Governance Review FAQs

Is the NUS governance review a right-wing plot to install a hereditary President for Life and replace the Annual Conference with an appointed politburo? Find out in this FAQ.

Why is the governance review taking place?
The governance review officially began with the passing of Motion 701 in the 2007 Annual Conference, which called for a ‘far-ranging review’ of NUS’ governance. But calls for change pre-date the conference. While piecemeal changes have been introduced on numerous occasions over many years, NUS members have been calling for real change since the 1980s.

The reality is that NUS’ structures are out-dated and the constitution is ‘confusing and contradictory.’ Inaccessible processes have taken precedent over getting results. However, financial problems and the lack of clarity over NUS’ work were arguably the greatest catalysts for the calls for wholesale change last year.

Above all, NUS members need their national union to be in the best possible shape to fight and win on crucial issues such as access to education in the coming years.

Is the review just about structures?
Governance is not just about structures, it is also about culture. Governance is about creating an organisation that is strong on all counts; relevant, coherent, transparent, well-managed, strategic and effective for its members.

The review aims to create an NUS where people are accountable for their actions, where responsibilities are clearly defined and where policies are clear and coherent.

Are other students’ unions also undergoing governance reforms?
The review of NUS is taking place against a background of wide-ranging reforms in students’ unions throughout the country. The Charity Act of 2006 set in motion one of the biggest shake-ups of charity law in 400 years.

Discussions around governance and the new charity law proposals have prompted many students’ unions to review their governance arrangements as a matter of best practice, and although NUS is not a charity we have much to learn from our own members and the wider third, charity, campaigning and trade union sectors.

Who has made the made the decisions about the review in NUS?
A principal objective of the review was to make it as inclusive and democratic as possible. A steering committee, comprised of elected officers, NUS and students’ unions staff, was engaged with the task of correlating the ideas and input from NUS’ members and at every stage of the process, and the governance review has been made available for the widest possible consultation. The consultation document, known as the Green Paper, gathered over 50 formal and more than 300 informal responses and was discussed at 12 consultation events around the UK, including each of the Nations, Liberation campaigns and Regions. The resulting White Paper- based on ideas from NUS’ members- was overwhelmingly approved by the National Executive Council on 15 October, 2007.

In December 2007, after more than 40 students’ unions had called for an Extraordinary Conference, an unprecedented 900 delegates attended and voted in favour of the changes with the required two-thirds majority. A similar majority is required again at Annual Conference in April for the governance review to come into effect.

What are the main structural changes brought about by the review?
Make no mistake, the governance review is the most significant set of changes probably in the history of the organisation, both in terms of culture and structure.

Led by a President elected by Annual Congress, a new Senate has been proposed to replace the NEC and allow a greater voice for volunteers, with the block of 12 becoming 15. It will also be made up of elected officers from the policy Zones and Liberation campaigns and non-voting members from partner student organisations. The Senate will become the heart of the NUS- a political leadership that ensures that the decisions made at Congress become reality. Its role is to coordinate campaigns, solve disputes, as well as acting as the primary decision-making body between Congresses.

A new Board will also be created to deal with the administrative side of NUS, freeing the elected leaders to deal with the core of their work- campaigns and policy development. The Board will be student-led, comprising of elected students in addition to elected officers and the President. The Board will be bolstered by a small number of professionals from relevant fields, who will bring expertise on key questions such as risk management. It will be appointed by the Annual Congress and is also answerable to it for all of its actions.

Other important additions include the introduction of experts into the NUS Steering Committee, which ensures that democratic processes are correctly followed, and the building of closer relations with other groups and networks which support students, such as the British Medical Association.

A final major change in terms of structures is about making sure that important issues get a proper hearing. As such, the five policy Zones- higher education, further education, welfare, society and citizenship and union development- have been reinforced to allow them greater time to share research and discuss issues. Each Zone will have a volunteer committee, a conference and a programme of work and campaigns.

International, mature and part-time students have been grouped together as ‘Social Policy’ and the international student block has been reinforced with a full-time elected officer.

Will there be time to debate key issues, and don’t the Zones risk turning the Annual Congress into a mechanism for rubber-stamping policy?
During the consultations, NUS’ membership felt very strongly that the current style of Annual Conference legislated against genuine discussion of many of the issues at the core of our work. They felt that fringe issues were allowed to dominate, subsume policy discussion and that many key questions were glossed over.

The new structures mean that each of the Zones will have the opportunity to present evidence, discuss and develop policy in committees and conferences before the Annual Congress. A block of time will then be specifically allocated for their issues to be discussed at the time of Congress. In this way, the more consensual issues already agreed upon within the Zone can be quickly dealt with, to allow more time to debate those that are more controversial. However, students’ unions can still submit motions in the traditional way.

The Zones have been created in order to place a greater emphasis on in-depth evidence-based discussion, to make sure that important issues are comprehensively covered.

What about the Liberation campaigns?
The review places the Liberation campaigns at the heart of the work of NUS, safeguarding their autonomy and aiming to provide an increase in support for their objectives.

What difference will the review make for my union?
The impact of the reforms of the NUS on unions around the country should be significant. The changes are important in bringing the national voice of students into the twenty-first century, benchmarked against other organisations in the sector and better equipped to deliver the goals of the student movement for years to come.