The Polish fight for abortion rights

This article is part of the NCAFC Women & Non-Binary zine being distributed at this week’s NUS Women’s Conference. You can find the whole zine here.

By Ana Oppenheim

coat-hangers abortion rights protestPoland has one of the most restrictive abortion laws in Europe. Ending a pregnancy is only allowed in cases when it resulted from rape or incest, when the mother’s life or health is at a serious risk, or when the foetus is deformed. And even in those exceptional cases, doctors can refuse to to perform a termination under conscience clause, meaning that some women (and other pregnant people) are denied access to legal, safe abortions even in the most desperate need.

This does not mean that abortions don’t take place. Those who are able to afford it often choose to have one abroad, the UK being one of the most popular destinations. In 2010, British tabloids were outraged over a poster designed by a feminist group, informing Polish women that they could get abortions on the NHS. How dare those bloody foreigners come over here, asking for an essential medical procedure? Those who can’t, resort to backstreet or self-induced abortions, sometimes with tragic consequences.

Ever since I can remember, abortion has been a subject of the most heated public debate. During religious ed at school, I remember learning that abortion is murder before I had much of an idea about human reproduction. I remember marches of opposing groups clashing with an almost seasonal regularity, and Serious, Important Men on TV calling women “witches” for demanding the right to choose. The voices least heard of the debate were of those directly affected.

Then the 2015 elections happened, and with them the ultra-conservative government of the Law and Justice party. Their victory further empowered anti-choice groups, including the conservative lawyers association Ordo Iuris who proposed a bill to outlaw abortion completely. The ruling party voted in favour and the bill kept progressing through Parliament. The prospect of it becoming law get terrifyingly real.

This provoked some of the biggest protests that Poland has seen in a generation. Women of all ages and backgrounds were out in the streets. Although some of the first protests were organised by the small socialist party Razem, it would be impossible name one group responsible for the mass mobilisation, and the movement attracted people of all and no political persuasion. Demonstrations took place in all major cities, as well as many European capitals, including London. Someone mentioned on Facebook the idea of a women’s strike, similar to the one that took place in 1975 in Iceland – and it caught on. Hundreds of thousands of women dressed in black in mourning of their reproductive rights, carrying coathangers to symbolise the horrific termination methods that many resort to, walked out of their classes and workplaces.

As a result, the government backed down, with a minister admitting that the protests ‘taught us humility’.

Never had the word “feminism” been said so openly in Poland. For a lot of women, this was their first experience of standing up for their rights. In many cases, demands went beyond opposing the bill and talked about free abortion on demand, sex education, access to contraception and more widely – the position of women in society. The long-term effects of this uprising are yet to be seen. Are we back to business as usual or are we now able to reclaim the debate and turn the tide?

Read the rest of the zine here

The Women’s Movement in Argentina

This article is part of the NCAFC Women & Non-Binary zine being distributed at this week’s NUS Women’s Conference. You can find the whole zine here.

By Zoe Salanitro

#NiUnaMenos demonstration, outside the Argentine Congress 03/06/2015

#NiUnaMenos demonstration, outside the Argentine Congress 03/06/2015

Right now the feminist movement in Argentina is at a really exciting place. There has always been a strong history women’s organising in the South American country led, most famously, by the Madres de la Plaza de Mayo (the Mothers of the May Square). The Madres are the mothers of Argentina’s disappeared: the 30,000 activists, dissidents, students, lawyers and journalists who were disappeared and murdered under the last and most brutal dictatorship in Argentina between 1976-85. Every Thursday they protest in the Plaza de Mayo, the main square in front of the presidential palace, the Casa Rosada, for justice and for the truth of what happened to their children.

Moreover, for the last thirty years women activists in Argentina have gathered every year for the “Encuentro Nacional de Mujeres” or the National Women’s Meeting where they discuss all the issues in society and how they affect women. Chief among them is reproductive rights. In Argentina abortion is illegal, anti-contraceptives are difficult to come by in rural areas dominated by the Catholic Church and sex education isn’t a compulsory part of the school curriculum, and in many places not covered at all. The Encuentro has traditionally attracted numbers of 40,000 or 50,000 women and is a unique phenomenon to Argentina.

The Madres de la Plaza de Mayo protesting

The Madres de la Plaza de Mayo protesting

Despite the previous president being a woman, Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, many women activists still felt women were getting nowhere. There was no move from Kirchner to introduce abortion legislation and Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio becomming Pope Francis empowered conservative movements in the country. It’s important to note that while Pope Francis’ enjoys a progressive reputation in the West, he was involved in the repression of dissidents during the military dictatorship and has had a reactionary influence on women’s reproductive rights, among other issues, in Argentina where the Catholic Church remains a powerful institution.

