National Executive Council

Meeting of: 30th meeting of the National Executive Council of the National Union of Students
Place: UNISON centre, 130 Euston Road London, NW1 2AY
Date and time: Tuesday 13th – Wednesday 14th May, 11:00

Members:
Zones





Liberation




Sections



Nations



Block
Toni Pearce (President & Chair)
Joe Vinson & Amy Smith (Further Education)
Rachel Wenstone (Higher Education)
Dom Anderson & Hugh Murdoch (Society & Citizenship)
Raechel Mattey (Union Development)
Colum McGuire & Chantel Le Carpentier (Welfare)

Aaron Kiely & Malia Bouattia (Black Students)
Hannah Paterson & Jawanza Ipyana (Disabled Students)
Sky Yarlett & Finn McGoldrick (LGBT)
Kelley Temple & Tabz O'Brien Butcher (Womens)

Daniel Stevens & Arianna Tassinari (International Students)
Josh Rowlands & Emma Barnes (Mature & Part Time Students)
Amy Gilligan (Postgraduate Students)

Stephanie Lloyd & Rhiannon Hedge (NUS Wales)
Gordon Maloney & Robert Foster (NUS Scotland)
Rebecca Hall & Fergal McFerran (NUS-USI)

Jeni-Marie Pittuck, Rosie Huzzard, Harry Fox, Ben Dilks, James McAsh, Peter Smallwood,
Paul Abernethy, Charles Barry, Chris Clements, Jessica Goldstone, Marc McCorkell, Kirat
Raj Singh, Matt Stanley, Rhiannon Durrans.

Apologies: Nosheen Dad, Edmund Schluessel, Anna Chowcat, Tom Flynn
In attendance: Amy Davies, Meg Evans
Agenda
1




No Item Action Paper Lead Time
1. Introduction and administration
1.1 Welcome and President’s opening remarks Verbal TP 5 mins
1.2 Apologies, quorum count and notice of meeting Note Verbal TP 2 mins
1.3 Disclosure of potential conflicts of interest from the agenda Note Verbal TP 2 mins
1.4 Minutes of the last meeting 20th February 2014 Approve 1.4 TP 5 mins
1.5
Actions and matter arising from the last meeting 20th February
2014
Discuss 1.4 TP 5 mins
2. Accountability and NEC Member Reports
2.1 National President report and questions Approve 2.1 TP 10 mins
2.2 Zone reports and questions Approve 2.2 15 mins
2.3 Liberation reports and questions Note 2.3 10 mins
2.4 Sections reports and questions Note 2.4 10 mins
2.5 Nations reports and questions Note 2.5 10 mins
2.6 Scrutiny and Group Committees report and questions Note Verbal 5 mins
2.7 Report from Block members on Member Unions Note Verbal 10 mins
3. Papers (to approve)
3.1 Review into the Block of 15 Note 3.1 TP 20 mins
3.2 Approval of the Detailed Internal Budgets Note 3.2 TP 10 mins
3.3 No Platform policy Note 3.3 TP 5 mins
4. Motions
4.1 Motions remitted from National Conference Approve 5.1 TP
4.2 Motions to NEC Approve 6.1 TP
6. AOB


2


National Executive Council









Meeting of: 29th meeting of the National Executive Council of the National Union of Students
Place: Unison Centre, 130 Euston Road, London, NW1 2AY
Date and time: Thursday 20th February 2014, 11:00

Members present:
Zones






Liberation




Sections



Nations



Block

Toni Pearce (President & Chair)
Joe Vinson and Amy Smith (Further Education)
Rachel Wenstone and Tom Flynn (Higher Education)
Dom Anderson and Hugh Murdoch (Society & Citizenship)
Raechel Mattey and Nosheen Dad (Union Development)
Colum McGuire (Welfare)

Malia Bouattia (Black Students)
Hannah Paterson & Jawanza Ipyana (Disabled Students)
Sky Yarlett & Finn McGoldrick (LGBT)
Kelley Temple & Tabz O’Brien Butcher (Women’s)

Daniel Stevens & Arianna Tassinari (International Students)
Josh Rowlands (Mature & Part Time Students)
Anna Chowcat & Amy Gilligan (Postgraduate Students)

Gordon Maloney & Robert Foster (NUS Scotland)
Stephanie Lloyd & Rhiannon Hedge (NUS Wales)
Rebecca Hall (NUS-USI)

James McAsh, Peter Smallwood, Charles Barry, Edmund Schluessel, Marc McCorkell, Kirat
Raj Singh, Rhiannon Durrans.


Apologies:



Absences:
Chris Clements, Paul Abernethy, Harry Fox, Chantel LeCarpentier, Rosie Huzzard, Anna
Chowcat, Matt Stanley, Peter Smallwood, Fergal McFerran, Aaron Kiely, Jessica
Goldstone, Ben Dilks.

Jeni-Marie Pittuck, Tabz O’Brien Butcher, Daniel Stevens.

In attendance:

Amy Davies, Meg Evans, Hilary Carter, Ben Kernighan, Alex Jones, Graeme Wise, Jason
Jackson.
Minutes
3




1. Introductory & Administration

1.1 Toni Pearce (TP) opened the meeting and welcomed members to NEC.

1.2 Apologies were noted.

1.3 There were no conflicts of interests declared.

1.4 Minutes of the meeting held on 23rd January 2014.

1.5 Matters arising from the minutes

There were no matters arising from the minutes.

The minutes were approved.

2. Reports and accountability

2.1 Presidents’ Priorities

Toni Pearce:
Report was taken as read; TP added the following:

Edmund Schluessel asked about the pan-London meeting. TP clarified that Raechel Mattey would be able to
speak more on the event as she was running it.

Sky Yarlett asked about tracking students through NUS by the events that they attend in order to measure
impact. TP noted that NUS’ Customer Relationship Management system enabled the organisation to do this and
NUS was doing some activity around this already.

2.2 Zone Convenors gave updates on their areas of work.

Joe Vinson:

Report was taken as read but Joe Vinson (JV) updated on some other areas of work:

Joe Vinson talked about #SweptoffmyFE and the success of the day. NUS received over 200 tweets from
colleges and sector bodies, as well as delivering a card to the Minister of Further Education and Skills, Matthew
Hancock.

TP added something about exemptions for traineeships. Ask TP.

Rachel Wenstone:

RW apologised for her report being late and circulated it at the meeting.

TP gave an update on the HEFCE grant letter. The government has prioritised the Student Opportunities fund
and saved £350 million for the fund. However, the Access to Learning fund has been combined into this and
there has to been a loss of £37 million. TP commended the work of the student movement in terms of saving
the Student Opportunities fund.

RW gave an update on the SASS and as a result of the Government’s decision to scrap the SASS and what this
would mean for students’ unions and what NUS was planning to do.

4




RW gave an update on Sections conferences.

GM asked about monthly student loans and what was being done about loan payments over the summer and
also asked about the cut to the Student Opportunities fund.

Tom Flynn asked whether there was an opportunity for NUS to provide some guidance to students’ unions on
how money for widening participation is being spent.

Dom Anderson:

DA apologised for his report being submitted late.

DA talked about the employment summit that was coming up and the work going on around that. DA also
added that he had spoken at Newcastle TUC Young Workers Conference.

DA gave an update on National Voter Registration Day and the work that students’ unions had done around it
and how much of a success it had been.

DA has also been doing a lot of work with Hope Not Hate around anti-fascism and anti-racism work ahead of
the 2014 European Elections.

DA updated on his visit to the Amazon distribution centre.

DA noted that he was going to be chairing a panel about lad culture at the Lad Culture summit and thanked
Kelley Temple and the NUS Women’s Committee for inviting him to do so.

Raechel Mattey:
Report was taken as read but Raechel Mattey (RM) updated on a couple of areas of work.
Raechel Mattey gave a verbal update about NUS London and what work the working group had undertaken so
far.

Colum McGuire
Report was taken as read.

CMCG talked about the successful lobby of the Office for Fair Trade on the issue of non-academic debt and that
the OFT had ruled in favour of NUS. NEC applauded CMCG on this win.

CMCG also talked about work around payday lenders and is gathering evidence around targeted payday lender

ES asked about visits to South Wales and asked whether CMCG if he was planning on visiting North Wales soon.

GM asked CMCG about whether universities would call in debt collectors on students where they had non-
academic debt.

NEC commended CMCG on the work around non-academic debt.

2.3 Liberation priorities were outlined to note

Black Students Campaign

To note.

5




Malia Bouattia updated that the Black Students Committee was helping with black students who want to run for
election in their students’ union.

DA noted that there had been a recent spate of racist videos appearing on YouTube lately, specifically in
Scotland, and asked if there were any plans to link up with the NUS Scotland’s Black Students Committee,
which MB confirmed was true.

TF asked if MB could circulate materials about Black students running in elections; TP asked for it to be
circulated around the whole NEC.

Disabled Students Campaign

To note.

HP updated on the Anti-ATOS day of action that had taken place the day before the NEC meeting. HP noted
that Parliament would be updating on workplace capability assessments on February 17th and would be
sending out briefings to unions.

LGBT Campaign

To note.

SY updated on #SportsGay and commented that there were around 200 students attending the event and what
further action was going to be taken.

SY updated on activities that were going on around LGBT History and work that unions had been doing around
LGBT History. SY had also visited Scotland to watch Equal Marriage pass.

FMCG gave an update on the LGBT research that was taking place and will be presenting preliminary findings
by the end of February.

Women’s campaign

The report was taken as read and to note.

Kelley Temple updated that applications for the coaching scheme has now closed. The target was for 50 women
students to be coached and there are now 80 women signed up to the scheme.

KT praised the work of the NUS-USI’s women’s officer in running a successful conference in Northern Ireland
and also thanked Rebecca Hall for all her work around the conference too.

KT updated on the lad culture summit that would be taking place the day after the NEC meeting and the impact
that the lad culture research was having.

2.4 Sections report:

Daniel Stevens:

To note.

2.5 Nations report:

NUS Wales – Stephanie Lloyd
6





Steph Lloyd noted that she was focusing on the Higher Education review and the first meeting of this will be
taking place in April.

SL has also met with the Welsh Electoral Reform Society to talk about individual voter registration.

Pound in Your Pocket research has closed and now work is being done around the results.

Research about transport has been released and looks at transport subsidies for Further Education students
following lots of college mergers.

SL added that Rhiannon Hedge had also organised a Reclaim the Night march and encouraged NEC to attend.

NUS Scotland – Gordon Maloney

Report taken is read but GM added some updates.

There has been a £13million increase to college funding, which was announced in the budget.

GM also added information about legislation around students’ associations.

GM has won exemptions for continuing students on council tax.

Work around housing – Ask GM.

The Scottish government are doing a review of postgraduates and GM laid out some of NUS Scotland’s
demands from that review. ES asked about the postgraduate policy day and what the review meant for Scottish
students. GM outlined what the postgraduate agenda meant was. Ask GM.

Robert Foster gave an update on the code of governance for colleges in Scotland. RF has successfully secured
students on college remuneration panels. (Ask RF)

NUS-USI – Rebecca Hall

Rebecca Hall gave a verbal update.

Met with the Equality Commission, talking specifically around Women in leadership.

Talked about the work that had been done on NVRD.

4,500 students have responded to the Pound in your Pocket survey.

RH updated on NUS-USI Women’s Conference and thanked KT, Beth Button and Rhiannon Hedge for coming to
Belfast. Thanked Aisling Gallagher for all her work on the conference. NUS-USI Disabled Students Conference
also took place and RH thanked HP for coming to Belfast.

NEC commended NUS-USI Women’s Officer Aisling Gallagher for her work on NUS-USI Women’s Conference.

NUS-USI is also organising a women’s only event for International Women’s Day.




7




Sections

International Students - Arianna Tassinari gave an update; the Fix International Fees was launched on
Monday 18th February. Another priority will be the Immigration Bill and the work around that. AT also
encouraged NEC to promote Sections conferences.

DA wanted to congratulate Daniel Stevens and the International Students Campaign had been doing around the
immigration bill.

MPT – Josh Rowlands echoed the call to promote Sections conference.

3.1 Update from UCU on industrial action with Q&A
Matt Waddup from UCU gave an update on the industrial action that was being taken by UCU members and
thanked NEC and NUS for their ongoing support. Members of the NEC were then given an opportunity to ask
questions.

4.1 Update on NUS Group KPIs
There was an update on the NUS Group KPIs.

TF asked TP what the formal governance relationship was between NEC and the Trustee Board. TP outlined the
relationship in the context of the Key Performance Indicators.

4.2 Equality and Diversity Report
There was a presentation on the Equality and Diversity report.

DA commented on some pockets of best practice from students’ unions in terms of employing black staff and
whether there was an intention for the organisation to replicate. RM added that the Black Staff survey had just
closed and the results would be circulated and guidance would be produced out of this.

5.1 Strategic Plan
NEC participated in a session on the new NUS Strategic Plan.

6. Motions to National Conference
Motion 1: New Deal for Education Funding

The amendments were accepted by the proposer.

Speech for: Rachel Wenstone
Speech against:
Summation:

Parts were received on Resolves 4
Speech for parts: Gordon Maloney
Speech against parts: Rachel Wenstone

Vote on parts: FALLS (Parts are kept)

Vote on motion: PASSES (Motion is approved to be sent to National Conference)

Motion 2: A new EMA

8




Speech for: Joe Vinson
Speech against: None
Summation: None

Vote: PASSES (Motion is approved to be sent to National Conference)

Motion 3: A New Deal for Work: Students and Workers Unite

Speech for: Rachel Wenstone
Speech against: None
Summation: None

Vote: PASSES (Motion is approved to be sent to National Conference)

Motion 4: From 1994 to 2034: the next generation of the student movement

Speech for: Steph Lloyd
Speech against: None
Vote: PASSES (Motion is approved to be sent to National Conference)

Motions to NEC:

Motion 1: Solidarity with Egyptian activists and students
Speech for: Amy Gilligan
Speech against: None
VOTE: PASSES

Motion 2: Protest in Birmingham
Speech for: Finn McGoldrick

TP accepted JM’s amendment through compositing, except for NEC Resolves 2, which will be heard as an add
amendment.

Amendment 2.1
Speech for: James McAsh
Speech against: Steph Lloyd
Speech for: Gordon Maloney
Speech against: Steph Lloyd

Vote on the amendment: FALLS

Back to the main motion
Speech against: None
Vote: PASSES

Motion 3: Emergency motion: UCU marking boycott
Speech for: Gordon Maloney
Speech against: None
VOTE: PASSES


9




Resolutions of the meeting held on February 20 2014.

Solidarity with Egyptian activists and students
NEC Believes:
1. There is a far-reaching assault on human rights currently underway in Egypt, three years after the
uprising which toppled Mubarak. According to Amnesty International the Egyptian military and security
forces have killed around 1,400 people and detained thousands since July 2013.

2. Students in Egypt are among those facing repression by the military and security forces. University
campuses have been repeatedly invaded by riot police, who have shot dead students in an attempt to
crush ongoing protests against the military regime. Over 500 students have been arrested since July
2013, and many have received harsh jail terms, some as long as 17 years. Academics have also been
targeted: large numbers of alleged supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood have been sacked or arrested.

NEC Resolves:
1. To call for
a. immediate and unconditional release of those imprisoned for exercising rights to freedom of
expression and of assembly;
b. independent investigation into state violence and criminality, including assaults on those
exercising any of the rights and freedoms above;
c. an immediate end to trials of civilians in military and State Security courts
2. To work with MENA Solidarity Network and the campus trade unions (UCU, Unison and Unite) to
establish a broad-based solidarity initiative to defend Egyptians under threat from the military regime
by
a. circulating solidarity appeals and information about the campaign to our members and encouraging
them to participate in solidarity action
b. writing to the Egyptian authorities condemning the military repression
c. writing to the UK government calling for the immediate suspension of all financial, military or other
support to the Egyptian authorities which may be used to violate the rights of Egyptian citizens. In
particular, we demand immediate cessation of all sales and transfers to the Egyptian government of
weapons, ammunition, vehicles, cyber-surveillance technology and other materials for use against
those who exercise their right to protest.

Protest at Birmingham
NEC Believes:

1. Students who wish to take non-violent protest action on their campus have a right to do so.
2. Those universities banning protest on campus and seeking to criminalise non-violent protestors are
abusing their position of authority over protesting students.
3. It is totally unacceptable for a university to suspend a student for being arrested for non-violent protest.
4. Bail conditions, like those given to the arrested Defend Education protestors in Birmingham on
Wednesday 29 January, are draconian and designed to frighten students away from activism.
5. The behaviour of a number of different police forces towards activists in the last 6 months has been
unacceptable – from the use of kettling, strip search, refusing medical care, withholding food and water,
not allowing access to toilets and taking arrestees to police stations far away from their point of their
arrest and hiding police numbers is immoral and indefensible.
6. The use of the above tactics has a detrimental effect on the mental health of activists; weather they are
being implemented by the police or fellow activists.
7. On 29th January 2014 over 150 students participated in a national demonstration in Birmingham for
free education, for a democratic university and against a staff pay cut.
8. The body of the protest was contained by West Midlands police and university security at around 4pm
9. The students were held in the rain without food, water or access to toilets for over 4 hours.
10. This appears to closely resemble ‘kettling’ although West Midlands Police deny that kettling took place.
11. Students were only released if they agreed to give their details to police. When this tactic and tactics
similar to this have been used before, they have been found to be illegal.
12. All students who did not give their details were arrested
13. The arrestees were held for up to 30 hours.
10




14. Arrestees were strip searched and had phones, notebooks, and tablet computers confiscated
15. When released, bail conditions imposed included banning students from entering any UK university
campus, meeting in groups of more than 10, and sleeping anywhere but their registered address.
16. All arrestees at the University of Birmingham have been suspended until September and banned from
campus by the University Management.
17. That the University of Birmingham has been condemned in the past by Amnesty International for their
attempts to stifle protest.

NEC Further Believes:

1. The last NEC discussed and passed policy on the nuances of relationships that students' unions have in
relation to the police and 'Cops off Campus'
2. ‘Cops Off Campus is a legitimate policy aim, but it takes compromise from students on that campus
not to take part in activity that requires a police presence.
3. Choosing to occupy a structurally unsafe building, or kettling a sabbatical officer, police community
support officer or student gives the police legitimate cause to come onto campus.
4. That there is good reason to question the legality of the police’s behaviour with regard to their
containment of the protestors and their forcing the protestors to give details under threat of arrest.
5. That access to water, food and toilets are human rights which should not be restricted
6. The university of Birmingham has actively used police to stifle legitimate protest
7. That the tactics used by the university of Birmingham and West Midland police were highly intimidating.
8. The use of suspensions by the university of Birmingham to stifle protest is an attack on democracy and
the right to protest, and sets a dangerous precedent for other universities
9. The university has therefore suspended students for not giving their details to police.
10. That NUS and students’ unions have a responsibility to defend their students and the right to protest on
campus.

