MOTION Supporting Palestinian students' right to education and forming friendship links with the Hebron University Students' Council. This Meeting Notes: 1. That the Universal Declaration of Human Rights guarantees equal rights for all, including the promise that 'Everyone has the right to education' (Article 26). 2. That all the Palestinian universities and the majority of schools, including kindergartens, were closed down by military order between the years 1988-1992, when Palestinian education was effectively made 'illegal' by the Israeli occupation, denying a whole generation their right to education. 3. That the 700 IDF roadblocks, checkpoints and other military obstacles frequently prevent students from being able to attend university. That 409 km of the projected 780 km of the Israeli separation wall has been constructed, all of it on Palestinian lands, dividing, isolating and encircling Palestinian areas and universities. 4. That Al Quds University in East Jerusalem is now surrounded by an 8-meter high concrete wall, which cuts the University off from 36 % of its students. 5. That 8 out of the total 11 universities in the West Bank and Gaza Strip have been shelled or broken into by the Israeli Army since September 2000. 6. That 73 educational institutions have been partially or fully destroyed in the Gaza Strip since September 2000, including kindergartens, schools, and a teacher training college which was completely demolished on 16 March 2004. 7. That Hebron University and the Palestine Polytechnic University in Hebron were closed down by Israeli military order for eight months in 2003; and that the students of Hebron had to physically break down the gates to their universities, in defiance of the Israeli Army, to reconvene classes and demand their right to an education. 8. That there are 15 permanent checkpoints inside the city of Hebron, and that students have to pass through these on their way to school or university. That some students have left their villages due to the harassments and delays faced on checkpoints, and are currently renting accommodation in Hebron: an extra and unnecessary burden on students. This Meeting Believes: 1. That the right to education is a universal human right and that we as students should support its promotion. 2. That Palestinian education has been severely hindered by university closures, blanket curfews, the presence of roadblocks and checkpoints and recently the erection of the Wall. 3. That the measures noted above violate international law, including provisions against collective punishment and guarantees for the protection of civilian populations under
military occupation, students' right to education and the fundamental rights of human beings to live in dignity and freedom. 4. That education is critical to the healthy functioning of Palestinian society, as well as the possibility of peace and reconciliation between the Israeli and Palestinian peoples. 5. That the University of Exeter Students' Guild and the Hebron University Students' Council share equivalent roles in that they represent the interests of their student body with regards to education, and have a similar commitment to democratic procedure. 6. That twinning with a student body in Palestine would not constitute a political stance on the wider Israel/Palestine conflict and implies only a support for the universal right to education. This Meeting Instructs: 1. The Students' Guild to affiliate to the Right to Education Campaign at Birzeit University as a public show of support for students in Palestine, who are finding it difficult to study under the conditions imposed by the occupation. 2. The Students' Guild to send a letter of support and a copy of this motion to the Hebron University Students' Council, inviting them to twin with the University of Exeter Students' Guild. 3. The Students' Guild Executive to lobby the University to provide two or more scholarships for Palestinian students who wish to study at the University of Exeter. 4. The Students' Guild Deputy President to begin discussions with the Institute of Arab and Islamic Studies to explore the possibility of initiating student exchanges for students of Arabic, or a Year Abroad option in Hebron or Palestine. 5. The Students' Guild to encourage the NUS to support Palestinian students' right to education. 6. The Students' Guild to publicise its policy of twinning with Hebron University Students' Council by erecting a plaque in Cornwall House or another suitable location, with the following wording: Our Friendship with Hebron University The University of Exeter Students' Guild is twinned with the Hebron University Students' Council. The Students' Guild believes that education is a universal human right. Palestinian education has been severely hindered by university closures, the presence of checkpoints and the erection of the Wall. Education is critical to the healthy functioning of Palestinian society, as well as the possibility of peace and reconciliation between the Israeli and Palestinian peoples. Proposed: Seconded: Katja Daniels Ibrahim Akay
Facebook Motion to General Meeting This meeting notes: Facebook is a distraction for students University computers should be used for work rather than socialising There is less access to computers in the library clusters than before This meeting believes: Students check their facebook on the library computers therefore restricting other students from getting on with assignments that are computer based. We need to encourage more face to face communication between students. This meeting instructs: To lobby the University to block facebook on the clusters in the library during the week, allowing access to facebook on the weekend.
