The National Union of Students has also pledged its support to the demonstration. For the facebook event, click here.

Last November following a peaceful sit-in in an unused gate house at the University of Birmingham, university managed acquired a draconian injunction banning all “occupational protest action” for twelve months. The injunction was condemned by Amnesty International and others as “aggressive and censorious”.

We are campaigning to get this injunction lifted and call on all concerned peoples to rally at 1pm at the Guild of students on the 15th of February to increase pressure on the university to drop this flagrant attack on democratic rights.

Simon Furse, a 2nd year student at the University of Birmingham, took part in a peaceful sit in to try and raise awareness and dialogue about the effects of the white paper. The University of Birmingham in response has singled him out with the help of the student union president. On the 15th he is being taken to a full misconduct committee, at which he faces expulsion. We want the proceedings against Simon Furse to be dropped and for Simon to be allowed to carry on with his studies.

So: book your tickets to Birmingham for Feb 15th!

***

We, the undersigned members of NCAFC Women’s Committee, are writing in protest at the behaviour of Committee member Fiona Edwards at last week’s NCAFC conference (Liverpool, 28-29 January), which we believe calls into question her position as a Committee member and indeed as part of the campaign.

Throughout the conference Fiona engaged in hectoring, abusive, bullying behaviour towards everyone who publicly disagreed with her. This included repeatedly shouting to heckle speakers; shouting at and bullying conference chairs; and aggressively denouncing those who disagreed with her and her faction (Student Broad Left / Socialist Action) with terms including “racist”, “fascist” and “imperialist”. On one occasion on Saturday evening, Fiona called another Women’s Committee member a “fascist imperialist” because she said she supported the uprising against the Qaddafi regime in Libya. In the conference she also denounced those who supported amending an anti-war resolution to make clear our solidarity with students, workers and women fighting state repression in Iran as “imperialists”.

Fiona’s behaviour throughout the weekend, including repeated violation of NCAFC’s safe space policy (despite repeated warnings on the conference floor), served to alienate committed activists who have worked hard to build the NCAFC and people just being drawn into the campaign alike. A number of people, for whom the conference was their first NCAFC event, have stated that they feel unable to continue to be involved with the campaign. It seems that this was all part of a deliberate attempt to wreck the conference, for factional reasons, by Fiona and her associates.

Fiona should be embarrassed and ashamed of her behaviour; not least of all, for her attempts to cover her tracks by cynically and opportunistically appealing to feminist principles and to the safe spaces policy to silence criticism against her and against Socialist Action. Fiona seems to have no respect for activists in the campaign or for feminist ideas. She may claim to be a socialist and feminist, but her behaviour at the conference was the antithesis of what we understand by those terms. It was much, much worse than what left-wing student activists commonly experience from our Blairite and Tory opponents in the movement.

Fiona’s behaviour causes us to seriously question her position as part of the NCAFC Women’s Committee. It should cause her to question it too. Does she seriously think such behaviour is acceptable in a campaign she claims to be part of? Does she, in fact, support the NCAFC at all?

We condemn Fiona’s actions and put her on warning that further behaviour of this sort will not be tolerated in the NCAFC Women’s Campaign. We call on her to apologise publicly – a clear, unconditional, straightforward apology, with no sectarian statement attached. We feel that this is essential for us to be able to build a campaign where women can work together, share ideas, tolerate disagreements with respect, engage in honest political debate and build a healthy, inclusive movement. If Fiona is unwilling to apologise, we call on her to resign from the Committee immediately.

(In her report on NCAFC conference on the Student Broad Left website, Fiona describes herself as “National Council jobshare”. Assuming she means the National Committee, this is not true. The Women’s Campaign has not yet elected its representative/s on the National Committee.)

