the people they are disagreeing with. I have learnt to let go of the anger, for the most part, I hold towards people like this because if I didn't, I couldn't survive. 

Thankfully, I'll end on a positive note. I met a lot of incredible people at this conference, people I would not have met otherwise. Sometimes we met because we were both furious at something that had just been said or passed, sometimes we met because we just happened to be in the same place at the same time. But there were so many people in that room who are fucking incredible, so many people who work incredibly hard in their students' unions and who I would give anything to have working within my own students' union. Vonnie's speech about remembering most of our members are FE and that any attempt for our leadership to push through policy without debate being unacceptable, Stacey and Naomi's speeches about our utter commitment to giving rape apologists the back door, Thais constantly reminding us about accessibility and how important it was, Rosie's speech about remembering our trade union links, Vicki's leaving speech- her unapologetic honesty, her passion and her drive, constantly reminding us that underneath each set of political views is a person, and that no person deserves to be treated the way many people within the leadership were treated this year. 

I wouldn't have gotten through the past few days if it weren't for people like Sky and Rosie and Rebecca. They were extremely tough, both in terms of my drive to keep fighting and my own mental and physical health. I want to come back, though. I want to keep working and keep fighting and keep debating and disagreeing and I want other people to want to do the same. But I don't want to see the lack of basic respect again. I'm a member of political parties and anti-cuts groups, but the most important thing in writing this, for me, is my honesty- I am proud of and disappointed in different 'sides' in equal measure, and whilst people may disagree (and they have the right to do so, and I respect that), the least we can do is respect the fact that we have differing opinions. We're not going to get anything done if we don't accept the fact we disagree on some things, and work positively to try and change the minds of others. We bloody love democracy, we do- but I also bloody love respect and common courtesy, of which this conference was lacking entirely. 

I am hoping that next year will be better, I am. At the end of the day, I am hopelessly optimistic, and probably have a little too much faith in people. But it is who I am, and I'm unapologetic for that. We need an NUS Conference that is accessible, welcoming, inclusive, and respectful. The vigil on Tuesday night definitely put everything into perspective- and I think many would agree with me on that. At the end of the day, we are all human. And I hope we can respect that. You don't convince anyone you're right when you're spending your time yelling down other people, and you don't make yourself or your opinions look great when you spend most of your time throwing insults. 

I am a first time delegate, and this was my experience. By all means, leave comments- but if you disagree, please be respectful. The last thing we need is for the poisonous atmosphere within conference to extend any further.

Why I'm not #BackinBelfast

The #BackinBelfast campaign launched in the wake of the devastating effect the loyalist flag protests were having on Belfast city centre. It started off as a relatively low key hashtag campaign on Twitter, and quickly erupted into a full blown, council and Executive backed campaign. Local newspapers are on board, with offers for various clubs, pubs and restaurants throughout the city being advertised daily in an attempt to revitalise the city centre and to increase the footfall that had been drastically affected in the wake of the seemingly never-ending loyalist protests.

The campaign launched at the end of January in a desperate attempt for the traders of the city to try to regain some of their lost revenue. Since the protests began in December, around 150 police officers have been injured, and the Confederation of British Industry have estimated that around £15 million has been lost in trade due to the protests. Pre-Christmas sales were badly affected, and the situation only seemed to go from bad to worse as time marched on. The cost of policing the protests is estimated to have exceeded £15 million. The Northern Irish Executive released a press statement at the end of January, declaring its support for the campaign, with Arlene Foster stating that it is essential for us to support our local businesses in what are very trying trading conditions.

So why am I not #BackinBelfast? I have a number of reasons. 