Proposed: Jess Dow (Guild President) Seconded: Ashley Petrons (Education)
“NO PLATFORM” POLICY
FACTS: 1: A balanced platform policy is in place at Exeter Students' Guild. [1] 2: A recent debating society event created outside concern with Students' Guild political ideology and student safety. [2][3] 3: The following student unions in the south west are an example of having “no platform” policy: Exeter college students union, university of Plymouth students union, university of Portsmouth student union and Birmingham university students‟. None of these institutions have been sued by the BNP. 4: Provisional NUS No platform policy and the no platform list is noted. 5: student unions are mandated to maintain the safety of its members and staff. 6: Nick Griffin, leader of the BNP stated "If I'm prosecuted under the Race Act or under a new Incitement to Religious Hatred, for telling the truth about a religion which is in this country and is going to utterly transform our society and destroy our culture as we know it, then if I'm prosecuted for that and it becomes a platform, then I'll be delighted yes." [4] 7: In Burnley where the BNP had 8 councillors between April 2002 and March 2003, 237 racist attacks were recorded; an increase of 149%. 8: BNP activist in Swindon Mark Bulman was sentenced to five years in January 2007 after attempting to firebomb a local mosque using a BNP leaflet as a fuse. He also daubed swastikas and racist graffiti on local shops and businesses. [5] 9: In February 2007 John Laidlaw, who told police he was a BNP member and wanted to kill all black people, was convicted in February 2007 after terrorising London's tube network with a series of shootings. [6] 10: The BNP Parliamentary candidate for Hull in the May 2005 General Election Brian Wainwright pleaded guilty in January 2007 after a campaign of hate mail against the local mosque, a Muslim councillor and a local anti-fascist activist. A letter in which he claimed, "Muslim blood will be spilt" included 'SS' skull and cross bones imagery. [7] 11: On the 10th of August 2007 Robert Cottage, three times BNP candidate has been jailed for having stockpiled chemicals, bomb making equipment and a rocket launcher. [8] 12: The BNP is an anti-Semitic organisation. Yorkshire BNP regional organiser Mark Collett stated that “Nazi Germany was a better place to live than Oldham or Burnley”. He also said that “the only person who ever stood up for white people was Hitler”. Further to this BNP Leader Nick griffin said “I am well aware that the orthodox opinion is that six million Jews were gassed and cremated or turned into lampshades. Orthodox opinion also once held that the earth is flat…I have reached the conclusion
1 2
Motion 13/05 “A Balanced Platform Policy for Democratic Debate”, 12 th May 2006 http://lancasteruaf.blogspot.com/2007/10/bnp-to-speak-at-exeter-university.html 3 http://www.stopthebnp.org.uk/index.php?location=news&art=767 “Daryl Scatcherd shows his true colours” 4 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/newsnight/3901631.stm - bbc interview of Nick Griffin 5 http://www.uaf.org.uk/news.asp?choice=70411 6 Ibid 7 Ibid 8 http://www.unison.org.uk/blackmembers/pages_view.asp?did=5593
that the „extermination‟ tale is a mixture of Allied wartime propaganda, extremely profitable lie, and latter day witch-hysteria.” [9] 13. On 7th of March 2007 new figures showed 13,319 racially aggravated incidents‟ in London last year. 14: It is the responsibility of all unions under the race relations (amendment) act (2000) to ensure good race relations exist on campus. [10] 15: It is the responsibility of all unions under the disability discrimination act (1995) to protect the rights of disabled students on campus. [11] 16: It is the responsibility of all unions under the Sex Discrimination (Gender Reassignment) Regulations (1999) to protect the rights of trans students. [12] 17: It is the responsibility of all unions under the Equality Act (2006) to prevent discrimination of students based on sexuality. [13] 18: Under the Students' Guild Equal opportunities policy, invitation of those who would be submitted to the “no platform” list would violate section 2.0: “The Students‟ Guild at the University of Exeter is committed to equal opportunities for all. We seek to encourage a community in which all individuals may contribute as fully as possible without fear of discriminatory attitudes or practices. Discriminatory attitudes, behaviour, comments, jokes, displays, activities or language which may offend or create an unpleasant or intimidating atmosphere will not be tolerated within the Students‟ Guild.” BELIEVES: 1: Freedom from student oppression is a fundamental priority of the Students' Guild and student movement. 