Monday 9th January I spent the day in the office doing paperwork, replying to emails and reading through the draft strategic plan. We also had a management team meeting in the afternoon. Tuesday for the majority of the day I sat in a strategic planning meeting with the management team then set off to go to parliament with Ellie and Sian to go to a Votes at 16 debate, there seems to be MP’s and Lords from all parties supporting lowering the voting age and this can only be a positive thing, there were so many young people there who were politicised and quite rightly indignant that they are not able to vote. To check out and support the campaign then visit www.votesat16.org.uk

Wednesday 11th I visited Derby and Sheffield SU’s to talk about Sabb roles and titles, Kick Racism out campaigning, building relationships with NUS, work in the community and NUS Xtra. Thursday I met with the National Council for Graduate Entrepreneurship and pulled together the report and plan addendum before sending it to be designed. Friday 13th was also spent in the office, this was definitely an extremely admin filled week – a warning to all those running for National Secretary in the elections!

Monday 16th was the second Year of Change group and the meeting went very well, the management team got some steer on the content of the strategic plan and discussed and debated options for democratic reform submitted by individual members of the group. There was much disagreement on some issues but also a surprising number of issues that there was consensus on. I committed to getting the options for democratic reform from the Year of Change group out to the membership by Monday 23rd January.

Here is the letter and options for possible reform from the group….

Dear Student Officer,

As you know we received the MORI research in December and since have been examining the recommendations and options for change outlined to see how they fit in with our strategy for the future.

We are responding to MORI in two ways, firstly the management team are working on a strategic plan for the organisation which will include many of the options outlined by MORI and secondly the Year of Change Group made up of National Councillors and the NEC Strategy Team. The Year of Change Group members have been tasked with influencing the direction of the strategic plan and looking at democratic options for change.

We committed to getting these options out to you before the amendments deadline for conference so you can examine the proposals and consider submitting the options you as an executive or council agree with to Annual Conference for debate.

Attached is a summary of the meeting the Year of Change Group had on the 16th January, the groups make up is politically diverse so obviously there was much debate about the way forward in terms of democratic change and some of the options detailed had consensus and some were more contentious.

I hope you can consider these options through your own democratic processes and submit amendments to Annual Conference by 1pm on the 10th February so we can have the debate at Annual Conference and move toward an NUS that has a more efficient, more accountable and more inclusive democracy in the future.

Please feel free to discuss these issues with members of the National Executive Committee and other officers from your region. Remember to refer to the Democracy Guide online for how to submit amendments to conference and email them to amendments@nus.org.uk and remember to attach a pro forma for each amendment.

Any questions or comments in relation to process please get in touch gemma.tumelty@nus.org.uk or yearofchange@nus.org.uk

Yours truly,

Gemma Tumelty           Kat Fletcher
National Secretary        National President

NUS Year of Change Group
Options for NUS Democratic Reform

The NUS Year of Change group met again on 16th January 2006, and had a wide ranging discussion about change in NUS following the publication of the MORI research.

Much of the discussion centred on NUS’ 5 year strategy, being worked on by NUS’ National Director, staff team and the NUS Management team. The group gave a clear steer on financial reform, options for income generation and options for NUS’ buildings and accommodation. Consensus was reached on a variety of ways in which NUS can improve delivery, particularly on its national campaigning and representation work. The final report will be debated and approved by the NEC and presented to Annual Conference in late March.

The group also discussed a review of NUS’ local staffing and delivery for students’ unions and officers that has been carried out over the past few months. Again, broad consensus was reached on a range of issues, from managing services better and closer to the membership, to the development of an organising and activist strategy to complement our current service delivery for unions, to increasing opportunities for networking between officers and students. The conclusions of this “regions review” will be built into NUS’ 5 year strategy as identified above.

The third major item for discussion was a variety of options for the democratic reform of NUS. Whilst vital to the long term future of the organisation, these have necessarily been considered separately from the 5 year strategy for NUS given the need for constitutional debate and change. Although interconnected, the group identified 10 potential “baskets” of debate on reform that could form the core of a package of discussion at Annual Conference.

They are presented here broadly in order of controversy, the least controversial being first. The group has not resolved to propose specific motions or text for unions to pass to send to conference for the Amendments stage on February 10th; rather this document summarises the issues and debates. The group would thus invite unions to consider the issues carefully, and if appropriate submit appropriate motions and or constitutional text as an Amendment in the Strong and Active unions zone, whereupon the steering committee will composite received text into appropriate baskets, motions, amendments for final debate and resolution at Annual Conference.

The group is clear in its resolve to demonstrate real change is desirable and possible in NUS’ structures; but it does not want to scupper or sully that debate by forcing through change or second guessing the precise opinions of unions on these issues. That’s why it’s vital that every union consider the issues and propose change that best reflects the views of their members. But it is also important to note that the YOC group believes that much change can be achieved culturally as well as structurally; and the strategy to be outlined in the 5 year plan will go some way to rebuilding confidence in our movement and focussing it on what it does best; promoting, defending, and extending the rights of students across the UK.

Suggested Reform Baskets

1) Creation of a ninth democratic region in NUS
NUS’ regional structures are confused, old fashioned and not based on any sense. The proposal is that for democratic purposes, NUS moves to the now well established Government Offices (RDA) boundaries and in doing so create a ninth “Yorks and Humber” region. NUS’ staffing will not necessarily match these boundaries but will be delivered in a much more flexible way to meet the needs of CM’s.

2) Timing of Spring Regional Conference
There is a clear role for Regional Conference to focus on NUS’ policy making- at the first of the year it introduces policy debates and zones, and at the last takes advice from members on the implementation of policy passed. But deadlines at present mean that the second regional conference of the year is unable to consider the motions submitted so far and encourage unions to think about amendments they may submit. The group would invite unions to amend the amendments deadline to allow regional conference to take on this function.