Campaña Nacional por el Derecho del Aborto (The National Campaign for the right for abortions) outside the national congress Buenos Aires, Argentina. The banner reads their demand: Not one single woman dead as a result of clandestine abortion.

Campaña Nacional por el Derecho del Aborto (The National Campaign for the right for abortions) outside the national congress Buenos Aires, Argentina. The banner reads their demand: Not one single woman dead as a result of clandestine abortion.

Campaña Nacional por el Derecho del Aborto (The National Campaign for the right for abortions) outside the national congress Buenos Aires, Argentina. The banner reads their demand: Not one single woman dead as a result of clandestine abortion.

Everything changed in June 2015. 14 year old Chiara Páez, became pregnant by her boyfriend. When he found out, he beat her and buried her alive under the patio of his house, in the Santa Fe province of Argentina, whilst his parents helped cover up the crime. Outraged at the news, women across Argentina took to the streets on 3rd June demanding #NiUnaMenos (not one woman less). Around 250,000 women marched, making it the biggest feminist march in generations. This was the last straw: a woman or girl is killed every 18 hours in Argentina by a partner, ex-partner or family member. In the last seven years there have been only five convictions for femicide and the Argentine government only began ‘officially’ counting rates of femicide last year, as a result of pressure from women.

#NiUnaMenos has had a huge affect on feminism in Argentina: numbers attending the Encuentro de Mujeres in the last two years has been 80,000 – 100,000 and 3rd June has become annual march against femicides. Since then there has also been marches across Latin America: in Chile, Uruguay, Peru, Paraguay, Bolivia and Mexico to name just a few. In 2016 the demand for legal abortions was also incorporated into the demand of #NiUnaMenos after Bélen, a young woman in the rural Tucúman province went to hospital because she was miscarrying. The doctors, affiliated with the Catholic Church, accused her of having an abortion and she was sentenced by the courts to seven years in prison. This proved another another flashpoint for Argentine women.

As did the murder of 16 year old Lucía Perez in the seaside city Mar del Plata. Lucía was drugged and raped causing her to die of a heart attack. Horrified by the murder, in November women once again to the streets – this time 500,000 in Buenos Aires alone – in the pouring rain to say enough. This march was also inspired by the Polish Women’s strike and women wore black and some even took an hour out of work to protest. This was the beginning of the momentum that led to the Women’s Strike early this month for International Women’s Day.

The two biggest demands for feminists in Argentina are around #NiUnaMenos and reproductive rights, however, their demands have expanded to equal pay for equal work, an end to sexual and labour trafficking, demands for domestic violence services which are funded and an end to gendered discrimination in work. International Women’s Day was the culmination of this: with women across the country marching and, where they had the support of the unions, walking out of work.

In the wider context of Argentina, the women’s march was the third march in the capital that week. With teachers (who are mostly women), parents and pupils marching on Monday 6th March: the teachers are fighting with the government for pay which matches inflation (last year inflation in Argentina was 40% and it looks like it will be again this year) whereas the government want a measly 18%. Public sector employees marched on 7th March and women culminated the action on 8th. As a result the CGT (Argentina’s TUC) and the CTA (most similar to UNISON) have called for a general strike on 6th April against the neoliberal government of Mauricio Macri, who is seeking to introduce austerity measures and turn the argentine economy into a cheap labour economy like Brazil. Macri’s economic plans will especially affect women who are already in some of the lowest paid and precarious work. It was heartening to hear chants for a general strike at the women’s march – a recognition of the gendered effects of the current government’s programme. We must recognise the way that capitalism and the patriarchy are intertwined and we need to defeat both if women are to be truly liberated.

This is certainly a time to be watching Argentina’s women movement: women are shaping much of the national and international picture politically. It powerful and it’s coming from below, not from women in charge, like Kirchner who demonstrated just having a woman in leadership is not enough to cause real meaningful change. Argentinean women are angry and are taking to the streets, we should follow their example and say Not One Woman Less.

Read the rest of the zine here

What should a National Education Service look like? Tell us what you think

Following our January conference, NCAFC is facilitating discussions in order to develop a vision for a National Education Service. We want to hear your opinions, ideas and arguments – please let us know if you’d like to contribute! In this article, Ben Towse from UCL Labour and Josh Berlyne from the Free University of Sheffield explain why we’re starting this conversation.

fist_pencil_square_borderNCAFC has always fought for more than just proper education funding and the abolition of tuition fees. Since we were founded in 2010, we’ve debated and developed ideas about what a democratic, liberatory education system would look like, and we’ve gone out and argued for those ideas.