2: Racism and Fascism are two of the largest threats facing society. 3: The recent contact with the BNP issue caused wide spread concern and often fear amongst minority, faith and liberation groups on campus such as but not exclusive to: international students, international university staff, Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Trans students, Black and Minority Ethnic students, students of all religions and students concerned with equality and liberty. 4: That a significant number and diversity of students have approached guild representatives with valid concerns over safety on campus in regards to visits/platform provision of those on the NUS no platform list. 5: The Youth BNP is increasingly targeting students. 6: Rights and responsibilities are inseparable. 7: Rights are removed when the rights of other humans are violated. 8: BNP and other fascists groups promote the removal of rights, yet hypocritically promote freedom of speech up to the point of their theoretical rule. 9: BNP rights to a platform should thus be removed as they have violated others human rights in line with their policy and membership belief (see FACTS points 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11)
9
http://www.stormfront.org/forum/showthread.php?p=2609920 – stormfront “white pride world wide” http://www.opsi.gov.uk/ACTS 11 Ibid 12 Ibid 13 Ibid
10
10: The right to freedom of expression can not be unfettered. It is limited, for example, by laws to protect national security and public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of the rights of others. As stated in point 13 of facts, a significant strand in the regulatory framework is the duty to promote good relations between persons of different racial groups. 11: Exeter campus should be a safe haven for students, a place where students can feel the utmost security possible provided by the University and Students' Guild. Visitors from the “no platform” list violate that security. 12: To be a relevant and effective student union, Exeter Student‟s guild structures must be democratic and above all inclusive, ensuring representation to the student movement‟s diversity. 13: The aim of all student support and catering for student diversity is hypocritical if racist and fascist organisers visit campus. 14: Minority groups may not be able to over-turn extraordinary general meetings due to the nature of being a minority group. This leads to the possibility of their views and vulnerability not being considered under the unions aim to cater for all students. This is why the aforementioned balanced platform policy must be overturned in favour of “No Platform” policy. 15: As highlighted in point 6 under facts, the BNP‟s primary concern is to create and maintain a platform at any cost regardless of individual civil rights including those of Nick Griffin. 16: An indicator of those who are denied entrance and submitted to be put on the “no platform” list is indicated in the guidance published by Universities UK that states “if an expression of views or beliefs is highly offensive with the potential of developing into harassment, or may constitute criminal activity, the balance is likely to lie in favour of restricting that activity”. [14] 17: Another key test is whether safety of participants at an event featuring no platform list participants can be guaranteed. 18: With the BNP and other groups, their affiliations and ideals, safety at such events cannot be guaranteed. INSTRUCTS: 1: That Exeter Students' Guild create its own “no platform” list 2: That Exeter Students' Guild “no platform” list initially includes the BNP. 3: That if any students wish to submit to the “no platform” list they should submit motions to subsequent general meetings 4: That any provisional arrangements for those on the “no platform” list to visit Exeter be cancelled 5: That it becomes the duty of all guild representatives to enact the Exeter Students' Guild “no platform” policy through representation and using the governance structure. 6: That Exeter Students' Guild provides support in the form of sharing of information, possible visit and discussion to any Students' union wishing to adopt a “no platform” policy.