Naomi Beecroft, Edinburgh University (Also NC member)
Martha Gillespie, Royal Holloway University
Rebecca Mallowan, Sheffield Hallam University
Lucy Eskell, Edinburgh University (Also Scotland Region job-share NC representative, women’s place)
Esther Townsend, University of East London
Abigail Barr, Edinburgh University
Philippa Faulkner, Edinburgh University
Aimee Kent-Payne, Hull University (outgoing Women’s Officer)
Beti Scott, Edinburgh University
Tali Janner-Klausner, University College London (Also Co-Chair of the NCAFC Communications and Inclusiveness Working Group)
(10 out of 12 committee members present at the conference)

Supported by:
Claire Lister, Birmingam University (outgoing NC member and chair of conference)
Sarah Weston, Merseyside (NC member)

Press contact: 07964791663

The National Campaign Against Fees and Cuts is calling for a National Student Strike this March, in support of a nationwide strike on pensions by the lecturers’ union, UCU, and coinciding with an official walk-out called by the National Union of Students. A date will be announced later this week, along with dates for a lobby of parliament in early March and another week of action in the runup to the walk-out.

In an almost unprecedented move, NUS looks set to call for a national walk-out in mid-late March as part of a strategy to defeat the government’s higher education reforms. NCAFC welcomes this move, and we will now look to build a National Student Strike, with demos, occupations and direct action across the country. We will also be calling a demonstration on the same day as the parliamentary lobby, and put together resources for students to organise strikes and pickets.

In an email sent to student union heads across the country, Liam Burns, NUS President, wrote:

Students’ unions will be able to develop a range of actions that their students want to take, but the aim is clear: let’s clear out the lecture theatres, the seminar rooms, the ITC suites and the libraries and demonstrate clearly that without students, Universities are just empty buildings. Let’s work hard together to show that students care and make the National Walk-Out count.

 

The national conference of the National Campaign Against Fees and Cuts (NCAFC) was held in Liverpool on January 28th and 29th. Between 150 and 200 students and activists from all corners of the UK attended, in the largest event of its kind in many years, with discussion and skill-sharing on a huge range of issues.

The conference put forward numerous actions to take the  student movement forward for the next few months, including:

• A call for a National Student Strike to coincide with an NUS-backed week of action in March
• A major new campaign entitled “Take Back Your Campus”, focused on democratising campuses and student unions.
• Support for major strike action by lecturers and public sector unions over pensions and conditions
• Continued resistance to the HE white paper after the dropping of the government’s HE Bill, including policy to fight for access against student number control, against marketisation and soaring fees for international and postgraduate students
• A call for NUS to organise a national demonstration in autumn 2012
• Policy to defend political prisoners and the right to protest.

Structural motions were passed to make NCAFC’s operations more transparent, and to increase representation of liberation groups and FE and school students. There was also a lively debate on a smattering international issues, and on anti-fascism. A full policy report will be put up on this website tomorrow.

The broader conversations at conference centred around the higher education white paper following the dropping of the HE Bill, with in depth analysis and discussions, as well as campus democracy, and a host of workshops on the issues affecting Women’s, LGBTQ, Disabled and BME students.

There was also a big social in the evening and a fair bit of fun.

Elections

One of the major events of the conference was the election of a new national committee, as well as liberation (Women, BME, LGBTQ and Disabled) representatives, and the co-chairs of the Communications and Inclusiveness Working Group. They were as follows:

Co-Chairs of the Communications and Inclusiveness Working Group:

• James McAsh, Edinburgh University (Open Place)
• Tali Janner-Klausner, UCL (Women’s Place)

Open Place National Committee members (14 elected, 40% reserved for women):

See below for more details.

***

The following event is being organised by a group of trade unionists, including Colin Waugh, editor of Post-16 Educator Magazine.

It is especially relevant given discussions of class and education at NCAFC Conference.

Following the successful Day School at the Northern (Trade Union and Community) College in Barnsley, we have decided to organise a similar Event in London.

£6.00 includes lunch. Pay on the day.

Please email now to confirm/book your place: venablesk@yahoo.co.uk

We welcome a wide range of presentations and lots of discussion exploring “Can Independent Working Class Education contribute to today’s class struggle”

The programme is likely look at anti-deportation campaigning, The Match Women, Mary Bridges Adams, working class heroes, Alice Wheeldon: lessons for today, Self taught workers, Are Freire and Gramsci still relevant to education? What can we learn from the Plebs, Robert Tressell, from popular education? Can we use film in our programmes? Much more.

A full report of the workshops, policy passed and people elected to the committee will be posted here soon.