It is easy for concrete ideas about the reform or transformation of our education system to be niche and wonk-ish, boring and difficult to articulate.  Indeed, proposals for education reform typically come from wonks in Westminster offices.  As a result, movements lose ownership over ideas, and it becomes difficult to bring proposals under a banner which can amass the kind of support needed to force them through.  The National Education Service has the potential to be that banner.

When he proposed it during the 2015 Labour leadership elections, Jeremy Corbyn spoke of an education system which would be free to access from cradle to grave.  He spoke about reversing adult education cuts by raising corporation tax; providing universal free childcare; abolishing tuition fees; and providing good, well-paid apprenticeships.

Almost two years on, the idea of a National Education Service is yet to be seriously developed.  This gives us, the grassroots, the opportunity to take ownership of it.  Through democratic debate and discussion across party lines, NCAFC can—and must—popularise the idea beyond the Labour left.  Only then will we see transformative ideas made real.

That’s why NCAFC is facilitating a conversation in which students and workers can put forward, debate and refine our ideas about a National Education Service. We want this conversation to lead to a set of democratically-adopted, concrete demands and proposals that we’ll campaign to for.

Our January conference included workshops to kick-start this discussion (reports from these workshops will be posted soon) and our members agreed a proposal that set out some basic ideas. We said that a National Education Service could:

  • Be universally accessible free of charge, with financial support through living grants/stipends for all.
  • Replace the chaos of market competition between institutions with an integrated service that is rationally and democratically organised to serve social good, rather the interests of the capitalist class.
  • Build on existing ideas about the “Comprehensive University” to break down arbitrary barriers within the curriculum and between streams of education, including between further and higher education, and “vocational” and “academic” study.
  • Be publicly owned and secular, and democratically governed by its students, workers and the communities it serves.
  • Through democratic control of the curriculum, allow us to overturn the sometimes overwhelming dominance of ruling ideologies in what is taught, opening space for radical, subversive, liberatory and marginalised ideas and perspectives.
  • Provide its workers with secure, decently-paid jobs and good conditions.
  • Include universal free childcare.
  • Be well-resourced, by taxing the rich and their businesses and expropriating the banks.

Now we want your thoughts. Do you want to write about a particular aspect of the education system? Do you want to respond to any of the ideas above, or any that were put forward at the conference? Have you read something in this debate that you disagree with, or you want to build on? Please write an article for us, or if you prefer, record a video or a podcast. We’re looking for contributions from our members, and more broadly too – in particular from education workers as well as students. You can get in touch at [email protected]. And for members, you can also debate and discuss on NCAFC’s webforum.

Over to you!

Solidarity message from an Ipsos MORI worker – boycott the NSS

destroy HE nssThis anonymous message came to NCAFC we received from an call centre worker at Ipsos MORI, the market research company that carries out the National Student Survey. Remember, when Ipsos MORI call you up to hassle you about the survey, the person on the other end of the phone probably don’t like it much more than you – so don’t forget to be polite when you tell them you won’t be completing the NSS and ask them to remove you from the contact list!

I have worked for Ipsos Mori (a market research company with call centres based in Edinburgh and Newcastle) for over 2 months now and to be honest I’ve worked for worse places. Most of the staff and management were nice with most of the people taking my quality control being very friendly giving constructive feedback but it’s a shame this wasn’t there right at the start. After apply for the job I was asked to do an assessment at the call centre. After a brief training period I completed the assessment and passed, only to be told by the trainer that if it was up to her she would have failed me which is always a nice way to be welcomed to a company.

After a few weeks of the joys of a zero hour contract we were assigned to the National Student Survey project. Before we began calling students up asking if they could take part we were given a 15 minute briefing. During this briefing we were informed of the most efficient way of getting as many surveys as possible. One of the things that came up in this briefing was the student boycott. It was described to us as a boycott being conducted by some Unions within the NUS as a misguided attempt to protest the fees and that the NSS ‘has nothing to do with student fees’ and ‘all the results can be found online’ and it’s simply a way of allowing students to make an ‘informed choice’ of which Uni to go to.  This was the response we were to give to students who told us they were taking part in the boycott in the hopes of convincing them to do the survey. There was no punishment for not trying to convince students to ignore the boycott but when your wages are determined by the number of successful surveys you complete in an hour there is a financial incentive to do so.