In typical Northern Irish fashion, we think that by throwing some money at the problem and having a colourful poster campaign, we actually solve what was wrong in the first place. We haven't. And no one is prepared to admit it. Whilst we have been holding hands with the 'other side' and proclaiming our love for our city centre, a 'unionist unity' candidate has been selected for the Mid-Ulster by-election, the Northern Irish Housing Executive is going to be abolished (with the possible loss of 400 public sector jobs, and hugely increased risk of privatisation), and two UUP MLAs have left the party in opposition to the recent actions undertaken by its leader, Mike Nesbitt.

The estimated amount that has gone into the campaign stands at around £1.5 million, with £400,000 directly from Belfast City Council and £600,000 from the Executive. The campaign has had great publicity, whilst the fact that countless death threats, bullets, and intimidation towards our elected representatives has pretty much been forgotten about in the past month or so. Some of those who were the targets of death threats may stand in polar opposition to what I stand for, but that doesn't mean I'll condone the threats to their families. 

The money that has been used to back the campaign could have, and should have, been used in any number of projects across the region that are crying out for funding. The media is bombarding us with deals and offers from pubs and restaurants around Belfast, at a time when wages for public sector workers have been frozen, the price of living is steadily increasing, and people are finding it exponentially difficult to get by day to day, without being shamed into spending what little money they have in restaurants and bars in the city. In addition to this, the workers in retail and hospitality industries have all but been left out in the cold by their employers- a lack of union presence means that all too often throughout the crisis, they were sent home from work and lost a significant amount of their earnings. Most have no union protection to ensure that they are paid irrespective of circumstance. In the bigger picture, this was seen in the south in January- music giant HMV announced it was going into administration and employees had to physically occupy the stores to ensure the company paid them the wages they were rightfully owed. 

But then we have another problem- the fact that many 'community' projects are fronted by paramilitaries who are kept quiet with the money dished out to them by the DUP/Sinn Fein coalition within the Executive. We need our elected representatives to take a stand on this- otherwise, it will keep going. On the ground, community workers see this day in and day out, and it appears to be one of the Executive's worst kept secrets. If everyone knows about it, why haven't we been lobbying the relevant Sinn Fein and DUP MLAs to stop this practise?! A similar situation was seen back in 2007, when then Social Development Minister Margaret Ritchie received numerous death threats at her refusal to continue to fund UDA-backed community projects without evidence of decommissioning and reduced criminality. Behind closed doors, everyday DUP and Sinn Fein members could be pushing their MLAs to stop this practise, but they aren't- it suits both parties for the status quo to remain intact. 

This is by no means an exhaustive list, nor does it explain as fully as I would like why I don't support the #BackinBelfast initiative. I find it rather insulting that my own students' union sabbatical officers are proudly enjoying their spot in the limelight as they publicly declare their support for the campaign, whilst simultaneously ignoring the fact that across the UK, there are campaigns far more worthy of their support- one only has to look at anti-fascist protests at Marine Le Pen's recent talk at Cambridge, and perhaps most importantly, recent occupations in the University of Sussex against further university privatisation to note that the de-politicisation of Queen's University Students' Union is hugely detrimental to the students and young people in Northern Ireland as a whole. 

I am not #BackinBelfast- I can't afford to. Neither can most students. Whilst students were not the main focus of this article, I'll stick to what I know best- students are struggling to get by as it is, and with £9k fees for GB students in Queen's University, halls that are more expensive than the basic loan, and a severe lack of part-time jobs (and those employed taken advantage of horrendously by their employers), students shouldn't be shamed into spending more money than they can afford. Luckily, it is often argued, we live in a world of (for the most part) interest-free overdrafts and the knowledge that it can be pushed to the back of our minds as a problem for 'future me' (the cost of living for students is something I'll get into another day- by no means take this as me declaring that we are in a comfortable position, when the reality is anything but). Most people living in Belfast don't have that luxury, most people couldn't afford to go to Deane's before the recession, never mind now. Maybe if our politicians start addressing the underlying problems- our innate sectarianism, the complete absence of any credible CSI document, inequalities in education, the strength of paramilitary control in many working class areas- I'll lend them my support in the future.