NEC Resolves:

1. Write to the West Midlands Police and Crime Commissioner demanding an investigation into police
tactics and behaviour at the University of Birmingham
2. Issue a request for UUK to tell Vice-Chancellors to stop criminalising non-violent protest on campus
3. For NUS to promote the ‘activists mental health toolkit’ to the membership and sure nationally we are
taking these guides into account when we are orgainsing our own action.
(http://www.nusconnect.org.uk/news/article/studentmentalhealth/Activist-Mental-Health-Guides-
download-now/)
4. To mandate the Vice President Society and Citizenship to write a statement, expressing the contents of
this motion, on behalf of NUS to be published on the NUS website.
5. To support to the on-going campaign at Birmingham University for the living wage


11




Emergency motion: UCU marking boycott

NEC Believes:
1. The ongoing UK-wide pay dispute in HE, in which staff in universities are fighting against a real-terms
pay cut of up to 13%.
2. That UCU have announced a marking boycott starting from the 28
th
of April
3. That this action may mean students are unable to graduate or progress.

NEC further believes:
1. That universities and the HE sector have the money to pay staff fairly.
2. That the belligerence demonstrated by university managements and UCEA in the dispute so far show
the need for staff to take action beyond traditional one-day strikes.
3. That students being unable to graduate or progress is a disgrace but that the blame for this lies
squarely and exclusively with the management of institutions, not with the staff unions.
4. That management will attempt to drive a wedge between students and staff in order to break the strike.
5. That support from students can play a decisive role in winning this dispute for staff and ensuring that
nobody is prevented from graduating or progressing.
6. That the long-term impact to students of staff losing this dispute will be far greater than the short-term
impact of this action.

NEC resolves:
1. To reaffirm our support for university staff in this dispute.
2. To communicate this support to UCU, EIS, Unison and Unite, as well as to UCEA.
3. To communicate this support and our firm believe that UCEA and university management are to blame
to our members.
4. To support students and students’ associations who wish to complain about the impact this will have on
them and their members to do so to UCEA and university management.



12



President

Priorities
Main Priorities Progress (what have you achieved since the last NEC)

New Deal for the Next Generation


General Election hub commissioned. Launching to students’ unions (July 2014)


Education

Won campaign to protect the Student Opportunities Fund
New Deal for Education fringe at NUS National Conference
Met with Liam Byrne MP, Shadow Higher Education Minister to discuss HE policy


Work

Student Employment Summit (March 2014)
New Deal for Work fringe at NUS National Conference
Commission on the Future of Work launched (May 2014)
Series of membership webinars and briefings on New Deal for Work


Community


Political & Constitutional Reform Committee oral evidence session on voter participation
Joined House of Commons Speaker’s Commission on Digital Democracy and attended
New Deal for Community fringe at NUS National Conference


Women in Leadership


Women and Leadership fringe at NUS National Conference


KPIs
Area of work KPI Status
Education Developed FE complaints pilot with the 157 group/OIA Complete
Education Discussed single application and admissions system with UCAS for post-16 education Complete
Education Pilot funding for Postgraduate Taught (PGT) via BIS Complete
Education Office of Fair Trading (OFT) inquiry into non-academic debt Complete
Education Student protection assurances over sale of pre-2012 student loan book Complete
Education Office of Fair Trading inquiry into UK Higher Education Complete
Education Scrapping of 24+ Advanced Learner Loans for apprentices Complete
Education Agreement from BIS to launch Framework for Partnership with UUK Complete
Work NUS/New Economics Foundation Report – ‘Modern Jobs Economy’ (July 2013) Complete
Work NUS/TUC Campaigning Partnership (September 2013) Complete
Work NUS/UNISON Living Wage Report (November 2013) Complete
Work Employment Summit (March 2014) Complete
Work 12 regional employment events hosted Pending
Work Commission Consultation: Regional Employment Events/Webinars (March 2014-) Pending
Work Employment Summit Complete
Work Commission on the Future Work launched Complete
Work Produce collaborative think-piece on student employment (Future of Work Commission report) Pending
Community 8 x Skills for Change Events Delivered (August/September) Complete
Community We Are The Change Event (October 2013) Complete
Community 12 x student-staff community organisers in post (October/November 2013-) Complete
Community 12 x Voter Registration Activities Complete
Community 10 x local I am/We Are The Change events Pending
Women 50 women leaders mentored for 1 year Pending
Women 50,000 more votes in elections – the majority being from Women Pending
Women 20% increase in the number of women standing in students’ union elections Pending
Women 100% of NUS staff to have attended equality and diversity training Pending
Author: Toni Pearce
Date Produced: 08/05/14
Committees: NEC
Action: Approve
Report




Attendance at events/meetings and actions taken or agreed
Event/Meeting Outcomes and/or actions taken or agreed on
Lad Culture Summit Gave closing remarks
Summit on Students’ and Work Attended by Dr Vince Cable MP and gave opening remarks
Students’ Green Fund
parliamentary reception
Gave speech at the parliamentary reception for the 25 Students’ Green Fund projects in
House of Lords with keynote speech by David Willetts MP

Membership Engagement
Member Union Purpose and anything to report on
Surrey Students’ Union Elections panel debate
Strategy and Scrutiny Gave speech and met with staff and officers across the membership
Exeter Students’ Union and
University
Took part in debate on fees with Sir Steve Smith and gave an interview with the student
newspaper
Disabled Students Conference Attended
Sections Conference Attended
Women’s Conference Attended
NUS Wales Conference Attended
National Conference Attended
Convention and AGM Attended
NUS-USI Conference Attended
Kent Union Gave speech on Making Students A Force Too Powerful To Ignore - Building for 2015
University of Ulster Gave speech at Student Experience Workshop
Roehampton Students’ Union Visited Students’ Green Fund project opening
Northampton Students’ Union Gave speech at Student Led Teaching Awards evening

Media engagement and external relations
Event/Meeting Outcomes and/or actions taken or agreed on
AoC Annual HE Conference Gave keynote speech
Meeting with Liam Byrne MP Update on Labour’s higher education policy development process
Meeting at GuildHE with Tristram Hunt MP Attended meeting to discuss FE policy development
QAA for HE Annual Reception Attended with other NUS officers and staff members
Political & Constitutional Reform Committee Oral evidence as party of inquiry into voter engagement in the UK
International Education Council Working Group Chaired the first meeting of the working group at BIS
Meeting with ACERT – Advisory Council for the
Education of Romany and other Travellers
Introductory meeting and discussion
Youth Roundtable with Facebook Co-chaired with Femi Oyeniran. Attended by student officers and ‘NEETs’
Meeting with Shami Shakrabarti, Liberty Meeting with Shami and Sabina Frediani, Campaigns Coordinator
Youth Employment Convention Took part in debate chaired by Matthew Taylor on "Do we have the
ambition to address the challenges of youth unemployment and the skills
deficit?"
Association of Teachers and Lecturers reception Gave speech at reception in House of Commons

Declaration of gifts, hospitality and interests
Declaration Further comment





Vice President (Higher Education)

Priorities
Main Priorities Progress (what have you achieved since the last NEC)
HE Regulation We worked with the Corporate Forms Working Group of the Regulatory Partnership Group to
set out basic rights for students in the new fees regime. These included to ensure students’
unions are recognised in the regulation of HE, that students are protected in the eventually
of institutional failure for financial or regulatory reasons, that students studying on
franchised courses validated by a different institution are treated with parity, and every HE
student has access to the OIA regardless of where they study. Our recommendations were
accepted by the RPG and will form the underlying principles of the next HE Bill. Basically,
that’s a huge win and I’m bloody proud.
Partnership The minister for Universities asked me and Janet Beer, VC of Oxford Brookes, to re-form
Student Charters Group to create a ‘Framework for Partnership’. This is a task and finish
group, and by June we will have reviewed the progress of charters and partnership
agreements across the UK and offer guidance and case studies to students, students’ unions
and institutions on how to make their charters live and breathe. The toolkit will focus on
student success, the role of student representation and induction in creating meaningful
partnership between students and staff.
Access Having told us that there would be no National Strategy for Access despite HEFCE and OFFA
working on it for 18 months, BIS then released the much anticipated National Strategy for
Access which brings together university access agreements and WP strategies. We released
our guidance and boot camps as if this wasn’t a thing, but it’ll be taken into account going
forward. One of areas we’ve been supporting unions with is to think about how an ever
shrinking pot of money should be spent – access, outreach, bursaries, hardship, etc. – and
how to hold their institutions accountable on the issue.
Grade Point Average We brought together some of the students’ unions from the 21 institutions across the UK
who are piloting different models of GPA. Unions discussed the areas of implementation and
process they were most concerned about, but also more fundamental issues with the GPA
agenda. Policy was sent to National Conference and we continue to engage – albeit critically
- with the GPA agenda.
Course Reps We held two national course rep conferences in Goldsmiths and York, with over 250
attendees. It was amazing, because course reps are amazing.
Small and Specialist We held the second of our joint days with Guild HE (the representative body for small and
specialists) in March, which focused on employment, employability and access. It was great,
because small and specialist unions are great.
Arts We held two State of The Arts Days with students studying arts education and are creating
an arts strategy off the back of this work.

Other achievements of my Zone
Achievement Progress (what have you achieved since the last NEC)
UCU Pay Dispute Speaking with UCU regularly and keeping unions informed. Advice and sometimes
mediation between an SU and their UCU branch.
ESU Thanks to Kelley and Seb who represented NUS UK at ESU BM66 in Vienna.
Professional Education Report on policy developments coming together. Survey is likely to be delayed until the
next academic year (*sob*).
General Election Discussing with HE Zone and presented at a National Conference on Future of Education
and GE strategy.
PG funding Continue to press for guarantees from political parties. Future of PCDL up for discussion
(scrap it!!)

Key Performance Indicators
Event/Meeting Outcomes and/or actions taken or agreed on
Author: Rachel Wenstone
Date Produced: 12/05/14
Committees: NEC
Action: Approve
Report




Launch of general election education manifesto June 2014
Democratic Institutions Research report released Audit toolkit launched at Zone Conference
Health, social care and initial teacher research published May 2014
Arts education SU resource published Arts Day held April 2014. Arts Strategy to follow.
Induction report published May 2014
2 Guild HE events Autumn 2013 and Summer 2014

Attendance at events/meetings and actions taken or agreed
Event/Meeting Outcomes and/or actions taken or agreed on
10/02 QAA Student Advisory
Board
I co-chair this group. Meeting discussed cause for concern procedures and student
complaints.
11/02 UCAS Panel Spoke on a panel at a schools and colleges conference on supporting students to make
informed decisions about HE.
12/02 HEFCE’s Teaching, Quality
and Student Experience strategic
advisory committee
Discussed all things teaching, quality and student experience
14/02 GPA Met with Bob Burgess and the HEA to discuss the development of the GPA agenda
20/02 NEC Meeting
21/02 NUS UK Trustee Board
26/02 Framework for Partnership Co-chair - First meeting of the task and finish group
28/02 RPG Regulatory Partnership Group (see top of my report)
03/03 I Am Visible Sat on a panel about women in different careers to young girls and women
11/03 Lord Stoneham Lib Dem Policy Lead for HE in the Lords. Discussed UG and PG funding and youth
unemployment. Bumped into my mate Alan Sugar.
12/03 QAA Board and Annual
Reception

18/03 Education Not for Sale Joint meeting of different education unions organised by TUC
18/03 Doughty Street Chambers Discuses protest on campus
20/03 GPA Advisory Group
24/03 TSEP Steering Group The Student Engagement Partnership
28/03 OIA Board Meeting
01/04 Manchester Uni Learning
and Teaching Conference
Delivered a keynote
02/04 OIA Good Practice
Framework Consolation Launch
Delivered Keynote
24/04 Framework for Partnership
30/04 NUS Audit Risk and
Remuneration Committee

06/05 Westminster Higher
Education Forum
Spoke on a panel about ‘are students consumers?’ (hint - no). Basically shouted at an
education lawyer. It was great.

Plans before the next meeting
Action/Work area What I hope to achieve
Wrapping up partnership work
and handing over to Megan
Eternal happiness.

Membership Engagement
Member Union Purpose and anything to report on
08/02 Course Reps! National Course Rep Conference in Goldsmiths (I <3 course reps)
13/02 Leeds Met Course Rep Conference Delivered some training and a keynote
15/02 Course Reps! National Course Rep Conference in York (I <3 course reps)
17/02 HE Zone Committee Meeting
25/02 NUS Wales Course Rep Conference in
Wrexham.
Delivered training. Generally hung-out with Welsh course reps.
27/02 Strategy and Scrutiny Strategised and scrutinised in Manchester
01/03 PG and MPT Committee
03/03 Institute of Education SU Chaired discussion on future of IoE and IoE SU
07/03 Guild HE and NUS event Delivered workshops
13-15/03 Sections Conferences
16/03 Composition for National Conference
18/03 Stop the Sell Off Stunt
20/03 Homes Fit For Study Launch
30/03 UJS Student Awards
03/04 HE Zone Committee
07-10/04 National Conference
23/04 State of the Arts For music and performance arts




24/04 State of the Arts For creative arts
29/04 UEL Student Led Teaching Awards
01/05 Exeter Student Led Teaching Awards There was taxidermy.
02/05 Plymouth Student Led Teaching Awards
06/05 Hull Student Led Teaching Awards
15/05 BCU Student Led Teaching Awards
16/05 Kingston Student Led Teaching Awards

Media engagement and external relations
09/05 You and Yours, Radio 4 Shortest interview ever on ‘value for money’

Declaration of gifts, hospitality and interests
I took 2 years’ worth of TOIL after National Conference
Lots of food and alcohol related to student led teaching
awards. I don’t have favourites, but if you give me pick and
mix, I’ll leave happy.







Vice-President (Welfare) – NUS Welfare Zone

Priorities
Four key priorities:
 Homes Fit For Study
 Winning on Welfare
 Student Health
 Local Public Services
Priority area Area of work Progress
Homes Fit For Study Homes Fit for Study: Private
Rented Sector research
Launched report on higher education findings on 20 March with a
sector launch event attended by 100 people from the education
and housing sectors, government and students’ unions. Press
coverage has been received in various national and local news
outlets including the Guardian, Independent, Huffington Post,
Daily Mail and even the Daily Mash… (that’s when you know
you’ve made it) We also got TV coverage from the BBC including a
live interview. We have already started the process of meeting
with key stakeholders to work towards our recommendations
becoming a reality and will continue to do so in the coming
months, along with incorporating the recommendations into our
key General Election asks. We will be doing further analysis on
further education, and nations respondents in the coming months,
as well as other student groups.
Homes Fit For Study Guidance for students’ unions –
“Housing How To”
Continued to launch editions of “Housing How To” which continues
to have high uptake and positive response from the membership –
the most recent editions have been on international students and
how to set up tenants’ unions. We will shortly be launching one on
Rate Your Landlord initiatives including some brief legal advice for
students’ unions on how to avoid libellous activity when
conducting Rate Your Landlord research.
Homes Fit For Study London Academic Forum
(London only)
We have submitted a response to the consultation on the Further
Alterations to the London Plan document in which the affordability
requirement we had lobbied for through the London Academic
Forum were watered down. We have, along with other key
stakeholders, highlighted the significance of this change, and will
continue to lobby to ensure the safeguards in place are as strong
as possible – we are hoping that this will be the first region in the
UK where affordability requirements will be placed on student
accommodation providers. We have also written a letter directly to
Boris Johnson, and we provided both the consultation response,
and the letter, along with a comprehensive briefing to students’
unions so that they could respond themselves.
Homes Fit For Study Responded to Department of
Communities and Local
Government (DCLG) private
rented sector property review
(England only)
Submitted a response to the consultation which considers how the
government should respond to issues around property conditions
in the private rented sector, including pushing for rent repayment
orders where poor conditions persist, limiting powers to evict and
compulsory provision of smoke alarms and carbon monoxide
detectors.
Homes Fit For Study Worked with DCLG on the
creation of a tenants’ charter
(England only)
Participated in workshops and informal consultation on the content
of the government’s tenants’ charter which will set out tenants’
rights in the private rented sector.
Winning on Welfare Drafting casework recording
guidelines
We are continuing work on drafting casework recording guidelines
for students’ union advice centres. These will be voluntary, but will
help to enable students’ unions to input into national data
collection on students’ union casework. Where this work has
previously only been focussed on those unions who use Advice
Author: Colum McGuire
Date Produced: April 2014
Committees: NEC
Action: Approve
Report




Pro, we are establishing ways to open this up to other students’
unions as well. We are also looking to run an event for advisors in
June to launch the guidelines, and to help students’ unions
develop their skills around casework reporting.
Winning on Welfare Expanding welfare
representation
We’ve been working this year to work with students’ unions to
expand welfare representation in their unions – 5 unions have now
created a new full time welfare officer position in their structures
that will be up for election this year (will a few more close to
finalising it) as well as a number of other unions to create part
time positions along with groups/committees working on student
welfare.
Student Health Alcohol Impact We now recruited a project manager in post to coordinate our
work around alcohol, and we have identified seven pilot students’
unions which the project will be working with. Initial planning is
now underway with the formal launch of the project in May, when
we will start to share much more detail with the rest of the
movement.
Local Public Services Transport campaigning Supported the Campaign for Better Transport in calling for flexible
rail tickets for part-time workers and students by co-signing a
letter to the Transport Minister.
Local Public Services Students and crime We attended a roundtable discussion on crime prevention chaired
by the Minister for Crime Prevention, Norman Baker, to discuss
government strategy. The group will devise a set of
recommendations over the next six months for the minister and
Home Office to take forward.