Although there is no active attempt to try and undermine the boycott the never nature of the market research means that some interviewers will attempt to persuade students to do so, this isn’t to blame them after all they are just doing their jobs, but if the boycott is to be successful it is important that every student knows to boycott the NSS and have clear arguments as to why it is detrimental to them and future students’ education.

Despite these challenges I know that with determination and courage a united student movement can mount an effective boycott that will force management to listen to us. To all students out there know that you have my full support and solidarity and wish you all the best with the boycott.

In Solidarity,
Mori Mole

Oppose Trump’s #MuslimBan and fight all racist border policies

trump demoOn Friday January 27, Donald Trump signed an executive order banning US entry of migrants from seven Muslim-majority countries and suspending all refugee admissions.

This inhumane, racist measure must be opposed in the strongest way possible. We must also condemn Theresa May’s refusal to speak out against this injustice.

However, the Muslim Ban is not happening in isolation, but in the context of anti-migrant and anti-Muslim sentiments and policies across the world. May’s silence is hardly surprising, given that the UK Government has been shamefully letting down refugees and asylum seekers, overseeing countless detentions and deportations, and targeting Muslims through the Prevent agenda.

NCAFC stands with all migrants. Freedom of movement should be a right for all regardless of anyone’s nationality.

NCAFC offers full solidarity with all the workers who've shut down airports, the New York taxi drivers who've stopped driving with all the protests taking place in the US and around the world. We will be joining the demonstration against the Muslim Ban outside Downing Street on Monday January 30, and supporting similar demos across the country.

We must not be silent, join us tomorrow at 6 PM!

Teaching Excellence Framework day of action #boycottNSS

Chelsea College of Art campus, University of the Arts London

Chelsea College of Art campus, University of the Arts London

On January 26th, the deadline for university submissions to the Teaching Excellence Framework, students coordinated cross-campus actions to protest against the Higher Education reforms.

Students at LSE, UCL, UAL, KCL, Queen Mary, Warwick and Bath Spa universities as well as City and Islington College put up banners calling for the Government’s plans to be dropped, and for a boycott of the National Student Survey (NSS).

The Teaching Excellence Framework is a Government scheme which is being introduced this year, aimed at measuring the quality of teaching in UK universities. It will rank universities Gold, Silver or Bronze according to metrics including NSS results, graduate outcomes and retention rates, and allow universities to increase fees by rates depending on their score. Despite major student-led campaigns on multiple campuses demanding that institutions opt out of the framework, most English universities decided to submit to the TEF.

The Higher Education and Research Bill, which is currently at Committee Stage in the House of Lords, also includes measures to make it easier for private providers to attain degree awarding powers and to become universities, as well as for established institutions to close down.

At the National Union of Students conference in April, students passed a policy to boycott the NSS as a means to disrupting the TEF until the Government backs down on its plans. The NSS is a survey given to final year undergraduates to rate their course and institution.

Ana Oppenheim from the National Executive Council of NUS, said: “The Teaching Excellence Framework has nothing to do with teaching quality, and everything to do with fee rises, marketisation and serving the interests of business at the expense of students and staff. The reforms are an attack on the very idea of public education, and we will use any means available to us to fight for its future.”

Monty Shield from the National Campaign Against Fees and Cuts, said: “We are fighting the Higher Education Reforms because they are going to rank up the role of private providers in our education system, majorly harming the conditions of both staff and students. Statistics from the National Student Survey (NSS) are a key part of this new system. In our boycott of the NSS we are showing the government that we have the power to take away the data they need for these reforms, and will continue to do so until they are defeated.”

For more information, contact: 07895405312, 07546233426 or 07758948478.

Sheffield’s fee rise shows why we need disruptive action

sheff tefJosh Berlyne, University of Sheffield

On Monday Sheffield University announced it will be raising tuition fees. As part of opting in to the Teaching Excellence Framework, fees will rise to £9,250 for undergraduates next year, and may rise to £10,000 by 2020.

This has happened despite over 3,000 students, staff and alumni signing an open letter calling on the university to opt out of the TEF.  It has happened despite Sheffield having a Vice-Chancellor who has consistently opposed tuition fees, and who has been vocal in his opposition to the TEF. This highlights a number of important points.

