Union democracy debated at Council

The Union Council meeting on Monday 5 December saw some heated debate over the nature of democracy at the University of Warwick. The main discussion centred around increasing freedom in Union Elections, which was set to be discussed at the General Meeting on Tuesday 29 November, but was referred to the Council Meeting after the number of people in attendance fell below quorum.

The Council resoundingly rejected a proposition from Student Councillor Kit Long that advocated the removal of financial barriers in campaigns for Union Council positions. Candidates in the Autumn elections are currently not allowed to print posters, leaflets or advertise their campaigns. Long blamed this cap for the “abysmally low” turnout in Autumn elections.

Eliminating the cap on the Sabbatical Officer elections was also advocated. Long felt that the “Union should encourage candidates to run the most exciting and dynamic campaigns they can” and also added that the variable cap “was always an arbitrary restriction”. The measure received just ten votes and was met with resistance from many of those present. Welfare Officer Izzy John branded the idea “dangerous”, and arguing that lifting the cap (which currently does not allow candidates to spend any money on their campaigns whatsoever) would make elections unfair by violating equal opportunities. She argued that “The most effective thing candidates can do is campaign on the ground by talking to students and writing a realistic, relatable manifesto,” which does not require fundraising.

Democracy Officer Chris Luck said that the election system was “in many ways outdated”, and respected Long’s attempts to debate the issue, but stated that he “fundamentally disagreed” with the specific solutions proposed. He disagreed with removing caps completely, or asking students to use their own money in elections, branding such a move as “very dangerous”. However, he conceded that “we absolutely should be looking at new ways of resourcing candidates and encouraging people to vote.”

Long was disappointed in the result but said that “without the support from the Democracy Officer, I will not attempt to introduce any more motions on campaign finance. It is a shame as election reform was a cornerstone of my manifesto this year.”

The second motion of the evening was over whether the Union should support Hope Nwachukwu, a homosexual Nigerian man seeking asylum in the United Kingdom. The motion was passed unanimously. The third motion, which proposed putting pressure on Costcutter to sell only free-range eggs, was also passed after some debate over individual student liberty to choose.

The meeting also involved a rather animated discussion over the Democracy Review. This section of the meeting saw no votes taken. Instead, the Review’s progress was being presented in order to gauge student opinion. Important issues raised included the number of part-time officers, with the view that the number should be reduced. Union Council elections are also likely to change as part of the Democracy Review process. Discussions of the Review’s proposals were sidelined by concerns regarding the its processes.

Luck admitted that this part of the evening “could have been done better”. Central to this was the issue of Union democracy and reform, as no significant reform of the democratic mechanisms of the Union have taken place since 2002. This evoked a heated debate between Luck and the Chair of the Council Meeting, James Entwistle. Luck admitted that “we both overreacted”.

The issue of proxy voting was once again raised, after being discussed extensively at the General Meeting after its first use. Luck wants to further facilitate voting, recognising that not everyone wants to “attend a four-hour meeting”. He also dismissed accusations of coercion, of which no concrete evidence has been presented, being used in garnering votes for the General Meeting measures.

He did, however, admit that the day involved a high amount of confusion, and that the paper form system “could have been better”. An online system was advocated at the Council to eliminate the security issues raised on the day of the General Meeting. The electronic system would hopefully be in place for the next General Meeting. However, some people had been confused by the proxy-voting system, with Luck saying that some people had not understood what they had assented to, which called into legitimacy the status of all of the votes.

The Union Council meeting was aborted when the numbers fell below quorum.