Other work of the Welfare Zone
Area of work Progress (what have you achieved since the last NEC)
Monthly Student Loans
campaign
Ran a week of action to mobilise students to sign government petition to open a debate on
students receiving student loans monthly
OFT report on academic
sanctions
In February, the OFT released its report on academic sanctions which vindicated NUS’
long-held position that such sanctions were unfair when used to enforce non-academic
debt, and even where academic debt was involved, had to be proportionate. Following on
from this we held a joint event with Unipol on the implications of the ruling, attended by
SU officers and staff and HEI staff from finance, accommodation and student services as
well as the OFT and external lawyers.
Access to Learning Fund Since the announcement that ALF will no longer be a ring-fenced funding stream in HEIs in
England we have met with BIS and HEFCE on the new guidance and expressed our strong
concerns in relation to the decision and the scrapping of much of the present guidance.
Disabled Students’ Allowances Following the announcement of cuts to the DSA in England, and the emergency motion at
Conference, the Welfare Zone has been working closely with the Disabled Students
Campaign on a plan of action which includes a day of action, policy briefings for the
membership, further research and discussions with a range of sector partners who are all
opposed to the decision. We will continue to work on this.
New EMA model We have worked up the new EMA model for England and have asked an independent
consultant to cost up our proposals. We hope to discuss these in depth soon.
Care leavers The Buttle Trust have announced they plan to end their work running a quality mark for HE
and FE institutions in relation to support for care leavers. We have met with them to
discuss how the work of the quality mark can continue, and will be attending two events in
June (one for each sector) to provide further input.
Faith work for FE and Nations Won increased funding for an additional staff member that will work to support faith and
belief projects and issues specifically in FE and in the Nations
Funding on Interfaith projects Secured £10,000 to give out to students’ unions next year for work on interfaith projects
Faith & Belief FE project Have started to roll out Faith & Belief in FE project, aiming to boost number of faith &
belief groups in FE and support for issues faith & belief students face in FE. Delivered
sessions on faith and belief in Leicester, Middlesbrough and Guildford colleges.
Isolation and Vulnerability
research
Finishing research into Isolation & Vulnerability in HE which will be published soon

Key Performance Indicators
KPI Outcomes and/or actions taken or agreed on
9 x “Homes fit for study“ briefings produced 8 briefings produced
Leadership in welfare document produced Completed
Mental health conference held with 80 delegates Completed
PCC guide produced TBA
24+ALL policy amended to exclude higher
apprenticeships
Completed




CPAG book written and distributed to SUs Completed

Attendance at events/meetings of note
Event/Meeting Date Details
ANUK/Unipol Committee of Management 10
th
February Governing committee of housing accreditation codes
Meeting with National Interfaith
Organisations
18
th
February Group meeting with organisation working on interfaith
issues and how they can incorporated to educational
institutions
Wales Welfare Bootcamp 21
st
February Ran a bootcamp day for Welsh unions on welfare issues
such as healthcare, transport and housing specific to
Wales
Meeting with Student Minds 24
th
February Met with new Student Minds organisation working on
student mental health
Sudanese delegation visit to NUS 25
th
February Welcomed a delegation of student leaders from Sudan
and delivered a session on NUS and the student
movement in the UK
Meeting with national student faith and
belief organisations
25
th
February Group meeting with national student groups
representing different faith & belief student groups
NUS Strategy & Scrutiny 27
th
* 28
th
February
UUK Governance Board 7
th
March Governance board of UUK governance code on student
housing
DPC Drafting Commission 9
th
March Attended drafting commission as NEC observer on DPC
NUS Welfare Zone Committee 12
th
March
Student Loans Company Stakeholder
Group
13
th
March
DPC Compositing 16
th
March Attended compositing as NEC observer on DPC
Greater London Assembly – Unpaid
Internships inquiry
20
th
March Gave evidence at inquiry on Unpaid Internships at the
Greater London Assembly
Alcohol Impact stakeholders group
meeting
25
th
March First meeting of the group of pilot unions in Alcohol
Impact
NUS Wales conference 26
th
& 27
th
March
Meeting with the National Federation of
Atheist, Humanist and Secularist Student
Societies President
31
st
March
NUS National Conference 8
th
– 10
th
April That happened.
AUDE (Association of Director of Estates)
conference
14
th
April Spoke to over 100 delegates with senior positions in
estates in universities on the importance of working in
partnership with the student body, focussing on issues
around campus accommodation, prayer space and
childcare.

Membership Engagement
Member Union Date Purpose and anything to report on
South Eastern Regional College SU 5
th
February Union visit – took part in National Voter Registration Day drive
Belfast Met College SU 5
th
February Union visit
St Mary’s University College SU 6
th
February Union visit
Queens University Belfast SU 6
th
February Union visit and attended UCU Rally
Bournemouth SU 19
th
February Union visit
Kingston SU 27
th
February Spoke at AGM
Sheffield Hallam SU 28
th
February Delivered training at Course Rep Conference
Heythrop College SU 3
rd
March Spoke at TED event
Barking and Dagengam College SU 5
th
March Spoke on Question Time panel
Ravensbourne College SU 17
th
March Union visit and inducted new welfare officer

Media engagement and external relations
Media outlet Date Purpose and anything to report on
BBC Radio 4 – ‘You and Yours’ 24
th
February Interview on rising numbers of students having to use food
banks due to inadequate student funding
BBC Newsbeat 20
th
March Homes Fit for Study research
BBC Radio London
BBC Asian Network
BBC Radio Coventry and Warwickshire
BBC Radio Kent
BBC Radio Foyle
BBC Radio Ulster
BBC Radio Tees
BBC Radio Berkshire
20
th
/21
st
March Interviews across UK on release of Homes Fit for Study
research project




BBC Radio Cambridgeshire
BBC Radio Essex
BBC Radio Derby
BBC Radio Gloucestershire
BBC Radio Hereford
BBC Radio Humberside
BBC Radio Lancashire
BBC Radio Lincoln
BBC Radio Merseyside
BBC Radio Norfolk
BBC Radio Northampton
BBC Radio Nottingham
BBC Radio Scotland
BBC Radio Sheffield
BBC Radio Shropshire
BBC Radio Solent
BBC Radio Somerset
BBC Radio Suffolk
BBC Radio Sussex
BBC Radio Wiltshire
Guardian 21
st
March Homes Fit for Study research
Daily Mail 21
st
March Homes Fit for Study research
The Independent 21
st
March Homes Fit for Study research
Daily Mash 21
st
March Homes Fit for Study research – parody article!
MSN 24
th
March Homes Fit for Study research
Huffington Post 24
th
March Homes Fit for Study research
Which? 25
th
March Homes Fit for Study research
Various Local News outlets 20
th
– 25
th
March Coverage in various local press including big names such as
the ‘Shropshire Star’ and ‘Plymouth Herald’ on Homes fit For
Study
The Independent 27
th
March Homes Fit for Study research
The Independent 6
th
April Interview on rising numbers of students accessing food banks
due to inadequate student funding
BBC Breakfast 21
st
April Live interview on Homes Fit for Study research

Declaration of gifts, hospitality and interests
Declaration Further comment
Hoodie from Bournemouth It’s purple which is in my colour wheel so that’s good.





Review of the Block of 15

Background and terms of reference
At motion reviewing the role of the National Executive Council was passed at National Conference 2013. It
stated (as a Believes clause): “There are widespread views and some misunderstanding surrounding the Block
of Fifteen on the executive.”
It therefore resolved: “That a special committee of the National Executive Council is formed to review support
for and communication around the National Executive Council Block of 15. This should include the
appropriateness of current budgeting and expenses arrangements.”
I was appointed by the National President and the NEC in July 2013 to fulfil this role.
Since my appointment, I have discussed the review with other members of the NEC (including current and
former Block members) as well as taking in my own personal experience of being on the Block of 15.
Role of the Block of 15
History
The history of the Block of 15 is complex
1
. The precursor of the Block was created in 1963 with the creation of
three open places on the NEC (bringing it to 10 members – the President, Treasurer, Secretary and 4 Vice-
Presidents without portfolio being the other members).
In 1969 this was changed with the enlargement of the NEC to 15 members. There were now 4 NEC Committee
members as well as three Executive Officers without portfolio. The Executive Officers were expected to be part-
time officers, actually doing things, while the committee members merely contributed to NEC meetings.
In 1980, this two-tier structure of part-time NEC members was converted to a three-tier structure of Executive
Officers, Executive Members and Committee Members (elected in Blocks of three, four and five respectively).
This was changed in 1989 to be consolidated into the Block of 12, which remained in place until 2009. The
Block of 12 were elected in the same manner as the modern Block of 15, and were allocated areas of
responsibility and expected to “do things”. During the 2000s Block members were paid an honorarium of £270
per month to cover these responsibilities.
2007-2009 changes
Starting in 2007 and implemented in 2009, following a wide-ranging governance review the Block of 12 was
converted to a Block of 15. Block of 15 members are unpaid and are not expected to perform the same


1
My thanks go to Mike Day for providing this information.
Proposed by: Charles Barry
Date produced: 25/04/2014
Committees: NEC
Action: Approve
Report




workload as the Block of 12. The cost saving from these changes to NUS was approximately £39,000. Block of
12 members also sat on two Zone Committees, unlike the Block of 15 who do not sit on Zone Committees at
all.
The rationale for these changes was partly that the NEC had evolved from a National Executive Committee –
deciding and directing NUS’s work – into a National Executive Council – deciding emergency policy and holding
the full-time offices to account. The NEC expanded from 27 members to 41, and following the abolition of the
70-member National Council, the NEC gained its powers to pass emergency policy.
These changes were also partly due to the emergence of the Liberation Campaigns and Sections, the creation of
the Zone Committees as separately elected bodies and the fact that the number of full-time officers had
increased from 7 in 1989 to 14 in 2007.
These changes have created an anomaly. Block members are still scrutinised, campaigned for and elected at
National Conference in a way more reflective of the time when they were paid part-time officers. This has
created an ‘expectations gap’ between what people imagine their role is and what NUS actually allows Block
members to do.
The key conundrum of the Block of 15 lies in their authority and ability to implement their own agenda. This is
highly uncertain. Many candidates run at National Conference on an agenda of implementing certain policies,
but in reality, they will never be able to implement these except in the most tangential way – for example,
when it comes to taking viewpoints in the passing of motions.
A partial reason for this is that the role of the Block of 15 has never been formalised in either current policy or
the constitution. The only formal role description is the one that “All members of the National Executive Council
shall have a general duty to uphold the constitution of the National Union and abide by its provisions, and to
abide by any code of conduct issued in accordance with the constitution.”
An additional reason is that with the creation of the Zone Committees, Block members now have little to no
input over the creation of NUS policy, and unlike the Block of 12, have no role in delivering policy either.
Recent developments
Despite the lack of a formal role description, a consensus amongst some of the role has emerged:
 Block members are responsible for scrutiny of the full-time officers, through reading their reports and
asking questions at NEC meetings.
 Block members are responsible for providing political diversity (through the nature of their election)
which feeds into informal consultations and the passing of emergency policy.
 Block members are responsible for communicating to the membership the work of the NEC to Unions in
a region of England, and for representing their views to the NEC.
There is a paradox in this current set-up in that Block members are nominated from and elected by Students’
Unions from across the country, but are only permitted to represent and communicate with Students’ Unions
within England.
Within regions, different approaches have been taken. Some regions have decided to allocate individual SUs to
specific Block members, while others have declined to do so. It is not clear to me which is the better solution –
while there are advantages to having one person to contact, if the sabbatical officers of a SU disagree politically
with that person, they might prefer to contact another Block member for the region.
In 2013, National Conference passed a change to the Constitution which stated “Each member of the Block of
15 will be allocated a principal scrutiny duty relating to a Zone of the National Union”.
This has caused enormous confusion and there has been no clear implementation of this change, only other
than to allocate Zones to Block members without clearly explaining what is expected of them.




I believe that it is pointless to separate students and officers who have been elected by our sovereign body to
represent their view points from the development and implementation of policy.
I therefore believe that Block of 15 members should be at the least included in the communications for their
allocated Zone Committee, so if not formally participating they can at least monitor and scrutinise the
implementation of policy. Accountability is just as much as knowing about what is going on between NEC
meetings as being able to ask questions.
At the present time, Zone Committee minutes are not publicly available. Block members should be provided
with the information to make them able to scrutinise the work of these Committees and their respective
Officers.
Support for Block of 15
The Block receive support from the NUS staff in the facilitation of meetings and the arrangement of travel and
other expenses.
Block members are also offered the opportunity to part in the NUS volunteer training programme.
The induction programme that Block members are provided with is quite perfunctory; last year this consisted of
a short presentation before the first NEC meeting.
There is divided opinion on changing the location or timing of NEC, which would potentially make meetings
more accessible for Block members who work or who are still studying. Moving the NEC out of London, while
making the meeting more of a national council, would have increased cost implications.
An area of concern that has been raised is the sometimes complex and inaccessible nature of papers,
particularly on financial matters. In area where the NEC is meant to be prioritising spending, meetings are often
presented with complex documents as a fait accompli with little to no ability to have any say over what has
been passed on from the Trustee Board.
Budgeting and expenses
The NEC are paid all expenses to travel to events to which they are invited, are paid accommodation when
necessary and are reimbursed for food costs. In this regard, no concern has been raised with regard to
expenses.
However, this is a fundamental uncertainty about the authority of Block members to claim for expenses on
events or activities when they are acting on their own initiative. For example, would a Block of 15 member be
allowed to claim travel to a Constituent Member in their allocated region? It is entirely unclear.
While Block members are paid expenses to travel to core meetings (NEC, Policy Development Conference and
National Conference), it appears that they can only participate in other areas (and expect to be repaid) with the
blessing of a full-time officer, which is fundamentally in contradiction in their role of holding those officers to
account.
I believe that is wholly incompatible with the way that the Block of 15 are elected that Block members should
have to rely on Full-Time Officers for support in either implementing their manifesto agenda or in representing
their own constituents. Therefore, Block members should be granted budgetary independence to travel to their
constituent Students’ Unions (if invited).
There have been some suggestions that the NUS should return to paying the Block of 15. I would disagree with
this. Firstly, there is no obvious need to change things – paying the Block of 15 would not likely increase the
effectiveness of Block members. Secondly, the cost of paying the Block of 15 would be a poor use of resources
– there are many other causes which members would likely prefer to prioritise (the costs saved from ending the
Block of 12 paid for the International Students Officer post). Thirdly, there is considerable doubt on the legality




of such an arrangement, unless the roles were formally employed posts. It would also likely be a cause for
problems in regard to visas for international students.
Communications
One of the central roles of the Block of 15 is to act as a channel of communication linking the work of the NEC
to English Students’ Unions. As part of this, Block members are expected to disseminate NEC papers and other
information.
In my view, this is not something that should continue. Members who are observing meetings via social media
often complain that they are unable to read the documents as they are not publicly accessible; consequently
individual members of the NEC have to give these out on an ad-hoc basis.
While some Block members provide an excellent quality of service, some do not and it is unreasonable to
continue to deliver key information through such an inconsistent channel of communication.
Furthermore, while Block members are meant to be the source of communication between their members and
the NEC, this is somewhat undermined by the fact that it is the full-time officers who communicate most with
the membership and make visits to Students’ Unions.
I therefore believe that NUS should disseminate centrally information to students and Students’ Unions and the
role of the Block should change to receiving feedback and communicating with member unions about the
information that has been sent out, should they so wish.
In turn, NUS needs to do more to build links between Block members and their Constituent Members. More
should be done to publicise and explain the existence and the role of the Block of 15 to members. This could be
done during summer training and through the organisation of regional events to allow Block members to meet
face to face with their constituents.
It is currently extremely difficult for Block members to find out who their constituents even are. While Block
members are provided with a list of contacts, these are only the President and a single staff member, and often
these data are hopelessly inaccurate.
In addition, the data provided to Block members allows for no sophisticated communication – for example, it
would be extremely hard work to find out the emails of all the welfare officers in a region, or those of officers
representing postgraduate students. It is not even straightforward to be able to determine which students’
unions are in sub-regions (such as Lancashire within the North region) without painstakingly consulting a map
and googling each contact.
Information about the role of the Block, or even who the Block members are, can be hard to find. At the time of
writing, the NEC membership on the main NUS website (nus.org.uk) has not been updated since November
2013 and is not in an obvious place. Furthermore, no information on their role is provided – instead a list of
portraits and email address is all that is available.
On nusconnect.org.uk, there is no simple or clear definition about what the role of either the NEC o the Block of
15 is for. While it is relatively easy to find portraits and emails for the NEC, there is no information on why you
should contact them or how they could help you. Other pages fail to explain the core governance role of the
NEC or the Block of 15, and the “get involved” page fails to mention the existence of the NEC.
Several Block members have expressed a concern that they have a poor grasp of what NUS is actually doing at
any given time. While Block members receive daily press digests, they are not integrated into NUS’s public
communications (or made aware of what these are). For this reason, many Block members feel that if they are
not a sabbatical officer or savvy enough to subscribe to JISCmail, then they are cut out of the loop within NUS.
Ironically though, Block members are often relied upon to communicate via social media and email the core
messages of the various campaigns of officers.




Conclusion and recommendations for action
The reality is that until there is a comprehensive review of the political structures of NUS, the quixotic and
confusing nature of the role of the Block of 15 will continue. The Block of 15 in its current form is a fudge
between competing models of governance from the 2007-2009 period.
Nevertheless there is scope for improving the Block within existing frameworks and therefore I recommend the
following actions:
1. A role description will be produced and approved by the NEC to provide clear and definitive information
on the precise expectations of the role. This will be published in advance of National Conference 2015
so that candidates can understand the precise nature of the role they are running for.
2. A budget will be allocated in the next set of estimates for each member of the Block of 15 to make use
of for travelling to Students’ Unions in their allocated Region at their discretion, to be divided equally
between each Block member.
3. A budget will be allocated in the next set of estimates to support the Block of 15 in campaigning on
national policy.
4. Block members will be allocated a Zone and a Region by the National President before the
commencement of their term of office (1
st
July), and the National President will invite Block members to
suggest their preferred Zone and Region before making an allocation.
5. NUS will provide an up-to-date list of the relevant contacts of the Students’ Unions in their region and
will provide contact details for Block members to Unions. NUS will encourage SUs to distribute NEC
material to a wider group than their sabbatical officers so that students can contact Block members as
well. In addition, NUS will look to be able to provide more than just the contact details of the President
and a staff member to Block members.
6. The role of the Block of 15 will be explained to SU Officers as part of NUS summer training events, and
at training Officers will receive their Block members’ contact details.
7. Block members will be shown papers and included in discussions relating to their allocated Zone
Committee and categorised as committee observers. The relationship between Zone Committees and
the Block will be formalised and integrated into the role description of the Block.
8. NUS will organise regional events allowing for the Block members in that region to meet their
respective officers and discuss NUS-related issues.
9. Block members will no longer be expected to send out the NEC papers to their respective members.
This function will be performed centrally by NUS, with NEC members receiving feedback from SUs.
10. The NEC Clerks will arrange a system for allowing Block members who cannot attend meetings to ask
questions by proxy.
11. The NEC Clerks will be responsible and accountable at each meeting for the timely publication of all NEC
material:
o The names and contact details of all NEC members should be made clear in an easy-to-find part
of nusconnect.org.uk and nus.org.uk
o All NEC papers should be published on these websites at the same time that they are provided
to NEC members by email.
o Minutes should be circulated and published in draft form no later than two weeks after each
meeting of the NEC.
I recommend that the National President as Chair of the NEC is mandated to ensure the
implementation of these recommendations.



Detailed Internal Budgets










1. Background and Context


Author: Dave Farbrother, Natasha Wharfe
Date Produced: 07/05/14
Committees: NEC
Action: Note
Report
Summary: Each year NUS National Conference debates and agrees a set of “Estimates”, these are
high level budgets that reflect the overall political direction of NUS. Following Conference
these are then converted to “Detailed Internal Budgets”, or DIBS which are then used
internally.

The first section lists the main figures, with subsequent sections explaining what is in
each area. Note that these have also been phased appropriately across the financial
year.