14
Promoting good campus relations: dealing with hate crimes and intolerance, Universities UK 2007
7: That those on the “no platform” list are denied a platform at Exeter University campuses. 8: That representatives of Exeter Students' Guild will not share a platform with anyone on the no platform list. 9: That if a submission to the “no platform” list is required in the interim between general meetings, the Students' Guild will call an extraordinary general meeting. Proposer: John Cox, Welfare & Equal opportunities officer, Students' Guild Seconder: Björn Fridén, International Students Association President
Proposal to keep a stronger Balanced Platform. 1. This meeting notes that with the proposal of a "No Platform" motion the former balanced platform motion would be superceded with a list system of speakers. 2. This meeting is alarmed that the blinkered vision of both the Socialist groups on Campus and the NUS Executive may lead to serious erosion of the freedom from opression principle supposedly espoused by those groups. 3. This meeting notes that historically the University of Exeter Guild of Students was enacted by Royal Charter, meaning that we do not have to adhere to the policy decisions of the NUS Executive. 4. This meeting notes that off campus students face real life issues of prejudice, and would remind the Guild Officers of ocassions in the past few years when Religious Groups on campus have acted in homophobic ways. 5. This meeting also reminds the Guild Officers that homophobia comes in many forms, and that while the LGBT group may not consider the issue of the Blood Transfusion Service blanket ban on gay men giving blood to be homophobia, there are Gay men on campus who have raised this issue, and the all-student email sent relating to blood donations is taken as being as homophobic as any BNP leaflet to those people who feel strongly about the issue. 6. This meeting notes from the above point that what is offensive to one person may not be offensive to another, and although in Law it is the harassors mens rea that decides an issue of harassment, when the matter of freedom from opression is raised as an article of faith then it becomes the harassees view of the matter which is the paramount issue. 7. This meeting would also remind the Guild that not all that is illegal is bad; until the age of consent for Gay men was lowered to 18 it was technically illegal for those aged 18-21 to join University Societies. Until s.32 of the 1956 Sexual Offences Act was repealed in 2002 it was technically illegal for gay groups to exist in any case; since they could be prosecuted under the head of "solicitation by men." This meeting therefore instructs as follows: 1. The balanced platform policy must remain in force, and indeed should be toughened; a. All external political speakers who do not espouse views seen as "centrist" (i.e. Labour, Liberal Democrat and Conservative) must be included in the triggering mechanism for an Extraordinary General Meeting to discuss the issue of balance when those person(s) speak; this will be done by keeping an "Exeter List", b. If the NUS list of right-wing groups is to be used then an associated "Exeter List" of leftwing groups, fanatical religious organisations and other bodies that may be considered as acting or speaking in ways which would opress any member of any minority must be drawn up to inclusively protect any member of the student body who feels their lifestyle, race or religious beliefs would be under threat.
2. Upon receiving any complaint from any member of a minority group the Guild Welfare Officer shall immediately convene a special meeting between the person(s) compaining and the group(s) involved to see whether the issues warrant addition of the group to the "Exeter List". Should non-Guild and non-Society groups be involved and not be willing to come to such a meeting their silence shall be taken as evidence against them and the student complaint shall be considered as paramount on the groups of freedom from opression. 3. Where an Emergency General Meeting of the Guild decides that a group named on the "Exeter List" is worthy of attendence on Campus (having a strong opposing voice in the event to which they are invited) then the security and comfort of the Student(s) affected by any issues of prejudice will be considered by the Welfare Officer, and all support and counselling necessary for those student(s) shall be given prior to and after the event. Proposer: Gary Mclachlan Seconder: Mike West
