BREAKING: Warwick disaffiliation campaign accused of violating SU rules
The campaign for Warwick to disaffiliate from the NUS has been accused of violating the SU’s campaigning regulations.
The “NUS Exit Warwick” campaign has failed to comply with a regulation stating that all campaign publicity must be printed by the SU. This rule is employed by the SU to regulate campaign spending.
Posters calling for disaffiliation were put up on campus today, however according to the SU, there is no record of these being printed at the SU print shop.
The campaign has been instructed to remove all offending publicity by 9am tomorrow morning (May 20) or further action will be taken by the SU. They have also been fined the maximum amount, £20.
We feel the campaign team has not acted in good faith.
SU Emergency Adjudication Panel
NUS Exit Warwick said: “We respect the decision of the panel. The posters are being taken down as best we can in the time frame allowed.
“It is with noting that the decision to print the posters wasn’t made in bad faith, we honestly believed that we were within the rules of the campaign but the panel has decided otherwise and we must respect that decision and accept the fine.”
The judgement was made by the Emergency Adjudication Panel of the SU. Sitting on this panel is Democracy and Development Officer, Olly Rice.
All members of the sabbatical team have expressed support for the “Yes to NUS” campaign, except for Rice.
Rice said: “The Adjudication Panel made the decision. This is a body that considers all complaints and conduct regarding SU votes and elections and can make rulings on them. It is comprised of myself, the Returning Officer and the Chair of Council – all members with no conflicts of interest.”
Charlie Hindhaugh, Education Officer
It is yet unclear whether the SU is prepared to declare the referendum invalid if the instruction to remove posters is not followed.
Rice said: “I cannot comment at the moment at to the ‘what-ifs’ of the outcome if the posters are or are not removed, though to-date we see no reason not to respect the outcome of the referendum.”
Earlier this year, the election of Women’s Officer Chloe Wynne was thrown into doubt after confusion surrounding the legality of her posters. Her election was allowed to go ahead, after the Adjudication Panel ruled that the posters had had an insignificant impact on the results.
Wynne tweeted today: “If they [NUS Exit] win, it won’t be on fair grounds. The Exit campaign has been so underhand, misleading and sneaky.”
Also today, Education Officer Charlie Hindhaugh tweeted: “Leave NUS Warwick are playing dirty. Not cool. Especially after asking for a clean campaign.”
External Campaigners
The news comes alongside allegations that the “Yes to NUS” is using NUS campaigners from outside of Warwick to help with their campaign, including entering halls of residence.
Olly Rice said: “The ‘YES’ to NUS campaign have made us aware that they are using external resources, specifically External Campaigners, this is acceptable under the By-Laws, Regulations and Emergency rulings the Adjudication Panel has made…
“It is not prohibited and it was judged by the Panel to be proportional to what the ‘NO’ to NUS campaign team could feasibly access (they are perfectly at liberty to invite external campaigners as well).”
This article is being updated as the story develops.
Comments (4)
Says it all that the panel includes anyone that’s already expressed support for one or other of the campaigns. As long as there’s no even playing field the corrupt, undemocratic organisation will thrive and students’ voices will be interpreted by a few out of touch sabbaticals in their little gang, and not properly represented.
The NUS Leave Campaign should have printed their posters with the SU. However, I don’t think it really is a big deal. It’s kind of petty and nasty to call the NUS Leave Campaign “underhand, misleading and sneaky” as well as “dirty”. To be honest, when I look at how NUS Stay campaigners have been commenting on nearly every single post made by the Leave NUS Campaign, I would argue it was the other way around. I have yet to seen pro-Exit campaigners stalk the NUS Stay Campaign Facebook page – and had they done so I would too be critical.
I believe this especially considering that an SU Sabb calls the Leave Campaign “sneaky” when she did the same thing during her election campaign. I voted to leave the NUS today. What drove me to leave was the behaviour of the NUS Stay Campaign.
I believe their behaviour has been a disgrace, patronising and their approach out of touch. I believe the NUS can do good work. It did so under Wes Streeting and to lesser extent but to some good degree under Megan Dunn. The NUS Stay campaign has not proven to me that they think that there are problems with the NUS. And not only that but their behaviour – both rude, obnoxious and patronising franking (I’m referring the article about “exceptional” and “ordinary” students) – has beneath the dignity of the SU.
The NUS has done good work in the past. It needs a voice that is strong and reasonable. The voice needs to be reasonable so it can be listened to. The NUS (in my opinion fails the second test). Rather than listening and dealing with the problems of the NUS, the Stay Campaign (in my opinion, and I’m writing this as an individual who has not partaken in campaigning to leave) has seemingly ignored all the problems. There is one exception to this which I believe has been the SU President Issac Leigh who has campaigned to stay with dignity. He recognised there is a problem with the NUS and I have yet to seen any “sneaky” or “underhand” campaigning on his party. Perhaps the rest of the NUS Stay Campaign should learn from him.
I believe that if the Leave Campaign is disciplined for posting these posters so should the offending Sabbs – those who also printed posters outside of the SU. They have made this campaign personal, petty and brought shame upon themselves.
The exit campaigners don’t need to worry about taking their posters down themselves, the Sabbs have been kindly tearing them down for them all day.
As you yourself linked, the SU previously decided posters make an insignificant difference: https://theboar.org/2016/01/65704/