07/05/2014 Page 2

Details
Salary & NEC
Costs
Activity Costs Group Recharge Income Net
1. Unrestricted Income
NUS Extra 0 0 0 1,500,000 1,500,000
Affiliation Fees 0 0 0 3,906,000 3,906,000
Other Core & EFP Income 0 0 0 1,487,000 1,487,000
Total 0 0 0 6,893,000 6,893,000
2. Zones, Liberation & Sections
Higher Education Zone 29,792 0 0 0 (29,792)
Further Education Zone 29,777 0 0 0 (29,777)
Welfare Zone 29,792 0 0 0 (29,792)
Society & Citizenship Zone 25,925 0 0 0 (25,925)
Union Development Zone 29,792 0 0 0 (29,792)
Womens Campaign 30,422 0 0 0 (30,422)
Black Students Campaign 29,792 0 0 0 (29,792)
Disabled Students 29,792 0 0 0 (29,792)
LGBT 59,466 0 0 0 (59,466)
International Students 29,792 0 0 0 (29,792)
Mature & Part Time 0 0 0 0 0
Postgraduate 0 0 0 0 0
Priority Campaign 0 76,000 0 0 (76,000)
Other Campaigns 0 171,953 0 0 (171,953)
Cross Liberations 0 0 0 0 0
Local Campaigning Capacity 47,589 0 0 0 (47,589)
Long Term Campaign 0 20,000 0 0 (20,000)
Sections Conferences 0 10,000 0 0 (10,000)
Total 371,932 277,953 0 0 (649,884)
3. Goverance
Democracy 0 22,000 0 0 (22,000)
National Conference 0 300,000 0 40,000 (260,000)
National Executive Council 0 35,000 0 0 (35,000)
Liberation Conferences 0 185,000 0 60,000 (125,000)
Zone Conferences 0 90,000 0 90,000 0
Affiliations 0 20,000 0 0 (20,000)
Access 0 30,000 0 0 (30,000)
Total 0 682,000 0 190,000 (492,000)
4. Policy & Delivery Unit
Political Strategy Unit 448,999 66,280 0 0 (515,279)
Higher Education Unit 196,143 24,555 0 0 (220,698)
Further Education Unit 254,892 40,217 0 0 (295,108)
Social Policy Unit 198,422 21,556 0 0 (219,978)
Membership Development Unit 0 0 0 0 0
Policy Unit 133,448 19,980 0 0 (153,428)
Policy Convention 0 20,000 0 0 (20,000)
Strategic Conversation 0 24,000 0 28,000 4,000
Policy & Delivery Unit 56,735 12,000 0 0 (68,735)
Total 1,288,638 228,588 0 28,000 (1,489,226)
5. Nations
Scotland 314,506 123,900 0 22,500 (415,906)
Donation to Scottish Charity 0 60,000 0 0 (60,000)
Wales 314,805 120,374 0 44,400 (390,779)
NUS-USI 134,232 35,395 0 128,500 (41,127)
Total 763,543 339,669 0 195,400 (907,812)
07/05/2014 Page 3

Details
Salary & NEC
Costs
Activity Costs Group Recharge Income Net
6. Services & Resources
Events & Conferencing Unit 0 0 48,623 0 (48,623)
Finance 0 0 197,508 0 (197,508)
NUSHQ 0 0 (46,627) 0 46,627
Executive Office 0 0 57,551 0 (57,551)
Corporate Governance 0 0 21,759 0 (21,759)
Customer Services 0 0 50,583 0 (50,583)
People & Admin 0 0 112,451 0 (112,451)
Chief Executive 0 0 0 0 0
Communications 0 0 173,919 0 (173,919)
IT 0 0 282,173 0 (282,173)
Analytics 0 0 20,827 0 (20,827)
Strategic Development 154,427 100,000 0 0 (254,427)
Total 154,427 100,000 918,768 0 (1,173,195)
7. Other Operating Expenditure
Management Task 0 0 0 0 0
Infrastructure 0 562,637 0 0 (562,637)
Scotland Infrastructure 0 113,123 0 0 (113,123)
Wales Infrastructure 0 50,427 0 0 (50,427)
NUS-USI Infrastructure 0 31,976 0 0 (31,976)
Irrecoverable VAT 0 60,000 0 0 (60,000)
Pension Deficit Contribution 0 409,506 0 0 (409,506)
Total 0 1,227,670 0 0 (1,227,670)
8. Charity (Donations from NUS)
Donation to UK Charity 0 680,376 0 0 (680,376)
Donation to Scottish Charity 0 173,634 0 0 (173,634)
Total 0 854,010 0 0 (854,010)
Subtotal 2,578,540 3,709,889 918,768 7,306,400 99,204
07/05/2014 Page 4
1 | Unrestricted Income



NUS Cards: NUS Extra represents one of the major sources of income to NUS. The above figures reflect a phased programme to increase the net contribution to NUS
of the NUS Extra card over the coming years.

Affiliation Fee Income: The expected income from affiliation fees is anticipated to remain at similar levels to the current year’s estimate but lower than the actual
amount received this year given the increases in block grants and no change to the methodology as discussed above. As total block grants have risen this will result
in a reduction in the affiliation fee as a proportion of block grants overall.

Affinity Income: This is income generated by NUS Services for NUS UK from various marketing initiatives.

Other Income

This includes the following:
 contribution to overheads from externally funded projects
 investment income – being preference dividends on the shares Endsleigh granted NUS
 bank interest
 sponsorship income – primarily this is from Endsleigh who continue their invaluable support of the student movement

2 | Zones, Liberations & Sections

In this section you will find costs relating to NUS’ range of centrally run campaigns and some costs relating to relevant full time officers. A detailed
explanation of what each area covers is given below each subsection. Some income directly related to this area is illustrated at the end of the
section.

The allocation of Other Campaigns costs for Zones, Liberations and sections will be agreed by the NEC at their meeting in September.


Details
Salary & NEC
Costs
Activity Costs Group Recharge Income Net
1. Unrestricted Income
NUS Extra 0 0 0 1,500,000 1,500,000
Affiliation Fees 0 0 0 3,906,000 3,906,000
Other Core & EFP Income 0 0 0 1,487,000 1,487,000
Total 0 0 0 6,893,000 6,893,000
07/05/2014 Page 5


Zones: This area includes the salary and associated payroll costs of the Vice Presidents of each of the five Zones (Further Education, Higher Education, Welfare,
Union Development and Society & Citizenship). No activity cost are shown. (As stated above) This area does not include the cost of staffing support which is included
in HQ Policy & Delivery Units in Section 3.

Liberation: NUS runs a range of politically autonomous campaigns centred on tackling discrimination and the rights of particular groups of students. This area
includes the salary costs for the Liberation Officers. There is an increase in the LGBT staffing as NEC voted to fund the two LGBT posts on a full salary basis rather
than a single salary split between two officers. Liberation Conferences are covered in the Governance section, and Liberation activism training is within activism
below. It does not include the cost of Liberation staffing support which is included in HQ Policy & Delivery Units in Section 3.

Sections: NUS runs a range of student sections centred on particular groups of students. This area includes the salary cost for the Full Time International Students
Officer. No activity cost is shown as this area. Their Conferences are budgeted with a subsidy of £10k. This does not include the cost of staffing support which is
included in HQ Policy & Delivery Units in Section 4.

Zones, Sections and Liberation Pot Allocation (Other Campaigns): From this ‘pot’ the Zones, Liberation Campaigns and Student Sections will bid for an
allocation after National Conference, based on democratic mandates, the priorities you set for campaigning and work programmes and a test to ensure these
activities benefit students’ unions. In addition new fund has been created to facilitate joint projects between Zones, Sections, and Liberation.

Priority Campaigns: The “Priority Campaigns Fund” is the key campaign budget for the year and is allocated to the campaign(s) chosen as a priority by the NEC. In
2014/15 the priority campaign fund is likely to be used to fund activity across NUS UK, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland to campaign for the benefit of students
at the next General Election.

Details
Salary & NEC
Costs
Activity Costs Group Recharge Income Net
2. Zones, Liberation & Sections
Higher Education Zone 29,792 0 0 0 (29,792)
Further Education Zone 29,777 0 0 0 (29,777)
Welfare Zone 29,792 0 0 0 (29,792)
Society & Citizenship Zone 25,925 0 0 0 (25,925)
Union Development Zone 29,792 0 0 0 (29,792)
Womens Campaign 30,422 0 0 0 (30,422)
Black Students Campaign 29,792 0 0 0 (29,792)
Disabled Students 29,792 0 0 0 (29,792)
LGBT 59,466 0 0 0 (59,466)
International Students 29,792 0 0 0 (29,792)
Mature & Part Time 0 0 0 0 0
Postgraduate 0 0 0 0 0
Priority Campaign 0 76,000 0 0 (76,000)
Other Campaigns 0 171,953 0 0 (171,953)
Cross Liberations 0 0 0 0 0
Local Campaigning Capacity 47,589 0 0 0 (47,589)
Long Term Campaign 0 20,000 0 0 (20,000)
Sections Conferences 0 10,000 0 0 (10,000)
Total 371,932 277,953 0 0 (649,884)
07/05/2014 Page 6
Local Campaigning Capacity: As well as carrying out National campaigning work, National Conference has repeatedly mandated that NUS invests in local
campaigning capacity. In the coming year this will focus on three areas; improving the campaigning effectiveness of students’ unions; building a new generation
of student activists through students’ unions; and supporting activism training inside Liberation campaigns.

3 | Governance

Section 3 includes costs relating to NUS’ central governance and democratic structures. A detailed explanation of what each area covers is given below each
subsection.



National Conference: This area contains all of the costs and income associated with NUS’ National Conference, along with some costs that relate to the Democratic
Procedures Committee and their meetings. It also houses the budget for Elections and the Chief Returning Officer. This is a net contribution figure and thus assumes
considerable income from sponsorship and stalls, albeit that this has been reduced following a review.

Democracy & Trustee Board: This area contains a range of functions essential to the operation of NUS’ Democratic Structures- safeguarding, trustee board costs,
committees training, affiliations campaigns, external affairs and groups and networks. Allocations are made here to cover out of pocket expenses for volunteers.

Affiliations: This area houses any of NUS’ affiliations to external organisations in the coming year. The two most significant affiliations are London Citizens, an
organisation which NUS is carrying out considerable partnership work with, and the European Students’ Union.

Access: This area houses central subsidy costs for participation across NUS structures by Disabled Students.

National Executive Council (NEC): Inside this area are all of the costs relating meetings of the NEC, its committees, and travel and expenses for the “Block”
members.

Liberation Conferences: This area includes all costs and income relating to the conferences of Liberation campaigns. This is a net contribution figure.

4 | Policy & Delivery Unit

This area includes all of the central units that develop and deliver the campaigns determined by Conference and NEC. Each area combines both capacity building and
voice support activity.
Details
Salary & NEC
Costs
Activity Costs Group Recharge Income Net
3. Goverance
Democracy 0 22,000 0 0 (22,000)
National Conference 0 300,000 0 40,000 (260,000)
National Executive Council 0 35,000 0 0 (35,000)
Liberation Conferences 0 185,000 0 60,000 (125,000)
Zone Conferences 0 90,000 0 90,000 0
Affiliations 0 20,000 0 0 (20,000)
Access 0 30,000 0 0 (30,000)
Total 0 682,000 0 190,000 (492,000)
07/05/2014 Page 7



Political Strategy Unit: This area houses our campaigns and political strategy staff, as well as the Press Office and Public Affairs unit. The area here includes
staffing on the campaigns effectiveness programme and activist development programmes, as well as support for Zones, Sections & Liberation Campaigns. Also
included here are a range of central fixed costs including subscriptions and publications related to press and public affairs. Costs relating to Parliamentary lobbying
and receptions are also included here. The significant change in these Estimates is the movement of the campaigns officer from here to the Priority Campaign as it is
anticipated that their work will be almost entirely focused around the general election.

Higher Education Unit: This unit includes staff support for research and policy in all areas of Higher Education, as well as regional support staff that specialise in HE
issues. Not included but run from this area include a range of HE projects funded by HEFCE, the QAA and the Higher Education Academy.

Further Education Unit: This unit includes staff support for research and policy in all areas of Further Education (including both union development and education
issues), as well as regional development staff who specialise in FE support. This year an additional subsidy for FE training has been allocated.

Not included but run from this area is a range of project work on learner voice funded by the Skills Funding Agency and other bodies.

Social Policy Unit: The Social Policy Unit houses research and policy staff support for Welfare, including areas like Accommodation, Student Funding and Student
Health, the externally Home Office funded Faith project, as well as research support for all four of NUS’ liberation campaigns. To this has also been added this year
the funding for an international role.

Membership Unit: This unit has been transferred to NUS Charity with only two members of staff being the Head who will not be replaced and a member of staff who
has been realigned to NUS Services Ltd.

Policy Unit: This policy unit houses Policy support for the National President and NEC; special projects; Chief Executive areas and long term policy analysis and
support, as well as staff carrying out one off and special projects on behalf of the Nations.

Management & Overhead: This includes management and support costs across the Policy & Delivery Units, including professional fees and staff meetings and
central management support for the NUS Nations.



Details
Salary & NEC
Costs
Activity Costs Group Recharge Income Net
4. Policy & Delivery Unit
Political Strategy Unit 448,999 66,280 0 0 (515,279)
Higher Education Unit 196,143 24,555 0 0 (220,698)
Further Education Unit 254,892 40,217 0 0 (295,108)
Social Policy Unit 198,422 21,556 0 0 (219,978)
Membership Development Unit 0 0 0 0 0
Policy Unit 133,448 19,980 0 0 (153,428)
Policy Convention 0 20,000 0 0 (20,000)
Strategic Conversation 0 24,000 0 28,000 4,000
Policy & Delivery Unit 56,735 12,000 0 0 (68,735)
Total 1,288,638 228,588 0 28,000 (1,489,226)
07/05/2014 Page 8



5| Nations

NUS’ Nations work is devolved and autonomous. This section reflects the costs of running each operation’s support, management, administration and activity costs in
the coming year. They do not include any central Nations management costs, nor any contribution to overheads or infrastructure at NUS UK.



Scotland: This includes all management, support, campaign, conference and activity costs in Scotland. Scotland goes on to produce its own detailed budgets
scrutinised and approved at its own conference.

Wales: This includes all management, support, campaign, conference and activity costs in Wales. Wales goes on to produce its own detailed budgets scrutinised and
approved at its own conference. The main change this year is to add the costs and income of the nascent Welsh translation service.

Not included but run from this area are a range of projects.

NUS-USI: NUS-USI is a partnership arrangement between NUS UK and the Union of Students in Ireland. Unlike for Wales and Scotland, income from unions in
Northern Ireland is allocated directly here (hence the apparently much smaller contribution) and funds from external sources cover management, support campaign
and activity costs in NUS-USI in the coming year.

6| Services & Resources

Services & Resources includes the Events team, Chief Executive and National President, as well as NUS’s share of the cost of running the Group’s People/ Admin,
Finance Events and IT functions.

Details
Salary & NEC
Costs
Activity Costs Group Recharge Income Net
5. Nations
Scotland 314,506 123,900 0 22,500 (415,906)
Donation to Scottish Charity 0 60,000 0 0 (60,000)
Wales 314,805 120,374 0 44,400 (390,779)
NUS-USI 134,232 35,395 0 128,500 (41,127)
Total 763,543 339,669 0 195,400 (907,812)
07/05/2014 Page 9


Events & Conferencing: This area houses the events & conferencing department, provided by NUS Services, delivering central events organisation and support, and
events support costs.

Finance: This area includes the shared service cost of finance being provided by NUS Services. This includes all staffing and financial administration costs.

NUS Headquarters: This area has now moved to NUS Holdings, however the figure in here relates to the management task for the shared service.

Executive Office: This is a new area formed to provide better support to the President, Chief Executive and the various Trustee Boards. It does not represent
incremental cost, rather a redistribution of roles that were formerly in different places.

Corporate Governance: This area includes costs of the Board meetings and the governance of NUS.

Customer Services: This area includes the shared service cost of customer services being provided by NUS Services. We are anticipating some savings as a result
of driving efficiencies in this area.

People & Admin: This area includes the shared service cost of Human Resources being provided by NUS Services.

Communications & Marketing Unit: This area includes costs relating to NUS’ corporate communications functions, including communications strategy, web and
print staff, and support for key marketing projects inside NUS such as the NUS Awards and Friends of NUS Schemes. Much of the cost is shared with NUSSL to
achieve maximum efficiencies.

IT: This area includes the NUS contribution to the shared service cost of IT and Web being provided by NUS Services, as well as all external costs relating to our web
hosting companies that provide the infrastructure for nus.org.uk and NUS Connect. The increase in this area is reflective of the generally increasing costs of meeting
a more diversified working practices with respect to IT and electronic equipment.

Strategic Development: This area includes Chief Executive and National President’s costs as well as costs relating to the Senior Management Group and their
meetings and a range of legal / strategic development costs.
Details
Salary & NEC
Costs
Activity Costs Group Recharge Income Net
6. Services & Resources
Events & Conferencing Unit 0 0 48,623 0 (48,623)
Finance 0 0 197,508 0 (197,508)
NUSHQ 0 0 (46,627) 0 46,627
Executive Office 0 0 57,551 0 (57,551)
Corporate Governance 0 0 21,759 0 (21,759)
Customer Services 0 0 50,583 0 (50,583)
People & Admin 0 0 112,451 0 (112,451)
Chief Executive 0 0 0 0 0
Communications 0 0 173,919 0 (173,919)
IT 0 0 282,173 0 (282,173)
Analytics 0 0 20,827 0 (20,827)
Strategic Development 154,427 100,000 0 0 (254,427)
Total 154,427 100,000 918,768 0 (1,173,195)
07/05/2014 Page 10

7| Other Operating Expenditure



This area includes costs those costs of running each of our buildings in London, Cardiff, Edinburgh, & Belfast.

Irrecoverable VAT: This is an estimate of the amount of VAT we will be able to recover on the provision of non-vatable services to our members. We have been
able to achieve some savings in this area.

Pension Deficit Contribution: This is the cost of our share of the SUSS pension deficit. As detailed above it has increased significantly this year. Also included are
the costs of the pension fund levy and life assurance for staff and FTOs.

8| Donations from NUS



NUS Charitable Services Limited is registered with the Charity Commission.

The charity is responsible for ensuring students’ union excellence and has four main roles.
 Students’ Union Quality Assurance
 Strategic Support
 Students’ Union Staff Development
 Ethical and Environmental
Details
Salary & NEC
Costs
Activity Costs Group Recharge Income Net
7. Other Operating Expenditure
Management Task 0 0 0 0 0
Infrastructure 0 562,637 0 0 (562,637)
Scotland Infrastructure 0 113,123 0 0 (113,123)
Wales Infrastructure 0 50,427 0 0 (50,427)
NUS-USI Infrastructure 0 31,976 0 0 (31,976)
Irrecoverable VAT 0 60,000 0 0 (60,000)
Pension Deficit Contribution 0 409,506 0 0 (409,506)
Total 0 1,227,670 0 0 (1,227,670)
Details
Salary & NEC
Costs
Activity Costs Group Recharge Income Net
8. Charity (Donations from NUS)
Donation to UK Charity 0 680,376 0 0 (680,376)
Donation to Scottish Charity 0 173,634 0 0 (173,634)
Total 0 854,010 0 0 (854,010)
07/05/2014 Page 11

This section does detail anticipated core costs. Over the next year, as we win new externally funded projects or renew existing ones our intention if for them to move
into the Charity.