Opposing Variable Top-Up Fees and the Lifting of the Cap This Meeting Notes: 1. That in 2004, the Government passed the „Higher Education Act‟ that allowed higher education institutions to charge their students „Top-Up Fees‟. 2. That the average student now has to pay a maximum of £3000 p.a. for their higher education. 3. That in a study commissioned by education ministers, the author (Professor Claire Calendar) stated that “Variable fees increase both the costs of higher education for students and their debt. Both deter low-income groups‟ participation” and that new reforms would “reassert elitism in higher education. Privileged students who populate top universities will pay high fees, but get highly valuable degrees. Low income and access students who populate universities at the bottom of the hierarchy will pay less and get less, but still end up with large debts.” 4. The limited funding available in the higher education sector and that this is a problem that needs to be addressed. 5. The 1997 Labour manifesto promise that “We have no plans to introduce university Top-Up Fees, and have legislated to prevent their introduction”. 6. That the Government will be reviewing the „Variable Fee‟ system in 2008. This Meeting Believes: 1. That the limited funding for HE and the international competitiveness of UK Universities are issues that need to be fully addressed by the government, but that variable fees and a lifting of the cap are not the ways to solve these problems. 2. That students should not have to enter the workplace with over £9,000 of debt (excluding debt incurred from student loans). 3. The pseudo-market that this system will bring to higher education. 4. That the premise of trying to attract more young people into higher education whilst systematically asking them to pay increasing amounts of money for the privilege is logically flawed. 5. That it is imperative that Students‟ Unions around the country speak out confidently and determinedly against variable fees and the lifting of the cap to counter the strong voices of Vice-Chancellors and other parties involved in this fight. This Meeting Instructs: 1. The Students' Guild to actively oppose variable fees and the lifting of the cap. 2. That an appropriate working party be formed to devise campaigns accordingly. 3. That the Students' Guild martial support from the students to act, through said campaigning group. 4. That the Students' Guild actively pursue support through the NUS to aid each other in the campaign against the lifting of the cap nationally 5. That the Students' Guild lobby the university to strengthen the stance against top-up fees and lifting of the cap. Proposer: John Cox, Welfare & Equal Opportunities Officer for the students guild Seconder: Ashley Petrons, Education Officer of Students' Guild
Nestlé Boycott Motion
This General Meeting notes: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Motion 16/97 (Nestle Boycott Motion). That Motion 16/97 is now outdated and needs updating. The Guild of Students‟ participation in a world wide boycott of Nestlé products. Reports from Baby Milk Action and IBFAN¹ describe Nestlé‟s world wide activities as unethical. Supporting evidence from groups like WHO² and UNICEF whose international code bans irresponsible promotion of baby milk products in developing countries. Many students are now unaware of the reasons behind the boycott. The University stills sells Nestlé products, e.g. In Halls of Residence; vending machines; and Hospitality Services outlets. Nestlé products are available in Key Store.
This General Meeting believes: 1. That Nestlé‟s promotion of breast milk substitutes is irresponsible. 2. That the consumption of Nestlé products is avoidable since there are many alternatives. 3. That the boycott of Nestlé products may lead to a reform in Nestlé‟s policies. 4. That the Guild of Students has a duty to inform its members of the reasons behind any boycott. This General Meeting instructs: 1. The Guild of Students to continue the boycott of Nestlé products until it has been proven beyond reasonable doubt that Nestlé are fully abiding by all WHO guidelines. 2. The Guild of Students to educate the student body about the reason for the boycott by presenting the facts on its website and by briefing X-Media. 3. The Guild of Students to keep the student body informed as to the most recent developments in Nestlé policies and activities in this area. 4. The Guild of Students to lobby the University to follow our lead in boycotting Nestlé products in all outlets, including, but not limited to, Halls of Residence; vending machines; and Hospitality Services outlets. 5. The Guild of Students to lobby organisations affiliated to the University to follow our lead in boycotting Nestlé products in all outlets, including, but not limited to, Key Store and Cafe Ritazza. 6. The Guild of Students to ask constituent organisations including, but not limited to, the GSA, the AU, RAG, etc. to remind their members (e.g. society presidents) that Guild of Students' funds cannot be used to support Nestlé in any way.