First, opposition to the marketisation and privatisation of universities—which fee rises, the TEF, and the higher education reforms more generally embody—will not be successful if it is localised. Universities are subject to the imperatives of a financial system which is out of their control. Any semblance of democratic control over the financing of higher education (if it could ever have been said to exist) has been blasted away; with central governmental funding slashed, universities must rely on tuition fees to sustain their budgets. As inflation rises, costs rise. This means tuition fees must also rise.

This leads to the second point. Since universities are subject to these financial imperatives, completely out of democratic control, winning the moral argument is not sufficient. No matter how convinced a Vice-Chancellor is that education should be free, they will always give in to the short-term financial pressures imposed on them. Students need to make it in the financial interests of the university and the state to act in the interests of students and workers. That means disruptive action.

The present state of affairs in universities means that the interests of students and workers are placed secondary to the financial interests of universities.  This is the wrong way around. The interests of universities should be put in line with the interests of students and workers.  The only way to do this is through democratic control.

The process of marketisation, which hands control over to the imperatives of the market, is being driven forwards by the present round of higher education reforms.  Thus resisting these reforms is a crucial part of the battle for democratic control.  The NSS boycott, which is being organized on 21 campuses across the country, is one way to generalize this battle.  In disrupting the ways in which universities are internally managed, and disrupting the management of the UK higher education sector as a whole, the boycott gives students the power to force concessions from the government.  On those campuses where a boycott is happening, students should get involved; on those where a boycott is not yet being organized, students should make organizing one their priority.

UCL students protest the Teaching Excellence Framework

ucl-demo-1

By Justine Canady, UCL

On 13 December, UCL we held a demonstration against the HE reforms at UCL. This protest was a part of a larger campaign started by our group of student activists, many of us from UCLU Labour Society, to defend higher education. Our campaign is focused on urging UCL’s Provost, Michael Arthur, to opt out of the Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF). We are supported by numerous UCL Union officers and other UCLU societies.

UCLU Labour Society sent a petition in the form of an open letter (with 429 signatures) to the provost 16 December. The petition called TEF’s metrics “not relevant to actually improving teaching”, claiming that such an “arbitrary” framework would raise tuition fees, open the door for big business, create unfair requirements for staff, compromise academic freedom, and make UCL inaccessible to even more students. The letter goes on to say that Arthur called TEF “unnecessary” nearly a year ago.

There have been numerous closed-door meetings to discuss TEF, but Arthur has yet to publicly denounce the scheme. Our campaign promises to keep agitating until students’ needs are met and we hope to see other campaigns like this across the country soon. Next term, with the support of our student union, we’ll be building the drive to boycott the NSS unless and until the government drops the reforms.

ucl-demo-2

Union officers: 11 ways you can promote the NSS boycott now!

boycott-the-nssThe NSS boycott is a national campaign – to be successful, we need as many students as possible to know about it and participate, and Students’ Unions have a crucial role to play in that. Here are some ideas of how you can spread the message – use as many of them as you can, and more!

Set up an SU webpage dedicated to the campaign

You need an online space where any students can find out more information about the campaign and, crucially, what they can do to take part. Where possible this should include a mechanism by which students can pledge to boycott and request to opt out of communications from Ipsos Mori. This process is *normally* done via the University and so you may need to have conversations with the relevant university staff member(s) about how to facilitate this. Some institutions might be more awkward about it than others – make sure you stand your ground and insist that this process is a key part of the SU campaign. You want to be able to keep track of how many students have pledged, and from which departments/faculties, so that you can focus your campaign in specific areas if necessary.

Send an all-student email

The easiest and most obvious way of reaching out to students. Make sure they hear about the NSS from you before they do from the university! Include a link to your campaign webpage as well as a clear and concise explanation of why the campaign is so important.

Do lecture shout-outs

It’s easy to ignore emails but most people will remember things they heard in person – especially when they’re in a lecture and (in theory) ready to pay attention! You need to figure out where the key lectures are for you to hit – remember that only a certain demographic of students are eligible to fill out the NSS and so you need to target the right people. Draw up a timetable of relevant lectures, chat to lecturers in advance to ask if you can have 5 minutes at the start to talk about the campaign and leave flyers/stickers for students to pick up at the end. Get to as many of these as you can!

Put up posters

Design your own posters or run a competition for students to make their own – think as creatively as possible! You can also encourage students to take down or deface university posters promoting the survey and share a photo!

Run stalls

You need to make sure the campaign is as visible as possible, and that there are people out there on the ground who can chat to students, answer any questions and, of course, win the key arguments! If possible, have a laptop/tablet at the stall so that students can pledge to boycott right there and then.