 Students’ Union Quality Assurance: This unit includes the development of the Student Union Quality Mark. It will continue and enhance the work that was
formerly done by SUEI.
 Strategic Support Unit: This unit is focused on supporting Unions development and is not restricted to those in difficulty or crisis. They perform diagnostics and
the source appropriate professional and cross-Union assistance for those Unions that require it.
 Student Union Staff Development Unit: This area houses much of the activity formerly associated with AMSU (the Association of Managers in Students’
Unions) including job advertising revenue, costs for NCVO membership for all unions and support for professional groups, as well as the new Talent Management
Programme.
 Ethical and Environmental (E&E): The E&E team provide ethical procurement support to the purchasing consortium as well as running environmental
behavioural change programmes within over 100 Unions and nearly 50 universities. The team won £5m of funding for unions to accelerate their green initiatives
in the 2013/14 year.

NUS UK will make a donation of £681k in 2014/15 towards the operating costs of the Charity. This is a £343k increase on the prior year reflecting:

a) A number of activities that have been transferred to the Charity from NUS UK
b) Partially offset by increased income in the Charity
c) Increased Shared Service for core funded work

NUS Scotland Charitable Services
is a Scottish Charitable Incorporated Organisation registered with the Office of the Scottish Charity Regulator (SC043361).

Working with students’ association in Scotland the charity delivers a programme of work promoting excellence in student leadership and staff development,
supporting students’ associations to enhance their governance and democratic effectiveness. The charity also hosts externally funded projects which fit with our
charitable purposes and reflect the needs of students’ associations and students in Scotland.

 Think Positive promotes good mental health and tackles the negative attitudes that exist about mental ill health. The campaign researches the experiences that
students have and whether they may cause mental health concerns and gives students and student support services in institutions a better understanding of the
best way to support students.
 Investing in Scotland’s Global Citizens works with students, young people and employers to increase the number of Scottish students taking study aboard
opportunities and raise the profile of studying abroad to students and the wider community.
 Partnerships for Change works with college students’ associations affected by mergers enabling them to develop as sustainable, autonomous and well- funded
student representative bodies.
 NUS Scotland Charitable Services is proud to work with Sparqs, an agency which puts students at the heart of decisions being made about quality and
governance of the learning experience.

NUS UK will make a donation of £174k in 2014/15 towards the operating costs of the NUS Scotland Charitable Services.





No Platform policy

Outline
Each year the list of organisations on the NUS no platform policy comes to the NEC to note and
ensure that no organisation which has been removed from the list remains, or that any who have
been added are not missed.

Organisations
The current list following National Conference 2014 is as follows:

1. Hizb ut-tahrir (HUT)
2. Al-Muhajiroun (AM)
3. Muslim Public Affairs Committee (MPAC)

Resolutions 2005 (5-7 April)

4. British National Party (BNP)

Resolutions 2007 (27-29 March)

5. English Defence League (EDL)

Resolutions 2010 (13-15
th
April)




Date Produced: 6 May 2014
Committees: NEC
Action: Note: The organisations on the NUS No Platform List for information
Report
13



Motion 513 A Student living grant and the cost-
of-living crisis

Submitted by: SOAS Students’ Union, University of Sussex Students’ Union, Ravensbourne Students’
Union, Students Union University of the Arts

Conference believes:
1. That aside from fees, the inadequacy of student grants and maintenance loans provides a significant
barrier to accessing higher education and leaves many students living in poverty.
2. That alongside campaigning to reduce student living costs, NUS should be demanding a student grant
that is sufficient to live on.
3. That maintenance loans make up a significant part of students' overall debt.
4. That students should be given greater flexibility and choice over when grant payments are made with
options for monthly or termly instalments as well as provisions to assist with upfront costs such as
deposits and course material costs.
5. That the current system of means-testing based on household income can have a negative impact on
the most vulnerable students and that student living grants should be universal.
6. Inadequate maintenance loans mean many students are working excessive hours in part-time jobs
which has a detrimental impact on their studies.
7. The current loan system discriminates against students returning to study who had completed academic
years under the previous loan system
8. For many years, NUS had a policy of supporting universal living grants.
9. Even leaving aside fees, the student grant goes nowhere covering living costs.
10. Since means testing was introduced, students who are estranged from their parents have suffered
unneeded stress and financial hardship as many have had to prove estrangement from their parents.
This disproportionately affects already marginalised students, in particular LGBT students and others
who suffer from high levels of estrangement.
11. It is better that some students who do not need grants receive them than for thousands of students to
excluded from education for fear of poverty, debt and persecution.
12. Money is available to reinstate universal grants – it’s about what society values. We should fight for
society to value accessible education.

Conference resolves:
1. To campaign for a universal living grant equivalent to at least £150 a week.
2. To campaign for a flexible grant payment system which gives students choice over their finances and
helps to support students with upfront costs.
3. To launch a campaign to reduce the student cost-of-living; reducing and capping rents, cutting course
costs and ending hidden fees, ending letting agent fees; transport costs.
4. To campaign for a living grant for FE students, inclusive of those on Foundation.
5. To reinstate its position supporting universal living grants
6. To call for this to be funded through progressive taxation such as an increase in corporation tax.


Motion 514 Mental health – away from
awareness, towards action

Submitted by: Students’ Union Bournemouth University

Conference Believes:
Motions




1. This year the Mental Health Summit brought together for the first time students’ union officers and
staff, external mental health and health practioners, institutional academic and support staff to discuss
mental health and how we can improve it for students.

Conference Further Believes:
1. NUS should be striving to create positive change around mental health
2. The Time to Change campaign has been a huge success in changing the rhetoric around mental health
and supporting campaigning to move from awareness to action with over 60 students’ unions and
institutions signing up in the last year
3. That discussions from the summit provided some exciting suggestions for creating this change

Conference Resolves:
1. To develop ways that mental health support and understanding can be embedded into the structures of
students unions by supporting unions to:
a. Lobby for relevant and appropriate training for all staff
b. Ensuring that academic policies do not cause undue additional mental distress for students
experiencing mental health issues
c. Ensuring support services and institutional policies are clearly advertised at recruitment and
pre-arrival stage and that disclosure of current or previous mental health problems is actively
encouraged at application stage
d. Integrate mental health into the widening participation agenda, both nationally and locally by
providing outreach to people who may not have continued in education as a result of their
mental health problems and including mental health in OFFA agreements
2. Help students unions to win on achieving well-supported, appropriate services for students, which are
responsive to the feedback of students and service users and flexible to students needs both in terms of
the type of service (i.e. not a one size fits all, counselling for everyone approach), but also the nature
of the service (i.e. number of sessions available, services available in the evenings where possible)
3. Support students unions to develop joined-up approaches across institutions and external services

Motion 516 Condemn “Student Rights” and
Support Islamophobia Awareness

Submitted by: SOAS Students’ Union, Birkbeck Students’ Union

Conference believes:
1. That Student Rights is an organisation claiming to support ‘freedom from extremism’ [1]* on UK
university campuses and mostly criticises speakers it sees as ‘extremists’ who have been invited by
Islamic and Palestinian societies [2, 23], but has in the past expressed opposition to student union ‘no-
platform’ policy for the BNP [3] though it has since stated that its policy has changed and it now
supports no platform for fascists.
2. That Student Rights was established in 2009 as a reaction to what it calls ‘increasing political
extremism’ [1] on campus – which director Raheem Kassam is reported to have said is a reference to a
wave of peaceful occupations that took place on UK campuses to protest Israel’s bombing of Gaza in
Operation Cast Lead [2].
3. That Student Rights’ Director Raheem Kassam was also the Executive Director of the right-wing
website, The Commentator, until recently [4] – known for publishing articles such as this [5]. He is the
founder of Trending Central [6], another right-wing “news” website, and has held various positions in
the controversial neoconservative think tank The Henry Jackson Society [7]. Press reports that he was
setting up a UK arm of the Tea Party have so far failed to materialise [8].
4. That Student Rights has only recently confirmed that it is a project of The Henry Jackson Society – a
neoconservative think tank whose associate director, Douglas Murray, has argued that “conditions for
Muslims in Europe must be made harder across the board” and “all immigration into Europe from
Muslim countries must stop” [9] – but is not transparent about its origins or funding on its website or
materials.




5. That Student Rights’ most recent report on gender segregation [10], focusing on Islamic society events,
has been described as deeply flawed in its methodology [11], and failed in almost every case to
determine whether segregation was enforced or if people were voluntarily choosing to sit where they
want to, and presented the phenomenon as ‘part of a wider, discriminatory trend’ on campuses [10, p.
17] which resulted in headlines in the mainstream media associating gender segregation with
‘extremism’ [12].
6. That the Institute of Race Relations has noted with concern [13] that Student Rights’ work and
reporting has been used by far-right groups to target a Muslim student event [14] which led to reported
threats of violence and the event subsequently having to be cancelled by the university [15].
7. That LSE, Goldsmith’s, Birkbeck, Kingston and UCL Student Unions have voted in favour of condemning
Student Rights for its overwhelming focus on Muslim students, the way its approach tends to bypass
students themselves and its lack of transparency about its links to The Henry Jackson Society (16, 17,
18, 19).
8. That NUS President 2011-13, Liam Burns said that we need to “challenge the right wing bile that is
spouted by groups like Student Rights and people like Douglas Murray”; and that NUS VP Welfare 2012-
13, Pete Mercer, condemned Student Rights’ approach as a “witch-hunt” [20].
9. That the grassroots student campaign ‘Real Student Rights’ which aims to expose and oppose Student
Rights is supported by NUS Black Students Officer (2013-14) Aaron Kiely; ULU Black Students Officer
(2013-14) Maham Hashmi-Khan; NUS VP Welfare Officers for 2012-13 and 2013-14 Pete Mercer and
Colum McGuire; and ULU President (2012-14) Michael Chessum among others [21].
10. That due to the activities of groups like Student Rights, some Muslim students are often left feeling that
university staff and even fellow students are insufficiently supportive of their rights on campus which is
detrimental to their university experience as individuals and to universities as a whole in terms of equal
political participation, good campus relations and cohesion in the student body.

Conference further believes:
1. That the claims Student Rights makes to the press have often been sensationalist and misleading,
designed to grab alarmist headlines about so-called ‘extremism’ on campus, regardless of the impact on
students; and Student Rights’ director Raheem Kassam – who called students who voted for the 'Real
Student Rights' motion in SUs voicing concerns about his organisation 'fools' – continues to show
disdain for students [22].
2. That whether intentional or not, it is deeply damaging that Student Rights’ approach – which tends to
bypass students themselves – should lead to a situation in which far-right groups come onto a campus,
creating a climate in which students feel persecuted and threatened and potentially endangering
students’ welfare.
3. That Student Rights’ activities fuel Islamophobia, by disproportionately and unfairly targeting Muslim
students, contributing to their marginalisation and ostracisation, damaging campus cohesion and
feeding into a growing trend of Islamophobic discourse in wider society which should always be
challenged.
4. That sexism, racism and homophobia are problems not confined to certain sectors of society
and should, like all forms of discrimination, be challenged and opposed without contributing to the
marginalisation of particular groups.
5. That Student Rights legitimacy is wholly questionable given its limited or non-existent links to actual
students, inconsistency on the issue of no-platform policies, creation in reaction to peaceful pro-
Palestinian activism, and in particular its lack of transparency about its origins, funding, and links to
The Henry Jackson Society – a think tank which has been widely criticised for comments made by its
staff perceived to be Islamophobic [9].
6. That it is not the place of any external organisation – particularly one as non-transparent and dubiously
connected as Student Rights – to undermine Student Unions’ autonomy or interfere with co-operation
between the union and university in their work to ensure that pre-existing guidelines regarding external
speakers are followed.

Conference Resolves:
1. The NUS Officer to release a public statement/open letter addressed to Student Rights criticising their
lack of transparency, sensationalism, divisive and counter-productive activities and disproportionate




preoccupation with Muslim students and calling on them to drastically change their approach and
mentality. The statement should also outline NUS’ commitment to challenging Islamophobia along with
all other forms of prejudice and discrimination.
2. The NUS Officer to write to the university Student Unions, making explicit students' concerns about the
effect Student Rights' activities have on students' welfare, campus cohesion and freedom of speech on
campus, as well as re-iterating the union’s desire to maintain its autonomy in determining guidelines on
external speakers in co-operation with relevant stakeholders such as the university, without undue
outside interference.
3. The NUS Officer to maintain ongoing communication and to report back to the NUS on any
developments including asking the Student Union’s to inform NUS of any attempts by Student Rights to
lobby them regarding any student groups’ activities.
4. To circulate the ‘Real Student Rights’ petition via email / social media.
5. To write to the UUK and AOC, making explicit our concerns about the group Student Rights, and the
effect that its activities have on students welfare, campus cohesion and on freedom of speech on
campus as well as re-iterating the NUS policy of opposing and disallowing any form of hate speech on
campus and its desire to maintain its autonomy in determining the boundaries of this remit without
outside interference.
6. To encourage students unions, university management and university press offices to both resist unfair
targeting of Muslim students, their events and political campaigns and encourage them to publicly
condemn Islamophobia, Student Rights and any similar groups to the press when individuals students
or their Muslim student population as a whole is unfairly singled out or targeted

* Where there is a number in brackets e.g. [1] there is a footnote which has not been outlined here but the
version with the footnotes is available on request


Motion 517 A New EMA

Submitted by: National Executive Council, Mid Kent College Students’ Union, Dudley College Students’
Union, Belfast Met SU, NUS Black Students’ Committee, Gateshead College Students’
Union

Conference believes:
1. That the EMA in England was abolished by the Coalition Government in the 2010 spending review,
despite widespread opposition and clear evidence of its impact on participation, retention, and
attainment
2. That the decision was based on a flawed reading of one research report, and which the author said was
the wrong conclusion to take from his work
3. That the EMA in England was replaced by the discretionary 16-19 Bursary Fund, with a total budget of
£180m, only a third the size of the EMA budget
4. That duty on local authorities to ensure adequate transport in order for those aged 16-19 to access FE
is routinely ignored
5. That research by Barnardo’s has found that the 16-19 Bursary Fund is inadequate to meet the needs of
learners and has created a ‘postcode lottery’ of support around the country
6. That the EMA has been retained in the three devolved nations, though with each making different policy
changes over time
7. That the participation age will rise to 18 by 2015 – which will mean a need for more support, not less

Conference further believes:
1. That an entitlement-based scheme for learners in FE is the fairest means of distributing resources
2. That the EMA system previously in place was imperfect and did not adequately take into account the
needs of learners with larger families, or changing circumstances
3. That the £30 maximum rate of EMA was never increased over its lifetime and as it lost value it blunted
the effectiveness of EMA




4. That simply restoring EMA without reform would be to miss an important opportunity to address its
flaws
5. That any new scheme should retain a small discretionary fund for hardship and unexpected costs, as
was the case prior to 2010
6. With the general election just one year away, it is vital that NUS builds a movement to press politicians
to commit to bring back a weekly grant for students in Further Education.

Conference resolves:
1. To campaign for an EMA replacement that restores an entitlement to learners but addresses the flaws in
the original scheme and to make it a major priority to press MPs and political parties to commit to
ahead of the General Election.
2. To ensure that any proposed scheme remains as simple as possible to understand and administer
3. To make the case through our campaign that a new EMA is not simply an incentive scheme but a
necessary means of support for learners in FE
4. To empower FE unions to make the case on a local level
5. To consider how the scope of a new EMA can be extended to learners older than 19
6. To continue to defend EMA in the nations and build a campaign for improvements in levels of financial
support to students.


Motion 518 International Students

Submitted by: University of Manchester Students’ Union

Conference Believes:
1. That education is a right to everyone, regardless of nationality.
2. That this government is using international students as a scapegoat to meet racist immigration targets.
3. That this government, as well as many of our institutions, treat international students as cash cows.
4. That international students have the right to work in the UK.
5. That international students should be treated with respect, and all monitoring should be low-impact.

Conferences Resolves:
1. That University fees for international students should be fixed.
2. That international students should not be charged for using the NHS.
3. NUS should run a campaign highlighting the non-economic benefits of having international students on
our campuses bring.
4. For now, Universities should minimise the impact of UKBA by putting in place non-invasive monitoring,
integrated with ordinary attendance procedures to comply with regulations.
5. NUS should campaign for UKBA to cease systematic monitoring of overseas students at all Universities
and focus on institutions where there has been evidence of incompetence.
6. The government should abandon the plans of monitoring students through landlords.
7. The NUS should campaign to bring back post-study Visas for international students.

Motion 519 Drugs off campus

Submitted by: Coleg Gwent Students’ Union

Conference believes:
1. Drugs are a serious issue within the UK and on campuses regardless to what “class” drug it maybe
2. Drugs are being used by people of all ages
3. With government cutting funding to organisations, help and support is fading away
4. Students have a lack of knowledge and understanding of the affects drugs use. Both during drug use
and after.





Conference further believes:
1. More people will be affected by the miss use of taking drugs over the next coming years.
2. Unions around the UK have very little support in dealing with drug issues on campuses
3. Unions have a duty and care to help students who could or may have a problem with the use of drugs
4. Unions across the UK needs to have full guidance, advice and help when dealing with issues regarding
drugs

Conference resolves:
1. NUS Welfare should work with drug support groups to help support unions with raising awareness
throughout Wales, England, Scotland and Ireland.
2. NUS Welfare to hold boot camps to help unions on tackling drug use on campuses while working with
organisations within Wales, England, Scotland and Ireland.
3. NUS to make tackling drugs on campus a priority for the next coming year.


Motion 520 Access without support is not
opportunity

Submitted by: University of Bristol Union, University of Bath Students Union,

Conference believes:
1. Our discourse around Higher Education funding and student debt is focused on tuition fees, not on
student financial support.
2. NUS’s 2012 Priority campaign was the ‘Pound in your Pocket’ survey.
3. Similar surveys are being conducted this year in Wales and Northern Ireland.
4. None of the 2012 priority campaign activity has yet translated into a sustained nationwide campaign on
student financial support.
5. This year, the Scottish Government committed to above-inflation rises in student financial support.
Other nations have yet to see the same.
6. Universities are increasingly exploring removing some institutional financial support to invest in
outreach activity, and OFFA (the Office for Fair Access) appears to be encouraging them to do so.
7. Universities with strong records on access cannot possibly afford to offer all of their students the
amount of support they really need.
8. The Access to Learning Fund is an emergency and discretionary hardship fund to provide local support
to those students in the direst financial need and from the most vulnerable groups.
9. The Access to Learning Fund stood at £37m this year and faces uncertainty over its existence for next
year and in the future in its current form.

Conference further believes:
1. Student financial support is a key priority for our Higher Education campaign if we are serious about
wanting students to stay in education, succeed, and thrive.
2. Student financial support is equally as important as how university tuition is funded.
3. No condemnation of the current system of Higher Education funding is complete without critiquing the
shoddy state of student financial support.
4. No discussion of student debt is complete without acknowledging the burden of maintenance loans.
5. It is the responsibility of national governments, not just our institutions, to ensure that students in
Higher Education have the necessary financial support to succeed.