Motions document

***
No to racist scapegoating – for unity in fighting cuts and racism

Conference believes:

1. In order to minimise rising anger to the Tories’ economic policies of slash and burn, politicians are seeking to divide and rule the 99% by scapegoating and blaming Black people, Muslims, immigrants and asylum seekers for the economic crisis caused by the bankers and government ‘austerity’ policies.

2. Tory Prime Minister David Cameron has been leading the charge with high profile attacks on multiculturalism and immigration. His aim is simple – distract and confuse ordinary people from the real causes of rising unemployment, deteriorating public services and falling living standards to weaken opposition to his government and its cuts agenda. He wants to blame the Burka not the bankers!

3. Across Europe – including Britain – there is a significant rise in Islamophobia and racism, and the far right continues to mobilise. The fascist British National Party secured 1 million votes at the last General Election and the racist and fascist English Defence League have continued to organise violent, anti-Muslim ‘protests’ in 2012.

4. If the Tories’ succeed in scapegoating Black people, Muslims, immigrants and asylum seekers for their attacks on ordinary people the movement against the cuts will be undermined: we need a united movement against cuts which makes no concessions to racist scapegoating.

Conference further believes:

1. The National Campaign Against Fees and Cuts must increase the involvement Black students in the leadership of the campaign.

2. 1 in 5 students in Britain is Black, a total of 1 million.

3. Black students are not only disproportionately affected by the cuts to education but also suffer from attempts to scapegoat Black people for the economic crisis.

4. In the interests of strengthening and broadening the anti-cuts movement all white NCAFC platforms should be avoided where possible because they are not representative of the student movement.

Conference resolves:

1. To raise the slogans ‘No to cuts and racist scapegoating’, ‘Blame the bankers not the Burka’ and similar anti racist slogans in our campaigning.

2. To mandate the incoming National Campaign Against Fees and Cuts National Council to ensure that there are Black representation on all NCAFC platforms in the future where possible.

3. To publicise the forthcoming Unite Against Fascism Conference on Saturday 24th February on the National Campaign Against Fees and Cuts website.

Proposed by: Kanja Sesay (NUS Black Students’ Officer, Vicki Baars (NUS LGBT Officer), Aaron Kiely (NUS NEC), Sean Rillo Raczka (Vice President ULU), Stef Newton (UCL LGBT Officer & NCAFC Committee), Ben Hayes La Swap College anti cuts group chair, Calum Sherwood (Bristol Labour Students Co-chair) and Fiona Edwards (Student Broad Left)
***
Anti-racism

Conference believes

1. That fighting racism in all its form should be a top priority for
the student movement, as well as for the labour and anti-cuts movements.
2. That there are legitimate differences of opinion among left-wing
students about anti-racism – for instance about how to fight organised
racist and fascist groups like the BNP and EDL.
3. That we should encourage debate and discussion in the student
movement about how to effectively fight racism and fascism.

Conference further believes

1. That in addition to more general anti-racist campaigning, there are
many issues which we as an education campaign can make a particular
contribution in taking up, including:
- Attacks on international students’ rights via the visa system;
- Use of the Prevent agenda to spy on Muslim students, seeking the
collaboration not only of institutions but also unions and student
unions;
- Use of immigration controls to attack migrant workers seeking to
organise in our colleges (a spectacular case being the 2009 SOAS raid);
- Questions of curriculum;
- The need for dedicated black students’ officers (and other
liberation officers), not simply amorphous “equality” or “diversity”
officers;
- No platform for fascists in our unions, and zero tolerance for
racism and racist behaviour.

Conference resolves

1. To ask the NC to discuss and produce a report on integrating these
issues into our campaigning work.
2. To organise an event of training and discussion on fighting racism
in education and in society, either as a dedicated event or as part of
broader liberation training.

Bob Sutton,
Daniel Lemberger Cooper

***

We need a fighting NUS to take on the Tories

Conference believes:
1. The Tories’ cuts agenda is having a devastating impact on students and
education.
2. On a national level the NUS has let students down by failing to
organise any actions or initiatives against the government’s assault on
students and education since its pathetic ‘glow stick’ vigil mourning
higher fees over a year ago in December 2010.
3. That the fight to defend education is not over: NUS must do more to
lead the student fight back against cuts – including by organising
national demonstrations, protests, lobbies of parliament, petitions, media
work and more.
4. Significant numbers of students are prepared to continue the fight
against the government’s attacks on education, even without the leadership
of NUS, as the 10,000 strong national demonstration in Autumn 2011 shows.
5. Even larger numbers of students could be mobilised to defend education
if the NUS took the leading role.

