How to kill a white Elephant: The Size and Make up of the NEC!

First we need to recognise the White Elephant!

The main problem of the NEC is that it means very different things to different people. The ambiguity for its existence begins at the point of its very election, and that is quite deliberate. The aim in its construction is to develop the most diverse political grouping possible. This is achieved by having a position for every faction around in the early 1980’s however small and unrepresentative of actual student views in this new millennium. This is also achieved to the deficit of actually ever properly representing the common norms and collective views of our student population and our constituent membership.

The effect of this construction is to paralyse the executive in a number of ways, all stopping the said executive completing its role as the body fit to be at the helm of NUS and as in all good governance ‘adding value’. This means that consensus is largely impossible to achieve and collective responsibility only a dream. NEC talks about being representative and democratic but what kind of representative sample makes it democratic. To make some thing democratic does not depend on diversity of politics but representative of the majority of those that elect it. And governance is to add value to the organisation does the political diversity add value to out come or only debate? Does this mean good governance if we perpetually look to process not outcome?

Historically, the political leadership of the National Union has found organisational change to be perhaps the biggest challenge when working together; positions have become understandably emotive and polarised. However, NUS must now put these difficulties aside. If it does not, we may find it impossible to stabilise the situation and the financial difficulties will increase. NUS also to remain at the helm of the student movement, meeting service expectations of its membership and remaining student lead must sort out its governance to remain relevant and progressive.

The membership has been showing their concern in a number of ways often with this frustration of reform being articulated through attempts to disaffiliation. NUS is often seen as irrelevant and not in touch with student views and its membership, run by a collection of geeks, misfits and political careerists. Working as though society could still be influenced by arguments based around a rejection of capital and organised into a left wing utopia.

The NEC has a responsibility to those that elected them and entrusted them with the leadership of the national union. Problem that becomes all to clear is with out collective responsibility and accountability the NEC becomes nassisistic and self-interested. Recently in NEC meeting this is all to clear when we are looking at savings the NEC ask, “how will I be able to do this?” or “but I will not be able to do this anymore?” Rather than asking should we (collectively) be doing this? Or we can’t afford that function so lets (collectively) stop doing that. Still the ultimate question, has not been attempted to be answered, what is the role of the NEC define?

Below I have tried to highlighted the areas that still have no clear answers for and I feel are of interest and concern to this discussion to date. I still have concerns that there are questions whose answers we cannot extract from the accounts and consultation as currently in process but many of the larger changes where consensus was easily built around have been made. The meat on the bones is the most important but much harder to be objective and with the continuous political infighting within the NEC where everything appears subjective.

Size of the NEC
We presently have a £500,000 hole in our bank account! NEC costs about £600,000 go figure. On a serious level we need an executive function but can we afford the function of 12 national generalists touring the country?

People are clearly emotionally attached to the block of twelve it is important for the factions to retain a voice in NUS as without it now it looks like all other positions are independent. However if it is to remain it needs to spend less; make cuts; earn more income. In reforming the organisation and its delivery mechanisms it is important to consider resource and then member expectations are aim at all times needs to be to meet expectations as efficiently as possible and in there fore doing start to answer the value for money question that we have been so good at dodging.

Savings, reform and relocation may be synonymous, and are all undoubtedly interlinked. I would like to still argue that we take a strategic approach to this debate and so we need fresh perspectives, opinions and ideas on the following from as many stakeholders as possible, Role on Mori!

How should the NEC as a function of the NUS ensure your voice is heard? Represent you? Develop democratic and strong student unions? Provide collective benefits and access to information for students? Deliver democracy, equality and collectivism? Does a large Executive and the confusion and dysfunction that this creates add value to these areas of NUS work for its members or would a smaller executive with increased organisational functionality improve this for the collective movement?

I think feel it is most important NUS has a strong executive but what is a strong Executive and how do we create them? How do we best deliver executive function? How should NEC represent you? To answer these questions you need to be clear what are present NEC’s strengths and weaknesses to understand that just look at what frustrates you?

If we want to take a purely functional and pragmatic approach we merely need to look at these issues in terms of income and expenditure we need to look at: Number of NEC x (NEC Salaries +NEC travel + Other operational costs) Get a hatchet to NEC Budgets and make sure they stay within so cut function or budget or Number of NEC or all. However, we all know in terms of reform, do we need to put everything in a more holistic context, with a strategic planning process like the year of change plan that is central to the organisation and with no area considered as an independent entity?

One debate that I would like to moot is the idea of moving the Block of Twelve out of the NEC to National Council and have 12 directly elected national councillors from national conference. The effect of this in terms of governance would create at more formal scrutinising body to a smaller more functional executive cttee. The scrutinising body would have added political diversity and would therefore bring increase perspective to its accountability. Money would be saved by them being volunteers and only going to council meetings.

There is increasing pressure to have more regional democracy, which paradoxically has happened at a time when we have seen all but a few of the areas collapse. Should we move to Regions electing regional conveners and executives in a more federal model who could be responsible for local initiatives and share best practice, chair their regional cttee’s and meetings. Serving as regional conveners on a volunteer basis to help promote NUS with the RO. (Look at the constitution where it talks about electing the regional observer and national councillors there is more to it that the role of the NEC.)

Obviously Annual Conference and emergency conferences are the only body that can affect some of these changes but with clear political leadership the NEC can take the first steps towards any fundamental reform and the continued success of the National Union.

The final question that NUS keeps dodging is how do we define quality as however much you like it with this level of elected positions and this level of politicisation you will never get a quality service. NUS needs to be clearer on what it delivers to you as members and what it does not do as at present it is often a jack of all trades, master of non. The biggest lesson it needs to learn is to say no!

So I hope we are all beginning to recognise the white elephant, lets stop it doing any more damage!

So who wants to take up the challenge I am leaving my time is up?

James Lloyd

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/jameslloyd/270836.aspx