THE YUSU sabbatical team could be in for some extra work following the upcoming Union General Meeting (UGM), with two directly conflicting motions up for vote. Should they both pass, the officers would, under the current constitution, theoretically be mandated to work to implement two opposing agendas. Democracy and Services officer Dan Walker admits that “the constitution gives little guidance on procedure here”.
The motions in question both deal with the heavily contested issue of higher education funding and especially the potential tuition fee hikes. Peter Spence has put forth a proposal that YUSU adopt a neutral stance on the issue. Spence argues that only a small proportion of the student body attended the recent national demonstration in London and infers from that that the majority of York students are either indifferent or opposed to the campaign.
He states that YUSU’s involvement in the campaign has damaged the reputation of the Union, referring to the presence of YUSU branded signs at the Millbank riots. He also added that continued campaigning is not an “effective use of Union resources and has not yet led to any tangible benefits”, arguing that ”political parties and the existing political framework are superior methods of representing partisan interests”.
YUSU Campaigns Officer Luke Sandford is behind the opposing motion. He seeks to mandate to Union to go against any increases in tuition fees, following its recently expired policy on the matter. In contrast to Spence, he believes the size of the demonstration “underlines the anger felt by students”. He believes that given the liberal democrats’ past promises there is a realistic chance of halting fee increases, giving YUSU an incentive to continue “vigorous and constant campaigning”. Additionally, he wants to mandate the D&S officer to work to raise awareness amongst students of the effects of any potential fees hike.
As there was limited help to be found in the current YUSU constitution, the Rules and Revisions committee, which approve the suitability for motions to debate at UGM, resolved to send both proposals through to a student vote. “If following this UGM both motions are passed by the student body I will proceed to call an EGM on the matter at the beginning of next term, where the student body will be asked how they wish their Union to proceed,” Walker stated.
The last UGM of the term will take place a week later than planned, something which Walker puts down to the adverse weather conditions and the number of motions submitted. In addition to the above, there is a motion dealing with the YUM Chair’s position on council, a motion to mandate the Union to lobby to affiliate the university with the Workers Rights Contortion and one calling for an international student common room. Walker commented that the he hoped the week’s delay would “ensure students had the time to engage properly with the large number of motions”.