7. The FATO to ensure that the Guild of Students‟ funds are not used to support Nestlé in any way by supplying comprehensive information to all Guild councillors and societies. 8. That this motion supercede motion 16/97. Proposer: Chris Richards, Environment and Human Rights Officer Seconder: G Harrison Littler, Environment and Human Rights Officer
1 The International Baby Food Action Network 2 The World Health Organisation.
MOTION; Ensuring that dates for Guild Meetings are confirmed and publicised within the first two weeks of the autumn term. This Meetings Notes; 1. That the constitution currently requires that only weeks notice be given of the confirmed date, time and venue of Guild General Meetings. This Meeting Believes; 1. That in order for Guild Members to both effectively prepare motions to be proposed at guild general meetings and garner support for those motions they must be made aware of the dates of Guild Meetings well in advance of those meetings being convened. 2. That earlier confirmation and publication of the dates of Guild Meetings will encourage greater interest and participation in said meetings within the student body. This Meeting Instructs; 1. The Students Guild to amend annexe 3.100 of the constitution with the following paragraph: The Chair of the Guild shall be responsible for confirming the dates of those general meetings required for the academic year by the Constitution. Notice of these dates shall be posted on the Guild website within the first two weeks of the autumn term. Proposer; Ibrahim Akay Seconder; Katja Daniels
GM 231107/ Motion to General Meeting
This Meeting Notes: 5. That the University has proposed plans to relocate the Arabic Studies Collection, a 50 000 volume collection which has international research reputation, either to rolling stacks in the basement of the Old Library, or to rolling stacks in the Arab World Documentation Unit (AWDU) in the Institute of Arabic and Islamic Studies (IAIS). 6. That the proposed relocation of the Collection is to create space in the Old Library Reading Room for a major research centre. 7. That an insignificant proportion of the student body was consulted prior to the drawing up of these plans.
This Meeting Believes: 9. The proposed relocation of the Arabic Studies Collection to be inappropriate, as: a) A move to rolling stacks (in either of the proposed locations) would create a less accessible way for students to browse the collection. b) A move to the lower stacks in the Old Library would put the Collection be in a far less desirable and visible space, and detract from the students‟ ability to browse and from their attractiveness to prospective students, researchers and staff. 10. That full consultation should take place between students, departmental staff and Academic Services before any final decision is made with regards to the relocation of the Arabic Studies Collection.
This Meeting Instructs: 9. The President and Education Officer to write a letter to those orchestrating the move expressing: a) Their extreme disapproval about both the proposed options, and the lack of student consultation. b) That the Old Library Arabic Collection must be kept as a cohesive entity and not split into different locations dependent on language of text c) That the preferred option, if one must be chosen of the two proposed, is to relocate the Arabic Studies Collection to the Arab World Documentation Unit in the IAIS, with a view to a future extension of the building to house the collection properly.
d) That relocation should not lead to diminished availability of the books or to a worsened working environment. e) The wish of the Students‟ Guild that a significant proportion of the student body be consulted prior to any future major changes.
Proposer: Oliver Saiman Seconder: Simon Irvine
Motion to Council
This Meeting Notes: - Library books are being destroyed or removed without considering their use as reference while within the confines of the library - The Law library is being closed down, unnecessarily. This Meeting Believes: - These books may not be being loaned out of the library, but there is a very high chance that they are being used as reference without leaving the library. - By removing/destroying these books, students have fewer books that they can use for reference. - This is the case, especially, in the Law Library in the Amory Building. This Meeting Instructs: - The books should stay where they are in the library as they are frequently used for referencing. - The Law library should not be closed down, as it is a highly specialised collection of law books that need not be moved to another location.
Proposer: Tom Richards Seconder: Dave Swetman
Library Motion Facts; Academic Services are discussing shutting the Law Library Believes; The Law Library is an integral part of the Law School and is invaluable for study purposes. The proposed closure would have a significant negative impact on both the Law School and University Any changes to University Libraries should only take place after significant consultation with the student body Actions; For the Guild to oppose the closure of the Law Library. Proposer: Dora Gleed (Law Subject Chair) Seconder: Kate Luton