Work with your UCU branch

Remember that UCU National Congress passed a motion supporting the NSS boycott! If you haven’t done so already, get in touch with your campus branch to talk to them about how you can work together to promote the campaign. See if staff members would be willing to put up a slide about the NSS boycott at the beginning of their lectures to spread awareness – students generally really respect what academics have to say, and so as much visible support from staff as possible would make a huge difference to the campaign.

Make a video

Simple really – a brief video breaking down what the NSS boycott is and why it’s necessary that can be shared around social media would be really useful!

Do creative actions

Alongside all the regular comms and publicity strategies, you need stunts/actions which will create a proper buzz on campus about the NSS boycott. This could be a banner drop, a sit-in, a rally, a march and more! Collaborate with grassroots activists to ensure maximum impact.

Reach out to societies

If you have any activist groups on campus, political societies (Labour? People & Planet? A strong Fem Soc?) or even less obvious communities (like sports teams?!), speak to them and try to get key people on board e.g society execs – they could send out member emails/general communications about the NSS boycott which will really help with engagement.

Contact course reps

Following on from the previous point, you don’t just want students to hear about the campaign from the SU, but from their flatmates, their fellow society/club members and their coursemates. Hence course representatives are a key group to try and get on board; they will generally be used to chatting to fellow students and spreading awareness/information and so if you can work with them to do this with the NSS boycott it would make a huge difference. You should encourage them to bring the issue up in departmental meetings and ensure you’re supporting them in terms of winning the arguments.

Run workshops

Most importantly, don’t assume that students aren’t interested. The Higher Education reforms – from fee increases, enforced competition, universities shutting down and being replaced with private companies – will affect everyone. It’s your job to break down these issues and make the campaign as accessible as possible, so ensure you’re facilitating spaces where students can access necessary knowledge and information!

Fighting the commodification and casualisation of higher education

Mark Campbell, London Met UCU (Vice-chair), London Region UCU (Higher Education Chair)

Re-posted with permission from London Met UCU’s blog

londonmetmay2016

This Monday, London Met UCU published the damning conclusions of a workload survey we recently conducted. It’s main findings were the shocking, health damaging, increase in workload – following continuing mass redundancies, now affecting London Met’s permanent substantive staff. Essentially, contractual workload protections have been subverted through the convenient mechanism of line-managers not recognising ANY work other than face-to-face lecturer-student teaching as needing to be measured (but still expected under threat of discipline to be conducted). The documented survey comments highlighting those appalling lived-experiences are shocking.

However, what our survey also highlighted was the other, even more discriminating, and health-risking, side of the modern commodified dystopian university: a permanently exploited, zero-houred, reserve army of labour. These staff have zero job-security, zero-reward for years of service, zero-protection from redundancy (their zero-hour contract is constructed to allow them to be permanently-redundant between crumbs of work). The appalling conditions of casualised lecturing staff are not unique to London Met, and are shockingly highlighted in today’s Guardian front-page and accompanying articles.

London Met management may be ahead of the pack in their future-imperfect full on rush to a privatised market dystopia, but the rest of the university sector are now snapping at its heals and about to be let off the leash by the Higher Education Bill 2016.

All university staff, permanent substantive or casualised, have a vested interest in fighting to end the commodification of education, and its equally evil twin, the casualisation of university labour. We need permanent secure contracts for all staff, that truly reflect and reward ALL the work that we do, and we need enough staff that allow us to deliver the sort of quality service that our students deserve. The neo-liberal model has failed. Time to remove it from education.

In these circumstances, and particularly at this critical time, its an absolute disgrace that the current UCU leadership have acted to disarm our members in that fight by dropping our national industrial action and pay campaign that was explicitly aimed at taking on all our employers over their collective guilt and complicity over both increasing casualisation and the equally shocking increasing gender pay-gap.

FInally, with regards to the Higher Education Bill 2016, we don’t need fatally flawed measures of ‘teaching excellence’ or ‘student satisfaction surveys’ – indeed, we should be supporting the NUS decision to boycott the NSS. Instead, what we really need is proper investment in the essential public good that a university education is. That starts with recognising the critical role that university staff play in forming and delivering that public good. It means recognising, as the NUS does, that ‘staff working conditions are students learning conditions’. It means recognising that society as a whole inextricably benefits from an educated workforce and critically engaged citizenry, therefore society should pay for it through student grants and direct university block grants via increased business taxation. We need to break the rod of mass student indebtedness and free from their shackles our indentured university employees.

This is why I, and thousands of others, will be marching this Saturday in London, United for Education.