3) Zoning of the NEC
There is a clear consensus on the notion of the NEC organising its responsibilities according to policy zone; effectively the creation of zone sub committees that would better plan and manage NUS’ work in implementing the decisions of conference in each zone. In devolving detailed discussion and budgets/NEC expenditure in this way, it would also assist in accountability (particularly over finance and the estimates) and improve staff and management relationships. The group would encourage unions to submit proposals for these 4 sub committees, at first with a fairly loose structure, to make this happen.

4) Management Committee of NUS
Again, there is a clear consensus that a formalisation of the NEC Management Committee needs to happen. It would be responsible for the day to day affairs of “running” NUS, considering staffing issues, health and safety, management finance etc. This would dramatically improve the financial accountability of NUS. The issue of debate is over membership of this formalised sub committee of the NEC- it clearly needs to be small, but the debate ranges from consisting of the Management Team positions and Vice Presidents, through to the President, Treasurer and Secretary combined with a small number of officers from across the NEC. The group invites unions to submit constitutional proposals in this area for change.

5) Delegate Entitlement
Ongoing reform by Finance Committee to the affiliation fee structure has as one of its goals students’ unions being much more honest with their declaration of student numbers to NUS. One consequence of this would be a dramatic increase in the number of delegates entitled to go to Annual Conference, and so it is probable that we will need to look again at delegate entitlement. Finance committee will propose some change but the issue needs to be considered by CM’s. Options include simply reducing the entitlement (it is currently 1 delegate per 1400 FTE students) or setting a maximum size for Conference and calculating entitlement proportionally in relation to FTE each year. The group would invite unions to submit views and or proposals in this area and to discuss the issues with the National Treasurer.

6) Role of Regional Reps to National Council
At present the role of English regional reps to national council is partly to help implement priority campaigns in that region. The group broadly agreed that if no other change was implemented with reference to regional structures, that at the very least the role of these “local organisers and implementers” could be made clearer with a name change and a clearly defined role in the constitution, with training and other support available. The group invites unions to submit constitutional proposals in this area for change.

7) National Secretary and National Treasurer
There was some considerable debate on these roles. This ranges from the creation of VP’s for each policy “zone” (i.e. “VP Strong and Active Unions” etc) through to combining the roles above into a VP internal affairs. An issue identified was the need for staffing and committee support for the above roles, which all agree can be seen as too administrative in focus. This staffing support is an urgent priority and will form part of NUS’ 5 year strategy so will be in place soon. As a result the group would invite unions to submit views and or proposals in this area.

8) Vice Presidents
There is some debate inside the movement on the issue of the Vice President Further Education and the Vice President Education. Some believe that the role of VPE should change to that of Vice President Higher Education, with a VP for each sector; some believe that it should stay as is now with the VPE retaining responsibility for whole of NUS’ Education work. Without rehearsing the arguments here, the group invites unions to submit views and or proposals in this area.

9) Regional Structures
There is some considerable debate on the need to strengthen regional structures. All agree that we need to strengthen work in this area; but the options range from more support for NUS Areas through to the creation of formal regional committees and sabbaticals in each region. One option identified was to create a basic regional committee structure out of the existing reps and NEC observers, and to offer support for regions wishing to opt out or create a formal area. The group invites unions to submit constitutional proposals in this area for change.

10) Role of National Council and the NEC
The item on which there was least consensus was the respective roles of and the relationship between these two bodies. The debate ranges from merging the two bodies into a single “National Executive Council”, adding regional representation to the existing make up (as happens in most trade unions and the TUC) through to keeping the bodies distinct but making clear each body’s role, powers, function, and the extent to which each has the ability to pass policy, make certain decisions or hold the other to account.

Some believe that any executive body must contain regional representation; some believe that it must work better with regional structures but should stay largely “as is”. The group does agree that clarity, simplicity, political diversity and regional involvement should all be features of any new structure; but it is divided on how this might best be carried out. The group would thus invite unions to submit constitutional and other proposals in this area for change.

Tuesday 17th I had a Web Technology meeting this meeting was also a response to the MORI report which outlined the need for NUS to facilitate communication between activists, become more responsive to our membership and develop new ways of campaigning. We are looking to move toward Web 2.0 technology rather than Web 1.0 – any techies out there will understand the logistics of this far more but it definitely sounds good! We then had the Annual Reception at Westminster where we launched Coalition 2010

Wednesday 18th we had an Affiliations meeting in HQ, then went off to Parliament once again for the launch of the NUS/AMSU/BWB Governance and the Charities Bill booklet which you can find here Derfel Owen deserves much praise for his work on this over the past couple of months – his nickname isn’t the “Governance Guru” for nothing! I know that Governance is an issue on the agenda for many of you so I really hope that this information is useful and timely.

Thursday 19th was a morning in the office reading numerous documents and emails and starting preparations for regional conferences then Derfel and I visited UWE then visited Bristol to speak to their Student Council about NUS Extra. We got another grilling again but hopefully put a few minds at rest.

Friday 20th I met with Pav about the provision of Halal food at NUS Annual Conference (I had met with UJS earlier in the week also) then at 3pm we had an open meeting with the NEC and a regional officer where we tried to pull together all the work individual members of the NEC are doing with the Trade Union movement. There is definitely a need to co-ordinate this work centrally and from a strategy for this work for the future.

This was definitely a busy week with lots of work, there is so much to do still in the rest of my term in office and January is proving a lot busier than I thought!

The Blogs on this site represent the individual views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the policies or practices of the National Union of Students.

All links in blogs will open in a new browser window.

The permanent URL for this specific blog entry is: http://www.officeronline.co.uk/blogs/gemmatumelty/271948.aspx