Conference Resolves:
1. To make fairer, better funded student financial support a key ‘ask’ in the 2015 General Election
campaign, alongside similar calls for students in Further Education.
2. To conduct further national research on the impact of financial hardship on students’ attainment, extra-
curricular participation, and prospects after graduation.




3. To continue to fight for student bursaries, but to acknowledge that in properly-funded governments
system of student financial support, universities could focus on more targeted support and outreach.
4. To extend this call for fairer and better funded financial support to students in postgraduate study, not
just those students who currently receive support.
5. To campaign for reinstatement of any cuts to both Students Opportunities Fund and Access to Learning
Fund.
6. To lobby for ring-fenced funding of hardship funds.

Motion 521 Students and HIV/AIDS

Submitted by: NUS LGBT Committee

Conference Believes:
1. That HIV/AIDS exists, almost 100,000 people are HIV+ in the UK, and people of all gender identities
and sexual orientations are affected.
2. For too long HIV/AIDS has been seen as a Gay mans issue, and that recently, even within this
community; campaigning, awareness and action against the spread of the virus has decreased.
3. That stigma around HIV+ people is rife.
4. That testing for HIV is just a part of a full sexual health screening.
5. That HIV denialist exist, and that conspiracy films such as “House of Numbers” have no place on our
campuses.

Conference Further Believes:
1. According to the National AIDS Trust (2012) 48% of people living with HIV were probably exposed via
Heterosexual Contact, while 43% were men who have sex with men.
2. 33% of HIV+ people in the UK are Women.
3. Black African, Caribbean and Asian people make up 48% of people living with HIV, yet are less than
10% of the UK population.

Conference Resolves:
1. To champion HIV testing, research and campaigning outside of the LGBT community
2. For the Welfare Zone and others to create relevant resources for events such as World AIDS Day which
will be promoted to all SUs and not just the LGBT Societies.
3. To denounce HIV denialist propaganda and conspiracy theories which spread stigma and mistruths
about HIV+ people.
4. To actively work with NUS USI on their campaign to lift the blanket life time blood donation ban on
MSM.



















Motion 523 Segregation on campus

Submitted by: Birkbeck Students’ Union

Conference Believes:
1. UUK supported the idea of allowing the segregation of students both at events and in lectures/tutorials,
stating in their guidance to universities that “segregated seated (on gender expression) would be
allowed if requested by speakers.
2. This caused calls for clarity from the government and condemnation from the Labour spokesperson,
stating that Labour “would legislate against it”

Conference further believes:
1. The hubble-bubble seems to have died away, however, the student body in the UK needs to take a
clear and decisive position on this idea and proposal
2. There is a clear different between self-organised representation and student or staff organisation on
campuses and the delivery of events, teaching and research seminars
3. The Equality Act 2010 is specifically disapplied on many areas that ordinarily cover protected
characteristics in the delivery of and challenging of academia.

Conference resolves:
1. To oppose the guidance from UUK as issued in December 2013 as outlined in CB 1
2. Endorse the policy that delivery of and access to higher education and research, whether in public
universities or the private sector, must be based on equality and the principles of the Equality Act
(which does not prevent positive action and lawful discrimination to ensure widening access)




3. To back Chuka Umma’s call for legislation to block such proposals from UUK










Motion 302 Local and Vocal: Students and the
Ballot Box

Submitted by: Society and Citizenship Zone Committee

NUS Believes:
1. Students are citizens who have a direct interest in matters beyond our campuses and have a vital role
in shaping communities.
2. Students are too often negatively profiled and othered in their communities with a false divide between
students and residents, leading to disengagement with local politics.
3. Fewer than 1 in 6 students feel they are able to influence the decisions of those in power and only 18%
of students feel that they have trust in politicians.
4. Community organising offers us a genuine opportunity for students to be involved more deeply in the
political and civic life of our towns and cities.
5. Community organising is about bringing people together and empowering them to achieve change
through political action. By using this approach communities come together to compel public authorities
and businesses to respond to the needs of ordinary people.




6. We are at our strongest as a movement when we act collectively and community organising enables us
to build these networks across regions and campuses.
7. Community organising has made a real differences to communities and campuses across the UK, such
as around the campaigns on Living Wage and against pay day loans.
8. Community organising is about building a vibrant and active civil society through building power and
confidence amongst everyday people create the changes they want to see themselves.
9. Community organising focuses on power in a way that is truly grassroots and about empowering people
to challenge the way decisions are made and to create change in their communities.
10. Community organising builds for lasting, impactful change rather than striving for instant, short-term
results.
11. That community organising offers us a genuine opportunity to be involved more deeply in the political
and civic life of our towns and cities.
12. Community organising enables us as a movement to build an activist base and we must continue to
invest in this kind of support.
13. High levels of student volunteering suggests that many students feel strong levels of ownership to their
community and are willing to invest.
14. That the principles of community organising mean that we must challenge the way we talk about power
and leaderships styles within our movement.

NUS Resolves:
1. To maintain and build upon the community organising work that has begun with NUS’ community
organising pilot projects.
2. To support and provide training to students’ unions on how to use community organising principles to
empower students within their communities, including how to develop young leaders.
3. To support students’ unions to develop their expertise and strategy in community organising in their
towns and cities to empower students and non-students within their communities.
4. To support students’ unions build broad-based citizens’ alliances with other organisations within their
cities/towns/regions, such as with Trade Unions, youth services, schools and religious groups.
5. To develop and support a national network of student community organisers.
6. To support SUs to develop their own community organising priorities via a series of training sessions
and briefings.
7. To provide guidance on how to engage with local authorities and other decision makers.
8. To work with national community organising organisations to enhance NUS’ understanding of
community organising principles.
9. To host a follow-up to last year's flagship ‘We Are The Change’ community organising event.


Motion 311 Barclays Bank – the Tax Dodging
and the Exploitation

Submitted by: Liverpool Hope Students Union, University of Leicester Students’ Union

Conference Believes
1. Corporate tax is an important source of revenue for governments around the world that helps build vital
public services and reduce poverty and inequality
2. 2013 has seen an unprecedented focus on tax-dodging by big business such as Google and Starbucks
and was top of the agenda at the G8 Summit in Loch Erne.
3. Tax-dodging harms public serves in the UK and in developing countries where three times more is lost
to tax-dodging than is received in aid.
4. Tax-dodging by big business narrows access to education, particularly for women in developing
countries.
5. Big business has a role to play in development, but only if they act responsibly and in the interests of
poor people.




6. Big businesses use a sophisticated network of tax havens and legal loopholes to shift profits out of the
countries where they were made without paying taxes on them.
7. USD$20 trillion is estimated to be stashed in tax havens. That’s enough to send every child in Africa to
school and to rebuild the continent’s entire road network with plenty spare.
8. Tax avoidance by multinational corporations is immoral, especially in developing countries where
revenue can be used to build hospitals, schools, colleges, universities, roads, and other vital public
services.

Conference Further Believes
1. Barclays bank has ambitions to be the biggest bank in Africa.
2. A recent report by anti-poverty charity ActionAid demonstrated that the bank actively promotes the use
of tax havens by big businesses who want to make profits in Africa.
3. A division of the bank called Offshore Corporate exists, in its own words, to
4. “ maximise the advantage offered by offshore jurisdictions”
5. The offshore jurisdictions promoted by Barclays are known tax havens that are set up to allow the
secret flow of money out of countries where they would have been taxed at a higher level.
6. Barclays bank is supposed to be in a process of cleaning up after being hit by numerous scandals
including the LIBOR fixing disgrace that resulted in the resignation of the bank’s Chief Executive, Bob
Diamond.
7. Barclays bank was forced into a humiliating withdrawal from South Africa in the 1980s after NUS
launched a campaign against their support of the racist apartheid regime.
8. Barclays says it wants to be a “force for good” in Africa, but its heavy promotion of tax haven use
suggests otherwise.
9. Barclays should be learn the lessons of their past and close down their Offshore Corporate division while
eliminating all its activities in tax havens

Conference Resolves
1. To lend our voice to the campaign to stop tax-dodging by big business, especially in developing
countries.
2. To support member unions to develop local campaigns that highlight the link between tax and public
services at home and in developing countries.
3. To incorporate tax-dodging into our work in the run up to the General Election in 2015
4. To lend our voice to the campaign to demand that Barclays shuts down its Offshore Corporate division
and eliminates all its activities in tax havens
5. To send a message of solidarity to student unions in developing countries that shows our commitment
to stopping UK corporations from shifting money out of their countries


Motion 312 Legal Aid

Submitted by: University of the West of England Students’ Union

Conference believes:
1. Legal Aid can be defined as “payment from public funds allowed, in cases of need, to help pay for legal
advice or proceedings.” http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/legal-aid
2. The Ministry of Justice are proposing to reduce Legal Aid by £220 million annually by 2018
http://www.theguardian.com/law/2013/sep/18/liberal-democrats-legal-aid-cuts

Conference further believes:
1. Access to Legal Aid is a fundamental need of an individual that cannot afford to hire a more costly
lawyer.
2. Freedom of choice of a lawyer is hugely important and the reduction in legal aid funding risk removing
client choice.




3. This will impact on our students looking to get representation from a lawyer with a specific skillset i.e.
in the event of a student arrested at a protest wanting access to a lawyer with a strong record in this
area.
4. It could have a hugely detrimental impact on aspiring law students looking to go into this area of work.
5. The Law Society is currently reviewing their tactics in tackling the proposed changes.

Conference resolves:
1. To release a statement in support of the defence of Legal Aid. The statement will affirm the importance
of access to Legal Aid for some of the hardest hit in our local and student communities and affirm the
right of legally-aided defendants to choose their lawyer.
2. To work with the National Law Society and student law societies to campaign against the cuts being
made to Legal Aid and defend the right of those that can’t afford a lawyer access to good legal
advocacy with freedom of choice.
3. To lobby for the creation of a campaigns toolkit by NUS that can be used by Students’ Unions to
support the campaign in defence of Legal Aid.
4. To ask the NUS to lobby the government against its current position on Legal Aid.
5. To lobby for access to legal aid for all students at universities.


Motion 313 Get Out the Vote; Stop the Far
Right

Submitted by: University of Edinburgh Students’ Association

Conference Believes:
1. That the Get Out the Vote work NUS did in advance of the previous European Parliament elections was
invaluable in the effort to shut down the BNP.
2. That across Europe far right groups are taking advantage of the present crisis to swell their ranks.
3. NUS has traditionally played an important and leading role in society’s response to the far right.
4. That UKIP is part of the group Europe for Freedom and Democracy, which includes representatives from
the Danish People’s Party, the True Finns Party, The Dutch SGP, and the Italian Lega Nord - all of them
far right.
5. The UKIP party leader, Nigel Farage, is co-president of this group along-side Lega Nord’s Francesco
Speroni who once described Andres Breivik as a man whose “ideas are in defense of western
civilisation”.
6. That in May of this year the UKIP Group of Lincolnshire County Council refused to sign an Anti-Racism
pledge upon election as it “pushes forward the chance of multiculturalism”.
7. That the founder of UKIP, Alan Sked, has said it has become “extraordinarily right-wing” and is now
devoted to “creating a fuss, via islam and immigrants”.
8. UKIP sacked its Youth Chairman, Olly Neville, for supporting Equal Marriage.
9. The former UKIP MEP Nikki Sinclaire, who came out as a lesbian, won a discrimination case against
UKIP after being ousted for refusing to sit with its homophobic allies in the European Parliament.
10. UKIP’s only current female MEP threatened to leave the party, labelling Nigel Farage as “anti-women”.
11. NIgel Farage endorsed the comment “no employer with a brain in the right place would employ a
young, single, free woman” by UKIP MEP Godfrey Bloom.

Conference Further Believes:
1. That UKIP is a racist, xenophobic, homophobic and sexist organisation.
2. That extremist far right parties thrive on low voter turnout.

Conference Resolves:
1. To condemn UKIP publicly on the basis of the above.
2. To reaffirm our commitment to smashing the far right.




3. To incorporate an expose on UKIP’s racist, xenophobic, homophobic and sexist politics in our Get Out
The Vote work in advance of the next European Parliament election.


Motion 314 Public ownership of the Banks

Submitted by: Students’ Union, Royal Holloway University of London

Conference believes
1. The 2008 bank bailout cost £850 billion.
2. Britain's 1,000 wealthiest individuals own £450 billion
3. The Coalition has cut billions from education, welfare and health spending, while lowering taxes for the
rich.
4. According to the Office of National Statistics, UK workers' average real-term hourly earnings have fallen
8.5% since 2009.

Conference further believes
1. This is a government of the rich, acting in the interests of the rich - using the crisis to attack jobs,
wages, benefits and public services.
2. NUS believes in democracy - but democracy is limited when wealth and power are in the hands of a
few.
3. If the vast wealth of society was socially owned and democratically controlled, not in the hands of a
few, society could fund top quality free education, services, jobs and benefits for all in place of
grotesque inequality and irrational waste of resources.
4. We should aim for a government which serves the interests of the majority (workers, students, service-
users), taxing the rich and expropriating the banks to rebuild public services and create jobs.

Conference resolves
1. To campaign for the TUC policy of “full public ownership of the banking sector and the creation of a
publicly owned banking service, democratically and accountably managed” and for taxing the rich, to
reverse cuts and fund services, education and jobs.


Motion 315 Fossil Free

Submitted by: Middlesbrough College, Dudley College, NUS Black Students’ Committee, Gateshead
College Students’ Union, University College London Union, Cambridge University
Students’ Union

Conference believes:
1. The fossil fuel industry is driving the climate crisis
2. A report based on research from People & Planet, Platform and 350.org estimates that UK universities
invest £5.2 billion in fossil fuel companies
3. Institutions’ investments in fossil fuel companies contradict NUS policy and fundamentally undermine
universities and colleges’ rightful place as a public service run for the good of society.
4. Following extensive flooding, Dame Julia Slingo, the Met Office’s chief scientist, said that “all the
evidence suggests there is a link to climate change.”
5. The worst effects of climate change can be avoided - but only with much greater political will and
urgent action to cut carbon emissions.
6. The International Energy Agency report that increased ‘fracking’ would lead to a 3.5°C temperature
rise, well above the 1.5°C acknowledged as the tipping point for runaway climate change.
7. To stop disastrous climate change, four fifths of all existing fossil fuels must be left in the ground.

Conference further believes:




1. That the Government has failed to take action to reduce climate-changing carbon emissions
2. That instead of taking urgent action on decarbonisation of our energy supply, the government have
instead chosen to focus on lining the pockets of their friends in the fossil fuel industry, with a new dash
for gas through fracking.

Conference resolves:
1. To mobilise students to press the Government to take tougher action on climate change
2. To work with SUs to support People and Planet’s ‘Fossil Free’ campaign, stepping up efforts to green
campuses and force universities and colleges to divest from the fossil fuel industry.
3. To condemn the Tory & Liberal Democrat Government’s new dash for polluting, expensive gas, and
push instead for investment in energy efficiency & renewable energy to end the scandal of winter
deaths and ensure we play our part in preventing dangerous climate change.
4. To collaborate with People and Planet, publicly support the Fossil Free UK campaign and make
resources available via NUS Connect
5. To campaign against ‘greenwashing’ of the fossil fuel industry (sponsorship, donations and support)
6. To divest any investments in the fossil fuel industry and establish an ethnical investment policy, ratified
annually by the NEC



Motion 316 Equality for Students

Submitted by: Northumbria Students’ Union

Conference believes
1. That to truly improve student and long term resident relations, stereotypes of students as perpetrators
of anti-social behaviour, litter dropping and crime, amongst other issues, should be actively challenged
in coordination nationally, using a variety of techniques.
2. That students should not be discriminated against in decisions made within local communities, based
upon stereotypes which are unfounded, unjustified and lack proper backing such as those seen recently
in Cambridge under the motor proctor scheme and in Newcastle with car parking spaces in Jesmond.
3. That if students are truly at fault for issues, they should be treated equally and face the same penalties
as those who are longer-term resident, instead of being unfairly discriminated against whilst sometimes
lacking effective and appropriate representation within local government, community bodies and/or
services.
4. That the National Union of Students has a significant role to play in combating issues between students
and wider communities, exercising the influence and power it has with local government, community
bodies and local groups.

Conference resolves
1. To mandate the Vice President of Society and Citizenship to coordinate a national campaign with the
aim of improving student relations with wider communities.
2. To lobby councils to stop implementing policies which single out student communities, such as the
parking bans in Newcastle and Cambridge.
3. For the National Union of Students to conduct a widescale review of the mistreatment and
discrimination of students based on their identification within the catch-all student stereotype.
4. To actively challenge student stereotypes which are promoted in the media and by politicians or
organisations which seek to demonise students for issues which are not necessarily the fault of the
student population.
5. For the National Union of Students to actively facilitate meetings and cooperative action between
Students’ Unions, local authorities and community organisations with the aim of promoting excellent
relations between students and the wider community.






Motion 317 Opposing the Immigration Bill

Submitted by: Northumbria Students’ Union

Conference believes
1. The immigration bill proposed by the Government will have a dramatic negative experience on the
student’s experience in UK.
2. Many UK Universities have a large number of international students and it will affect students from all
over the UK, as they would seek other places to study abroad which provides better educational
experience.
3. The bill threatens the welfare of international students in the UK.

Conference resolves
1. To investigate this issue and to lobby the Government to recognize the benefits of International
Students.
2. To support Students’ Union’s in ensuring that they take a proactive approach to supporting
International students.


Motion 318 Fighting Cuts

Submitted by: Students’ Union Royal Holloway University of London

Conference believes
1. This year will see another huge wave of cuts in council services, cuts that will disproportionately hit
deprived areas and the most oppressed groups in society.

Conference further believes
1. Instead of implementing central government cuts, councils should refuse to do so, defy the government
and lead local communities in a campaign to demand the restoration of funding. Such a revolt by even
one council would make life very difficult for the Government; a few councils refusing to implement cuts
would make the cuts untenable.

Conference resolves
1. To support and encourage student unions to campaign against cuts to local services.
2. To highlight the impact of cuts to local services in our campaigning in the run up to the general
election.
3. To call on councils to refuse to implement cuts, and support and work with Councillors Againts the Cuts.


Motion 319 Justice for Palestine – support the
right to education

Submitted by: Mid-Kent College Students’ Union, NUS Black Students Committee, Middlesex Students’
Union, South and City College Birmingham

Conference believes:

1. Palestinian students’ right to education continues to suffer as a result of the illegal occupation of the
West Bank and Israel’s brutal siege on Gaza.

Conference resolves:




1. To invite a Palestinian student as a guest speaker for next year’s NUS National Conference to increase
awareness of how the illegal occupation of the West Bank and the siege on Gaza is adversely affecting
their right to education.
2. To continue to boycott companies that benefit from the illegal occupation of the West Bank.
3. To call upon the British government to demand that the siege on Gaza is lifted.


