Last week, I received an e-mail from the NUS Black Students' Officer expressing outrage that, in response to a statement sent to the national media from Bell and a number of high profile individuals, I had apparently dismissed calls for an Equality Impact Assessment on NUS Reforms as a 'cynical political ploy'. As a strong supporter of an Equality Impact Assessment, I reject this misrepresentation of my position.

For clarity, I have published my response below. I would also add that I have no doubt that our current constitution is not only out-dated, but deeply inaccessible, with irrelevant representational structures that actually exclude groups of students, like FE students and part-time students, which are amongst the most diverse of the post-16 student population.

Here is my response:

Dear Bell,

As promised, I am writing in response to your e-mail on behalf of the Black Students’ Committee concerning the Equality Impact Assessment on the proposed new constitution for NUS.

First of all I want to be clear: at no point have I suggested that an Equality Impact Assessment (EqIA) is a “cynical political ploy”. Indeed, I voted for an EqIA at the first extraordinary conference and instructed relevant staff to tender for this EqIA in consultation with all liberation officers.

What I have said, is that “claiming that the NUS’ reform proposals should not be debated until an equality impact assessment is completed is a cynical political ploy…”

1. Your statement on this matter has only been circulated since the second extraordinary conference was called. It is not possible to cancel the conference now and the constitution states that the changes must pass through two consecutive conferences.
2. The choice on Tuesday is between the new proposed constitution, or between the current one. I do not see how there could be any doubt that the new constitution will ensure a far fairer representation of the diversity of our membership. For example:
1. There will be additional representation for liberation campaigns on the national executive;
2. Changes to the annual conference and the environment promoted at zone conferences will be far more inclusive – and is a major reason why the disabled students’ campaign supports reform;
3. New representation for part-time and mature students on the NEC – supported by their conference – should ensure greater representation for women and black students in particular, because of the make-up of these groups in further and higher education.
4. Increased and guaranteed representation from Further Education on the National Executive should also ensure greater representation for students who define into liberation campaigns, because of the diversity of the student profile in FE.
3. We reached the point of ratification earlier this year (on an arguably worse set of proposals) and no such call for an EqIA was made by the Black Students’ Campaign; your predecessor was even on the review group itself!

Please also bear in mind that these proposals have been changing and evolving throughout the year. The last sets of changes were passed during the first extraordinary conference in November. I daresay there will be further amendments to the schedules as they are debated and discussed on Tuesday and at annual conference. The NEC has committed not only to implementing any further changes identified in the forthcoming EqIA, but also to undertake a further EqIA further down the line to monitor the impact of these changes in practice.

Furthermore, the concerns of the Black Students’ Campaign have been taken into account throughout this process:

• Black representation was demanded on the highest decision making body of NUS; the powers of the NEC were strengthened and clarified to make it crystal clear that the NEC is the highest body (bar annual conference itself) and can both refer board decisions back and even sack individual board members or the board collectively.
• Concern was expressed about exemptions from cross-campus ballots and so the proposals were strengthened to ensure that all HE unions have to undergo cross-campus ballots.
• Concern was expressed that without guaranteed liberation representation, the board would not have sufficient diversity, so the proposals were strengthened to ensure that the need for a diverse board are clearly written into the board selection procedure. All board members are either elected by Annual Conference or subject to an accept/reject procedure at the Annual Conference.
• Concern was expressed about the role of zone conferences in relation to the policy making process, so the proposals were strengthened by removing formal policy making powers from zone conferences and reaffirming the role of Annual Conference as the sovereign policy making body.

This is why I cannot understand why, with the greatest respect to the individuals concerned, Doreen Lawrence is cited as stating that the proposals “roll back black students’ representation”, or Dr Benjamin Zephaniah believes that they are “sidelining the black students’ officer”.

As I have stated in a previous e-mail, I am not interested in preventing you from e-mailing students and student officers. I have apologised for temporarily disabling access to your e-mail account, although it is unacceptable to circulate such statements to NUS staff and staff in students’ unions, and I am also surprised that you chose to circulate the statement to the national press.

In a nutshell:

• We have already committed to conducting two equality impact assessments and to act on the findings.
• I firmly believe that these proposals are far superior to the current constitution, which inhibits participation with structures that fail to reflect and represent the diversity of our membership.
• We have genuinely listened to feedback on the proposals throughout the year and have made changes accordingly.
• As a member of the LGBT campaign, if I believed that the proposed structures limited our liberation campaigns or equality for all, I would never support them.

I do not believe an equality impact assessment is a cynical ploy, but I do believe that the misrepresentation of the proposals and the timing and manner of the tactics you have employed is.

Wes

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/wesstreeting/276016.aspx