Controversy surrounds last week’s Union General Meeting (UGM) where Student Activities Officer Nick Scarlett, put forth a highly contentious motion regarding a full restructure of the current society and sports club funding allocation system.
The proposal to move the responsibility of funding allocation from the Student Activities Officer to the newly formed Societies Committee, was met with considerable opposition from the representatives of the societies in attendance, and resulted in a one-and-a-half hour floor debate on the issue.
Scarlett argued that the current system was “undemocratic” and “prone to nepotism”, as it puts one person in control of the funding of all societies. “[The motion] makes sure Sam [Asfahani, York Sport President] and I, and our successors, can no longer distribute large amounts if we favour a particular society or club,” he said.
Chris Montanaro, head of the Debating Society and the chosen speaker of the opposition, fired back that the alternative would be more undemocratic seeing as the committee would not be elected and accountable to the student body to the same degree as a sabbatical officer.
He argued that the current system is “meritocratic” and “accountable”, stating that: “Nick, as an independent and impartial person can genuinely make an overall judgment about what he thinks societies should merit in terms of resources,” while, “the representatives who will be in the committee are only there to serve the vested interests of their own society.”
The debate also saw several heads of societies and York University Media (YUM) Chair Chris Young challenging the motion, while the YUSU sabbs spoke in favour.
The matter has even prompted former YUSU Campaigns Officer, Chris Etheridge, to create a Facebook page urging people to vote against the motion.
As it stands, the changes in the system would only affect societies whose funding make up more than five percent of the overall grant budget, as they would be the only ones forced to justify their finances to the Societies Committee. The motion explicitly mentions that there are seven societies and two sports clubs that receive a “disproportionate amount of funding”. Vision understands that these include all the YUM societies, FragSoc and DramaSoc. However, it is unclear whether all of these go above the five per cent cut-off line.
YUM Chair Chris Young has hit out at the proposed reform, stating that it will make the process “even more nepotistic, bureaucratic, and undemocratic.”
However, DramaSoc Chair Dan Wood told Vision that while they understand that their funding may change because of these potential reforms, “we approve and will continue to approve of the democratic nature of YUSU.”
The proposal comes after a recent Union Council meeting in which YUSU President Tim Ngwena instigated the removal of the seat of YUM Chair from the council.
In light of this, Young says that “there is no doubt that if passed, the motion creates an extremely dangerous precedent for not only the media’s ability to perform its role as an autonomous, informal, scrutinizing, watchdog-style institution, but its very existence.”
He further argues that the motion represents a “slippery slope that could lead to the Union becoming an unchecked body with the power to do as it pleases.”
Scarlett has responded by assuring that the changes are not about making cuts, but about creating greater transparency. “These important decisions about who gets large funds and who doesn’t will now be minuted and available for people to see.” He added that “this isn’t an attack on the media, it’s about spreading the decision making.”
Voting for the UGM is open now, and will close tomorrow at noon.