SU democracy row

The Democratic Challenge is being organised by Miguel Costa Matos, the Undergraduate Social Sciences Student Staff Liaison Committee Faculty Representative, in an effort to highlight how the the Students’ Union (SU) could be made more transparent, and democratise it further.

“When were you asked whether you wanted to be ripped off at the Dirty Duck?

“Since when have you been consulted on what to do with the nearly £7 million the SU takes into its coffers every year?” said Mr Matos on his event page.

Mr Matos wants the SU budget to be brought to Council by sabbatical officers for approval to guarantee full “democratic accountability”. The budget would be taken to approval in Student Council as well as the Trustees allowing everyone to scrutinize “how money is spent”.

Mr Matos is campaigning for this change to prevent “faceless/anonymous bureaucrats” making the decisions.

He believes there is a lack of student interest in SU politics because students are not able to be involved. He said : “The issue is about the SU democracy and [the SU] is a £7 million turnover charity. This grants the SU enormous power.
“If only there was some scrutiny on how the money was spent”.

In a response to these concerns Cosmo March, the SU Democracy and Development Officer, has denied that there is a lack of student interest stressing that Warwick’s SU has “more Societies (242) and Sports Clubs (72) than almost every other Union”.

Mr March admitted the SU had “some way to go” in reaching their personal target in relation to accumulating student engagement, but found Mr Matos’ opinion about student participation “unfair”.

Mr March said: “No officer makes a decision without insight into students’ needs but that if decisions are made, they are always made with the interests of students at the centre of the discussion.”

In response, Mr Matos said that whilst the Sabbs are full-time democratically-elected representatives of students and are meant to be the executives of the SU, students still lack sufficient representation as there are failings to deal with their opinions in regards to the SU’s operations.

Mr Matos has said that answers are not provided when one contacts the SU about creating a financial plan for change in the workings of the organisation.