Motion 320 Defend our right to resist

Submitted by: Dudley College, NUS Black Students’ Committee, Middlesex Students’ Union, University
of Sussex Students’ Union

Conference believes:
1. In response to the significant upturn in the student movement - with increasing numbers of students
taking part in protests, occupations and campaigns against austerity and attacks on our education -
there has been a huge crackdown.
2. Students have been suspended from their courses, violently attacked by the police, kettled in freezing
weather for hours and even banned from protesting on central London campuses.
3. The goal of the crackdown is simple – to intimidate and deter a new generation of students from
fighting back against the government’s assault on our education and our future.
4. The crackdown on student protest is part of a wider assault on the right to resist in society – with
increasing attacks on trade unions and the passing of the draconian ‘gagging bill’.

Conference resolves to:
1. To support all students facing unlawful and unfair victimisation as a result of the crackdown on the right
to resist austerity, including with legal advice and by creating a legal fund to support students facing
charges or legal costs as a result of repression.
2. Continue to campaign against the ‘Gagging Bill’ and demand that it is reversed.
3. Work with the People’s Assembly Against Austerity in their ‘Hands Off Our Unions’ campaign and
support the trade union movement against attacks on their right to organise.


Motion 321 Solidarity with the oppressed in
South Africa

Submitted by: NUS Postgraduate Committee

Conference believes;
1. That 34 South African miners were gunned down by police in 2012 at Marikana, as they took strike
action to try and lift themselves and their families out of terrible poverty.
2. That conditions in the mines are so bad that there is a "Marikana massacre" underground every few
months: 128 miners were killed in 2010.
3. That solidarity from Britain and internationally played a part in ending the racist apartheid regime.
4. That unfortunately the ending of apartheid did not end the troubles of the millions of ordinary South
Africans, and that economic apartheid has survived and thrived.
5. That South Africa contains some of the biggest deposits of platinum, gold and other precious metals on
the planet, and also that this wealth is controlled by a tiny elite.
6. That miners and other workers have launched the Workers and Socialist Party (WASP) to stand up for
ordinary South Africans against the interests of the super-rich who currently have a monopoly of wealth
and power in the country.

Conference further believes;




1. That the tradition of solidarity between workers in Britain and South Africa should be continued and
strengthened.

Conference resolves;
1. To send a message of support to South African miners in their campaign for justice, and a life of
dignity.
2. To publicise the campaign of the South African Miners for Justice for Marikana
3. To financially support South African Miners for Justice with a donation of £200


Motion 322 Local income tax

Submitted by: University of Edinburgh Students’ Association

Conference Believes:
1. At present council tax is charged at a blanket rate to all people resident in an area, according to the
average house price.
2. House prices were last valued for council tax in 1991.
3. There are a number of reductions and exemptions in place for council tax, including properties solely
occupied by full-time students or in which only one resident is eligible to pay.
4. Part-time students receive no automatic reduction or exemption from council tax.
5. Council tax has been criticised for impacting renters and occupants of social housing more severely,
categories which many students fall into.
6. The SNP and Scottish Liberal Democrats both proposed replacing council tax with a form of local income
tax (LIT) in the 2007 Scottish Parliament elections, and the concept was approved in principle by the
Scottish Parliament the same year.
7. LIT taxes residents according to their income, and can either be collected and distributed by central
government or by local authorities.


Conference Further Believes:
1. Council tax is a regressive taxation, and therefore impacts people on low incomes more severely.
2. There are currently some welcome reductions and exemptions of council tax for vulnerable members of
society, however these are not comprehensive enough.
3. Part-time students often find it difficult to earn sufficient income along their studies due to the nature of
their courses, or to negotiate the social security system.
4. As a progressive taxation, LIT would be a fairer alternative to council tax.

Conference Resolves:
1. To campaign for council tax to be replaced with LIT.
2. To campaign to ensure students and vulnerable members of society are in no way negatively impacted
by this change.


Motion 323 30 years since the miners’ strike

Submitted by: Students’ Union Royal Holloway University of London

Conference believes
1. It is 30 years since the National Union of Mineworkers defied the Thatcher government's devastation of
working-class communities and the labour movement, in a year long-strike that involved thousands of
students, many dozens of student unions and NUS.
2. Student activists showed great creativity in supporting the strike - in many cases student unions
involved thousands of students in all kinds of innovative ways.




3. As well as galvanising trade unionists who wanted to resist the Tories' onslaught, the strike generated
important movements against oppression, eg the movement of women in the mining communities.

Conference further believes
1. Particularly when a Tory-dominated government is once again devastating our communities, there is a
lot to learn and inspiration to be taken from the miners' strike.

Conference resolves
1. Produce an exhibition about the strike and students' activity in supporting it for use in SUs.


Motion 324 Saving Polar Bears, One plastic
bottle at a time

Submitted by: Heriot-Watt University Students’ Union

Conference believes
1. Universities and Colleges have worked hard to improve the recycling facilities on campuses; however,
they can go further in order to improve what they provide for students.
2. 1 recycled glass bottle would save enough energy to power a computer for 25 minutes.
3. Up to 60% of the rubbish that ends up in the dustbin could be recycled.
4. 9 out of 10 people would recycle more if it were made easier.
5. 12.5 million tonnes of paper and cardboard are used annually in the UK.
6. Each year, new students arrive on campus and need to be shown that their University or College is
working hard to tackle a problem that affects their future.

Conference further believes
1. More should be done to help students recycle.
2. It is important for students to be able to recycle and for it to become part of a daily routine, therefore
by having recycling points on campuses, it will make it easier for students to do so and become familiar
with recycling.
3. That NUS UK should be at the forefront of this issue promoting and growing awareness of the issue of
recycling.

Conference Resolves
1. Lobby Universities and Colleges to encourage students to be recycling as much as possible.
2. Lobby Universities and Colleges to have energy saving and/or motion sensored lights in all buildings by
2016.
3. Lobby Universities and Colleges to have recycling points on campuses, especially around Halls of
Residences, enabling students to actively recycling and improve their surrounding areas.
4. Lobby Councils to provide recycling collections at Halls of Residences, as frequently as the residential
areas within their Council region.




Motion 401 Empowering Active Students

Submitted by: Union Development Zone Committee

Preamble

This motion seeks to bring together the three arms of ‘union development’ defining how it will progress over
the course of the next 18 months. Firstly, by empowering active students, we are working to give the
knowledge and tools to individuals to create change. Secondly, empowered individuals need to work
collectively to be effective; which is why we’ll work to create and connect networks of student communities in
and around the UK. Lastly, these communities of students will come together in students’ unions; here, we
must carry on with our work transforming these hubs of activity.

Traditionally, the majority of our work has been carried out in students’ unions. As time progresses, we believe
that this will begin to change and that more and more, students will focus their time in various communities
within the union and that this is where NUS should shift its focus. Through supporting these communities and
putting infrastructure in place to do this, we will be able to increase activism, enable greater levels of change
and ultimately re-shape further and higher education for the future

Conference Believes:
2. Working with and through students’ unions, students have a valuable and vital impact on their
education and wider society.
3. Students are at their most powerful when we organise collectively.
4. Organising collectively through an independent body is a fundamental right of all students in further
and higher education.
5. Thousands of students, especially in further education, work based learning, small and specialist
institutions and some private providers are denied the right to organise collectively.
6. All students should have power to make a difference, to get involved and organise to take action
around the issues they are most passionate about.
7. Democracy gives power to the people and by being at the vanguard of democratising students’ unions,
universities, colleges and wider society, we will secure more power for students to make a difference
and have an impact on the world around them.
8. That power gives the opportunity to cause and provoke change and politics is the way we decide what
kinds of impacts we think are important. While many students don’t necessarily think of themselves as
being “political”, we believe that all students have power.Being political is therefore necessary to make
a difference as being political is simply a way for students to organise and take action around the most
widely and deeply felt issues.
9. Measuring and articulating what students’ unions do – impact – allows us to both think critically about
what our activities aim to achieve and also better understand the benefits of our work. From strategic
benefits of thinking critically about activity aims, to democratic benefits of the increased transparency
brought about through the regular measurement and publication of impact.
10. For too long measuring and articulating impact has been limited to numbers and figures about volume –
simply recording how many students are in societies rather than demonstrating the impact that those
societies are having on their members, their institution and wider society.

Conference Resolves:
1. To create an online hub of resources that demonstrates the power of the student movement as a force
for good in society by using and analysisng impact from across the student movement.
2. This evidence base should be used in multiple ways including campaigning nationally to articulate the
value of students’ unions and inspiring more students to take party in civil society.
3. To support students’ unions to bring about social and political change in the formal curriculum of their
institution alongside co- and extra-curricular activities.




4. To deliver a programme supporting students’ unions to measure and articulate the impact of
campaigning activity more effectively and develop a set of common metrics for measuring impact. This
includes moving from quantitative to qualitative measurement tools.
5. To work with students’ unions across the country to promote new and good practice models of
democracy – and promote these principles further beyond their union. We will also ensure this work
complements and supports our efforts to diversify elections in students’ unions.
6. To create an organisational approach to empowering communities that exist in students’ unions from
clubs and societies to campaign groups. This should be reflected in our Quality Mark and strategic
support to students’ unions.


Amendment 401a NUS and Strategic Partnership

Amendment Action: Add amendment to 401
Submitted by: University of Lincoln Students’ Union

Conference Believes:
1. The UK government have cut between £20 billion from 2010 and 2015; this agenda is affecting all
sectors of the economy and society - including the voluntary sector and its beneficiaries.
2. NUS have a duty to support the strategic development of its membership
3. NUS are a voluntary organisation who seek to empower, inspire and educate its membership
4. Strategic plans are a tool used to help define the purpose and nature of organisations
5. Strong unions should support student representatives via research engaged data which back student
opinion
6. Students’ Unions are change agents who require the tools to enable activists to impact positively on
society
7. Transferable modes of best practice should be accessible to all unions
8. Campaigners need to respond to, and understand, new policy initiatives and ways of working in a
challenging and changing environment.
9. VAT has been raised – considerably increasing the voluntary sector’s cost base – and transitional relief
on Gift Aid has been ended.

Conference Resolves:
1. NUS to build modes of best practice from organisations in the sector for executive handovers into
training modules for sabbaticals
2. NUS to consolidate resources into research and policy projects with the aim of lobbying and
campaigning to influence the government’s decision making
3. NUS to collaborate with voluntary organisations by building a resource hub that will outline how to
create links with local organisations and what we can learn from them, for example community
organising methods and communication tools.
4. Work in tandem with NCVO into making the voluntary sector a priority in public policy ahead of the
General election 2015
5. NUS to localise strategic modelling NCVO have created to unions through bespoke training events


Motion 402 Connecting Networks of Student
Communities

Submitted by: Union Development Zone Committee

Conference Believes:

1. Communities exist across all aspects of student life within the education system.




2. That based on our initial research and mapping of student communities, there are a number of different
communities;
a. Communities of Administration (e.g. Identifying with the university, union)
b. Communities of Location (e.g. where you live)
c. Communities of Values (e.g. your identity LGBT, women)
d. Communities of Interest (e.g. courses, clubs and societies)
3. Students’ Unions are trying to develop and involve a more diverse student population to engage and
lead their unions but usually ‘box’ individuals and create structures that don’t relate to where student
communities are strong and active.
4. Active communities with deep ties are found to be based around values and interests of students.
5. The views of active and thriving communities should shape policy in students’ unions. However,
currently, unions put the majority of resources around administrative structures.
6. Engaging and empowering communities that already exist to make a difference and create change is a
priority.
7. By working to engage existing groups of students, levels of engagement with groups of students
typically seen as ‘hard-to-reach’ can be improved.
8. Only by re-imagining what students’ unions are and how they work, by thinking differently about the
communities we work with, can we build lasting relationships and engage different groups, increasing
participation with our unions.

Conference Resolves:
1. To work with individuals, organisations and students’ unions to fundamentally re-think how students’
unions should achieve their ambitions with an aim to empower communities that already exist.
2. To research and create models of communities that students’ unions can adapt that will allow unions to
identify where communities lie and how they can empower them. We will draw on student
development theory, so prevalent in the United States.
3. To deliver a programme of work with students’ unions to re-think how their unions are structured,
governed and how to disseminate power to communities of students. We will also work with students’
union staff, through specialist groups, supporting what enabling these new models might look like.
4. To create a leadership development programme for student opportunity leaders on campus to ensure
these community leaders have the capacity to build membership and grow activities in their unions.
5. To create an online training toolkit for clubs, societies, sports clubs and volunteering programmes to
train students to build activists in readiness for the 2015 general election and beyond.
6. To create new programmes of about devolving power to student interest groups
7. To fund a series of pilot projects to embed new models of democratic participation, ensuring a diverse
mix of students’ unions are chosen to test our work.


Motion 411 Regional Partnerships

Submitted by: Stanmore College Students’ Union, Chester Students’ Union, Birmingham City
University Students Union.

Conference Believes:
1. Further Education and Higher Education unions would benefit from working closely with each other in
local regions.
2. The development of the community organising agenda is exciting and must explore other ways unions
can collaborate.
3. Students' Unions nationally (including NUS) talk about a united student movement however, many
unions fail to work with other local unions.
4. In many Union's nationally, they strive to make sure all elections (local, European and General) are a
win for students and by linking together local unions they can amplify the student voice.




5. Not all student issues are down to the institution they study in, many exist because of the locality they
live in. For example, housing, crime, employment and travel campaigns can be city wide or regional
issues.
6. There are lessons to be learnt from both HE and FE institutions and that city wide partnerships should
be about mutual respect and development.
7. Students’ unions already work hard to explore what changes they can make locally, including
influencing local politics and decision makers.
8. There are already fantastic examples of students’ unions working together across cities, such as;
Glasgow Student Forum, NUS London Area, Birmingham Students’ Unions. These groups all set their
own agenda we must learn from them.
9. Full Time Officers at the National Union of Students have effective representation with trade unions
through “Union Representatives”
10. While Students’ Union Officers are entitled to join trade unions, there is low take up of this

Conference further believes:
1. In a time where collaboration is key and tertiary education is at the forefront of our minds, it is time
that we embrace working together in city FE and HE students’ unions where so many of our students
experience the same issues.
2. Birmingham HE Students’ Unions have created its own group of Executive Officers that meet
throughout the year to discuss joint campaigns, concerns and developments to variable success. This
group does not have any staff support or formal organization, consequently regular meetings are not as
successful as hoped. Therefore, the results from these meetings are ineffective in its current form.
3. Trade Unions can have difficulties understanding the role of Students’ Union Officers, which is a
deterrent to some Officers joining
4. Better representation through trade unions, and more support in this, would enable Officers to receive
better working conditions

Conference Resolves:
1. NUS should work with Students’ Unions to develop partnerships across FE and HE unions.
2. NUS should hold more regional events and networking opportunities to encourage initial dialogue
between unions around an area.
3. Unaffiliated Students’ Union should be invited to attend.
4. NUS should identify ways that unions can share resources and capacity and pilot opening facilities
where applicable to students from a number of institutions.
5. Where current collaboration is working, NUS should highlight and share examples of how and why this
works well.
6. NUS should support local campaigns that develop from regional meetings with staff and resources.
7. NUS should develop guides about breaking down local politics and decision makers, making
campaigning for students locally more understandable.
8. An elected NUS officer will be expected to attend at least one of these meetings each year.
9. Every meeting will be attended by an elected NUS representative (NEC).
10. An elected NUS Vice President/President will be expected to attend at least one of these meetings each
year.
11. To investigate the possibility of facilitating regional representation in trade unions for Students’ Union
Officers.

Amendment 411a Creating Networks for similar Students’ Unions

Amendment Action: Add amendment to 414
Submitted by: Keele Students’ Union,

Conference Believes:
1. That different Universities organise themselves into ‘groups’ based on areas such as research excellence
and teaching and learning.
2. That a number of Universities do not sit within a mission group.




3. That Student Unions do not have system that mirrors that of the University they sit alongside.
4. That in response to several conference mandates in previous years, NUS has increased its work to
support Small and Specialist Students’ Unions
5. Given the large proportion of the membership these Unions constitute, this work is to be celebrated and
encouraged
6. For the same reason, this work should now be expanded

Conference Further Believes:
1. That there are a number of benefits for institutions of being in a group.
2. That Student Unions could benefit from a similar set up to that of University mission groups through
working collaboratively and sharing best practice with those institutions that they are similar to.
3. That Student Unions tend to work and associate with those Unions geographically close to them rather
than Unions which are similar.
4. That we should develop a union mission group system.
5. That most Small and Specialist Unions have limited financial resources and thus are limited in the staff
they can hire
6. That these Unions must often choose, when creating staff structures, whether to prioritise front-line
services for students (such as advice workers, clubs and societies coordinators or campaign staff etc.)
or back room operations (such as managers, finance staff etc.)
7. That this can leave these unions, and their members, without sufficient provision in either area
8. That by combining resources many of these unions could work together to provide support and training
to current staff and possibly even some back room services
9. That even larger, more resource-rich unions may find sharing back room staffing more efficient

Conference Resolves:
1. To mandate the Vice President Union Development to undertake research into how Student Unions work
collaboratively and share best practice.
2. To mandate the Vice President Union Development to establish a mission group system for Student
Unions based on the indicators that fall within the Quality Mark and undertake extensive consultation
with Student Unions regarding what networks would help them.
3. That NUS will investigate the possibility of either NUS providing back room services centrally or NUS
facilitating unions (either by region or relative need) jointly purchasing back room services
4. To support the creation of a Small and Specialist Staff Network
5. To support (and, where possible, finance) this group to create training events which these unions could
not otherwise finance on their own
6. To support Small and Specialist Unions in reviewing their staff structures and help them identify hiring
and training priorities


Motion 412 Democratic Students’ Unions

Submitted by: University of Sussex Students’ Union, University College London Union, Central School
of Speech and Drama Students’ Union,

Conference believes
1. Clear, open, democratic structures are essential to develop the culture of involvement, mobilisation,
activism and accountability we need.
2. The interests of student unions and management are fundamentally counterposed
3. In FE, unions frequently do not have access to basic resources, such as membership lists and means of
communicating with members
4. Where unions are effective, they will come under pressure from management to stop their activities.
This should be resisted.




5. University and College managers are increasingly seeking to interfere with union autonomy in relation
to campus dissent and protest. At the University of Birmingham, a candidate was suspended by the
University in relation to protest activity and almost prevented from running in elections.
6. Liberation is a key part of being a democratic union. Having structures that reflect Liberation is not a
magic bullet, but it is good and we should urge CMs to introduce and improve them in line with NUS
Liberation Campaigns’ guidance.

Conference resolves
1. NUS to issue democratic guidance to Union’s which encourage;
a. Important decisions should be made by students and their elected representatives.
b. Autonomous Liberation campaigns in every Students’ Union, and where possible full-time
Liberation officers.
2. To campaign for Students’ Union independence, including:
a. A basic and legally enforceable minimum standard for unions in FE and HE, including access to
independent resources and space; means of communication with members; automatic annual
elections; security of funding; and existence and representation within institutional structures.
b. Independent and accountable returning officers for union elections, who have no employment
or trusteeship connection with the institution.
c. A drive to create full-time elected officers in small and specialist and FE unions.
3. NUS to issue guidance to Students’ Unions that, where students are suspended from the University as a
result of their participation in protest activity, they should continue to remain full members of their
Students’ Union.
4. To issue guidance, and include in the Summer Training programmes, on how officers and student reps
can tackle and work around undue interference of university management and senior SU staff.

Amendment 412a Open and transparent Students’ Unions

Amendment Action: Add amendment to 413
Submitted by: University College London Union, Central School of Speech and Drama Students’ Union

Conference believes:
1. The success of an SU should be judged on how easy it is for members to get involved and steer its
decisions and direction, how many it mobilises in action and campaigning, and to what extent it puts
pressure on and wins concessions from management and government.
2. Clear, open, democratic structures are essential to develop the culture of involvement, mobilisation,
activism and accountability we need.
3. External trustees can give valuable expertise. However, there is absolutely no good reason why
unelected non students should be allowed to vote in our unions.

Conference resolves to
1. Campaign for SU democracy including:
a. A constant flow of easily accessible information to members (minutes, public reports from
senior staff as well as elected officers, etc);
b. Regular, well-built General Meetings; when SU councils exist they should be open to all to
attend, speak and put motions;
2. To issue guidance that only elected students should be full voting members of Trustee Boards.
Externals should advise, but should not have a say in final decisions.


Amendment 412b Trustee Boards

Amendment Action: Delete CR2 of 413a and add amendment to 413
Submitted by: Central School of Speech and Drama Students’ Union

Speech For: Central School of Speech and Drama Students’ Union (1.5 minutes)




Speech Against: Free (1.5 minutes)
Summation: Central School of Speech and Drama Students’ Union (1 minute)

Conference Resolves:
1. We oppose the existence of Trustee Boards; while they exist they should be made up exclusively of
elected students, and in no case include management representatives.


Motion 413 From 1994 to 2034: the next
generation of the student
movement

Submitted by: National Executive Council

Conference believes:
1. The 1994 Education Act and the 2006 Charities Act together establish the principle of independent,
well-governed and representative students’ unions.
2. As the further and higher education sectors have evolved students’ unions have as well; they are
diverse in mission, scope and levels of resource.
3. Students’ unions are increasingly interwoven into the fabric of national education regulation: across the
UK we have a presumption of student participation in governance, frameworks for learner and student
voice, management of complaints and appeals and student engagement.
4. Twenty years on from the Education Act it is timely to reaffirm the right of every student to organise
and seek representation through an independent students’ union, and to reflect on how students’
unions might evolve in the next twenty years.

Conference resolves
1. To consult widely within the student movement and with the further and higher education sectors on
the development of a White Paper setting out proposals to ensure students’ unions are recognised in
law, continue to be well-governed and are sufficiently resourced to carry out their mission of amplifying
the student voice, helping students be powerful and improving students’ lives.
2. To consider the diverse purposes and activities of students’ unions and how these might be more fully
developed and supported in a complex and changing educational environment with multiple external
pressures.
3. To explore the legal and regulatory frameworks for students’ unions and lobby to strengthen these.
4. To use the current legal and regulatory frameworks available to us and any future legislation we may
achieve to take steps to establish independent collective student representative bodies where they
currently do not exist.

Motion 414 For a living wage in our institutions

Submitted by: University College London Union, Students Union University of the Arts, Central School
of Speech and Drama Students’ Union

Conference believes:
1. The highest pay in the HE sector averages £248,292 per year.
2. Many workers in universities are paid the National Minimum Wage, and workers across the sector have
had their pay cut by 13% since 2008.
3. Many Universities and Colleges still employ large numbers of staff for less than the Living Wage, and
often on highly casualised contracts.

Conference further believes:




1. All workers should be paid at least the Living Wage

Conference resolves:
1. To support SUs campaigning for the Living Wage, and publicise how workers at University of London
and elsewhere have won it through industrial action.
2. To call for all students unions to lead by example in paying all workers, including student staff, the
Living Wage.

Motion 415 SU autonomy and building pan-
London representation

Submitted by: University College London Union, Students Union University of the Arts

Conference believes
1. There are 800,000 students in London. These members face acute and specific issues, and if mobilised
could make a massive impact. NEC recognised London as an Area in autumn.
2. Following a review, the University of London has declared its intention to shut down its federal student
union, ULU, from August 2014, which alongside college unions represents around a third of all HE
students in London. No student sat on the Review Panel, and no student sat on any body which
approved it.
3. ULU and NUS London have adopted positions opposing the outcomes of the ULU Review and
campaigning for ULU’s building and services to remain in student hands.

Conference further believes
1. An injury to one is an injury to all. Regardless of how unique ULU is, the shutting down of ULU presents
a major attack on students' right to organise and on SU independence.
2. There has been a failure of leadership in NUS HQ around this issue and pan-London representation
more generally, despite having policy to campaign on it and enthusiasm from CMs.
3. Other regions should have a better advertised opportunity to explore the possibility of Area
organisations.

Conference resolves
1. To condemn and campaign against the processes and outcomes of the ULU Review
2. To affirm the sovereignty of NUS London Area, and support NUS London and ULU in their campaigns to
keep ULU’s building and services in student hands.
3. To actively explore the feasibility and desirability of creating NUS Areas in other parts of the country, in
consultation with unions.

Amendment 415a Save ULU –defend student union independence

Amendment Action: Add amendment to 412
Submitted by: Students Union University of the Arts


Conference believes:
1. That University of London's proposals to close down University of London Union are of a piece with its
contemptuous attitude to staff and calling the police on its students.
2. That the shutting down of ULU is a major attack on students' right to organise and SU independence. If
University of London can get away with it, other SUs may be under threat.
3. NUS's failure to straightforwardly support ULU against this attack has been disgraceful, relying on
dishonest and nonsensical arguments.

Conference resolves to:
1. Campaign against the shutting down of ULU.




2. Campaign in defence of the independence of SUs from management, as part of defending the right to
organise.

Motion 416 Gagging Clauses

Submitted by: University College London Union

Conference Believes
1. This year the University of Edinburgh threatened to withdraw Edinburgh University Students’
Associations block grant if the Sabbaticals refused to sign a ‘Gag Clause’. This Gag Clause severely
limited the ability of EUSA to publicly criticise the University

Conference Resolves:
1. To publicly commit to calling a large scale National Demonstration on the campus of the next University
to attempt to silence their Students’ Union in a similar manner
2. To communicate the above to Universities UK.

Motion 417 The next opportunity…

Submitted by: University of Lincoln Students’ Union

Conference believes:
1. This is the first year NUS has taken Student opportunities (work on societies, sports, volunteering and
media) seriously and welcomes the work in this area.
2. The work carried out has supported student activities officers and staff across the country create a
national network and support each other to develop student groups.
3. NUS should continue to prioritise work in this area and recognise the important role student
opportunities have within our students’ unions.
4. The work supporting students’ unions diversify their candidates in elections and breaking down barriers
in our democracy is important and needs to be reflected in the democracy of our student groups.
5. There are many national organisations that support student groups we can create further partnerships
with, especially within media and charities.
6. There has been a lack of work with Student Enterprise, something which would add value for student
groups and student social enterprises.
7. There has been a worrying increase of institutions taking over this activity from students unions and we
absolutely believe they should be run by students for students.
8. There are still too many places where timetabling is still a problem and there is no dedicated time for
students to play sport, volunteer, work and run societies.

Conference resolves:
1. To hold a student opportunities conference during the summer, bringing staff and officers together and
invite external organisations such as BUCS, Media groups, volunteering and charities to support this.
2. To develop more resources and support for unions that have no to very few clubs, societies and media.
3. Research the diversity of leadership in student groups, produce specific guidance and innovative
structures to support the research that allows our student groups to be more reflective of their
members.
4. Run pilot projects connecting student groups across cities and regions, bringing together campaigning
societies and clubs to tackle local issues.
5. To create an external partner database and that brings together national organisations and charities
that have student links, creating a ‘way into students’ union manual’ to educate them on how to best
work with students’ unions.
6. Develop a local version that supports students’ unions create local ties with key partners that support
student groups with common causes. Capture where strong community ties exist and share in other
areas.




7. Identify organisations that fund student enterprise and hold a students’ union enterprise events and
training, pulling in funding to unions and student groups for social enterprise.
8. NUS should hold a national enquiry into timetabling and extra circular activity, this should include
bringing BUCS, volunteer organisations and institution representation to have the debate nationally
about the importance of dedicated timetabling space.


Amendment 417a BUCS

Amendment Action: Add amendment to 416
Submitted by: Birkbeck Students’ Union


Conference Believes:
1. The British Universities & Colleges Sports (BUCS) receives a lot of funding from students and students’
unions.
2. The participation in BUCS is unrepresentative of students at large, commonly being only affluent full-
time students
3. BUCS historically has put age restrictions on participation in some activities
4. National meetings of BUCS have been branded as alcohol-fuelled romps, where homophobia is endemic
and misogyny is mainstreamed as part of the culture

Conference Further Believes:
1. BUCS must be accountable to students and to the NUS as the national student body
2. Some SUs pay over £250k to BUCS annually, yet access to democratic members meetings such as the
AGM is blocked by a seemingly intransigent board of director, unaccountable to the paying membership

Conference Resolves:
1. To call for BUCS to be democratised fully
2. For NUS to use its influence to bring about changes to BUCS’ constitution and to make it accountable to
the student body for its finance.


Amendment 417b National Student Associations

Amendment Action: Add amendment to 416
Submitted by: Loughborough Students’ Union

Conference believes:
1. It is positive that a number of independent national associations exist to promote areas of student
activity such as National Association of Student Television Association (NASTA) and National Student
Fundraising Association (NaSFA).

Conference resolves:
2. To support and encourage the formation of a National Association of Student Societies and Activities
(NASSA) and support the establishment of associated awards.
3. To support the development of a national accreditation brand of ‘Societies Stripes’ awarded for
individual recognition for outstanding contribution towards student Societies and Activities.’





Motions submitted to this meeting of the National Executive Council

Motion 1: Student Carers and Parents
Proposed by: Kelley Temple
Seconded by: Charles Barry, Daniel Stevens, Dom Anderson

NEC Believes:
1. NUS has many representative structures for different types of students, but does not have any dedicated
structure for student parents or for student carers.
2. There is no channel for student parents and carers to express their voices on issues that affect them or to
collaboratively develop policy.
3. NUS’ core purpose is to “promote, defend and extend the rights of students”, and this must include those
students who are parents or who have caring responsibilities.
4. Rule changes were submitted to National Conference (2013 AGM) but were not discussed for lack of time.

NEC Resolves:
1. To create a temporary representative structure for Student Parents and Carers:
2. To create the Student Parents and Carers Committee as a NEC Committee, effective 1
st
July 2014 that will
operate in accordance with the terms of reference below.
3. The NEC will appoint a lead officer for Student Parent and Student Carers at its first meeting of each year
from the NUS full-time officers (including those who are not members of the NEC), who will have authority to
speak for NUS on matters affecting Student Parents and Student Carers.
4. To hold a Student Parents and Carers Conference in 2014/15.
5. To consult with constituent members and student parents and carers:
6. The National President will launch a consultation on the future of representation within NUS for Student
Parents and Student Carers, and the best way to incorporate these groups within NUS’ democratic structures.
7. This review will conclude in time for the NEC to bring rule changes to National Conference in2015, and this
policy and the temporary structure above will cease to have effect if permanent rules changes are adopted by
National Conference that create a representative structure for Student Parents and Student Carers.

NUS Student Parents and Carers Committee – Terms of Reference
Membership
1. The Student Parents and Carers Committee will be composed of individual members of NUS who wish to join
the committee and are both:

A parent or someone with caring responsibilities, and members of one or more of the groups listed below.

2.The groups are:
 The National Executive Council;
 Liberation Campaigns Committees;
 Student Sections Committees;
 Nations committees;
 Zone Committees;
 Members elected by any Conference composed of delegates from Constituent Members that is
recognised by the National Executive Council to represent Student Parents and Carers.

The lead full-time officer appointed by the National Executive Council to represent Student Parents and Carers
will be an ex-officio member of the Committee.

Remit
The remit of the Committee is to:
a. Represent Student Parents and Carers within NUS;
b. Discuss issues affecting Student Parents and Carers;
c. Develop policy on Student Parents and Carers, and to submit this to the National Executive Council for
adoption.





Organisation:
The lead full-time officer appointed by the National Executive Council to represent Student Parents and Carers
shall chair the Committee.
In all other aspects relating to its organisation and procedures, the Committee will follow the rules of NEC
Committees.

Motion 2: We need Hope, not Hate
Proposed by: Dom Anderson
Seconded by: Daniel Stevens, Gordon Maloney

NEC Believes

1.That racism and fascism can be beaten on the streets but also at the ballot box
2.That the rise of UKIP is a dangerous one pushing the conservatives further to the right
3.Hope not hate have been brilliant in highlighting the real UKIP
4.They have also been active in campaigning against the BNP in the NW
5.NUS must always stand with progressive anti racist groups
6.Anti racism and anti fascism should be centre of our movement

NUS resolves

1. To affiliate with Hope not Hate
2. For NEC members to encourage CM's to do the same

Motion 3: Ukraine Conflict
Proposed by: Rosie Huzzard
Seconded by: James McAsh, Gordon Maloney.

NEC believes:
1. The right of nations to self-determination is an important part of democracy.

NEC further believes:
1. Russia, the historical and recent oppressor of Ukraine, is attempting to regain political control of the country.
2. In the current clash between Russia and Ukraine, we support the Ukrainians' right to defend their
independence against Russian
imperialism.

NEC resolves:
1. We call for an end to Russian aggression against Ukraine.
2. Our number one emphasis and priority is making links with students' organisations, workers' organisations
and other progressive and democratic forces in Ukraine, supporting them against both Russian aggression and
Ukraine's right-wing government and growing right-wing nationalist movement.
3. We will also publicise and support the struggles of the anti-war movement in Russia, and call on the British
government and other Western powers to stop seeking to impose neo-liberal economic policies on Ukraine and
instead cancel the country's debts.

Motion 4: Free Education Motion Clarification
Proposed by: James McAsh
Seconded by: Rosie Huzzard, Gordon Maloney, Charles Barry

NEC Believes:
1. NUS National Conference 2014 passed amendment 215c 'Free Education' which committed NUS to a free
education position. This was made very clear in the resolves: "To make the case for free education and demand
that free, accessible, quality education, and decent wages, public services and benefits, are funded by: a.




Ending tax evasion and avoidance and cracking down on tax havens b. Imposing serious taxes on the incomes,
inheritance and capital gains of the rich c. Taking the banks, and their wealth, under democratic control "
2. The amendment also committed NUS to opposing all forms of graduate contribution, including a graduate
tax: "To oppose and campaign against all methods of charging students for education – including tuition fees
and a ‘graduate tax’ which is nothing more than a euphemism for ‘student debt’"
3. The original motion, which the Free Education text amended, committed NUS to a funding model based on
graduate contributions.
4. That the amendment was an 'Add Amendment' and did not delete the contradictory parts.
5. That the motion, as it currently reads, is internally contradictory.

NEC Further Believes:

1. That the inter-relationship with the motions was wrong: it should not be possible to have an internally
contradictory policy.
2. That the submitters of the amendment clearly did not intend for the end policy to be internally contradictory,
and nor did conference when it voted for the amendment.
3. That due to the lengthy count on this amendment and the falling of the guillotine, it was not possible to
debate the parts to delete the commitment to the graduate tax in the original motion. 4. Conference knew what
it was voting for: free education and opposition to all forms of student contribution.
5. That the policy needs to be interpreted one way or the other.

NEC Resolves:

1. To interpret NUS national policy on education funding as being unambiguously in favour of free education
and against all forms of student contribution.
2. To act on the basis of this in the run-up to the General Election and after.
3. To publicise NUS's historic change of position.















Emergency motions


Emergency motion: Defend the DSA – reject the cuts
Proposed by: Hannah Paterson
Seconded by: Colum McGuire

NEC believes:
1. The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills announced changes to Disabled Students’
Allowances on Monday 7 April
2. The changes seek to restrict the provision of laptops to disabled students unless they have ‘complex’
needs
3. They also seek to shift responsibility for the provision of ‘basic’ non-medical support on to institutions
4. The changes will take effect for new students from the 2015/16 academic year
5. At National Conference, an emergency motion was passed to condemn the decision and to campaign
against the cuts.

NEC further believes:
1. These are deeply dangerous proposals, and assume that disabled students are all able to afford their
own laptop, and all institutions able to afford to fund the non-medical support their students require
2. Many disabled students cannot afford their own laptop, or one at the specification necessary to utilise
specialist assistive software
3. Those institutions who do best at recruiting disabled students often have the least resources and
therefore are disproportionately affected by the proposals
6. Disabled students should not have to fight for the support they need to achieve in their studies any
more than they already do
7. The proposals come in the context of cuts to disabled people’s benefit and local authority support
8. This motion further shows NUS’ commitment to campaign against the cuts and to support the Disabled
Students’ Campaign.

NEC resolves:
1. To mandate the VP Welfare and VP Higher Education to campaign to oppose these cuts and support the
Disabled Students Campaign.
2. To oppose any proposal which negatively impacts on students
3. To work to support students’ unions to campaign on this locally
4. To share the campaign ideas and other materials with constituent members
5. To commit to supporting Disabled Students’ Campaign Committee in doing phone rounds to students’
unions
6. To promote the NUS Constituency Lobby Date for the date is now confirmed as Friday 6
th
June
7. To work on this campaign with any partner organisations who share our objectives.

Motion: Lambeth College Struggle
Proposed by: Rosie Huzzard

NEC believes
1. That on 7 May Unison announced that its members at Lambeth College had voted 83 percent to strike over
attacks on their terms and conditions.
2. That this came after the 30 April decision by a judge to issue an injunction preventing UCU members at the
college going on all-out strike - despite the fact they had voted 95 percent to strike.

NEC further believes
1. That both UCU and Unison the college plan to be on strike soon.
2. That this is an extremely important and potentially precedent-setting dispute in terms of defending FE from
the cuts and casualisation that are gutting it – vital not just for staff but for the future of students' education
too.
3. That we should seek to mobilise the movement to ensure that the Lambeth College workers win.

NEC resolves:
1. To promote and mobilise for the UCU demonstration in Lambeth on 17 May.
2. To promote and mobilise for the National Day of Action on 22 May.


3. To publish a statement of support for the Lambeth College workers spelling out the significance of the
dispute for FE and condemning the college management's use of legal intimidation against the workers.
4. To establish a working group in support of the dispute including the VP FE and any other NEC member who
wishes to be part of it.
5. To ask the VP FE to contact UCU, Unison and the student union at the college to discuss support for the
strike.
6. To ask Constituent Members to send messages of support and make donations/raise money for the strike
fund.
7. To donate £100 to the strike fund.






Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Special offer for students: Only $4.99/month.

Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Cancel anytime.