Conference further believes:
1. Within the student movement the organisations that have played a
prominent role in actively defending education include: the NUS LGBT
Campaign, the NUS Black Students’ Campaign, a number of Students’ Unions
particularly the University of London Union (ULU), the National Campaign
Against Fees and Cuts, the Education Activist Network (EAN) and the
Student Broad Left (SBL).
2. That NCAFC should work with the organisations listed above to form a
united challenge to the current NUS leadership at the forthcoming NUS
Conference, including a united slate for the full time officer positions
and a joint campaign for NUS to organise a national demonstration against
the cuts in the Autumn term.

Conference resolves:
1. To actively campaign and lobby for NUS to call a first term national
demonstration in 2012 against cuts, fees, high interest on student debts
and privatisation, to unite the student movement.
2. To work with the NUS LGBT Officers, NUS Black Students’ Officer, the
leadership of ULU, EAN and SBL to organise a united anti-cuts slate for
the NUS National Conference 2012 and to campaign alongside these groups at
the conference to win the vote for NUS to organise a national demo.

Proposed by: Student Broad Left

***

All out 1st March

The UCU have called a strike for 1st March, which can act as a beacon for all workers, students, young unemployed, pensioners – everyone suffering from the Tory government’s austerity agenda to fight back. We call for demonstrations in every town and city, with the aim of drawing in not just students and lecturers on the campuses, but the broader working class and anticuts movement. NCAFC is committed to working with all other students, workers and anticuts organisations in open grassroots local forums to build the widest possible support for action on this day. We will approach EAN and Progressive Students with this goal in mind.

John Bowden Manchester Met

***

Broaden out the struggle

The rise in tuition fees, cuts to EMA, and high youth unemployment have led to increasing hardship for youth in Britain. This will only be exacerbated if the government’s changes to pension schemes for workers are allowed to happen. The student struggle is no longer simply over issues such as fees and privatisation, but part of a wider discontentment, as seen in the August riots and #Occupy movement, and we need to reflect the demands of workers in struggle, the young unemployed and the poor in the actions we plan and in the slogans we raise.

John Bowden Manchester Met

***

Fund Education Not War – Scrap Trident, Scrap Fees

Conference notes:

1. According to the Treasury, by mid 2010 Britain had spent more than £20 billion on the wars against Iraq and Afghanistan. The cost of Britain’s war on Libya last year totalled £2 billion.

2. The cost of renewing Trident, Britain’s nuclear weapons system has risen to £100 billion.

3. Government figures show that it would have cost just £2bn per year to abolish tuitions fees, before they were trebled.

4. Over the past decade hundreds of thousands of young people have been active in the movements against war and for global peace, from opposing the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan to calling for an end to Britain’s nuclear weapons system.

Conference believes:

1. Whilst the government is cutting billions of pounds from education and trebling tuition fees, it remains committed to wasting billions of pounds on war and nuclear weapons.

2. The wars on Afghanistan and Iraq have been a waste of money and a waste of lives. One million dead in Iraq and hundreds of thousands killed in Afghanistan – and at the cost of billions of pounds to the British taxpayer.

3. There are dangers of new wars being launched by the Western powers in the Middle East – the United States and Britain are particularly turning their attention to Syria and Iran. These wars will bring even more death and destruction to the Middle East and could cost the British taxpayer billions of pounds.

4. Britain should withdraw troops from Afghanistan, scrap nuclear weapons and refrain from launching new wars in the Middle East, against Iran and Syria. This would save billions which could be used to fund education and other public services facing the axe.

Conference resolves:

1. For the National Campaign Against Fees and Cuts to work with the Stop the War Coalition and Student CND to campaign for the British government to change its twisted spending priorities and fund education not war, to scrap Trident and scrap tuition fees.

2. For the National Campaign Against Fees and Cuts to send an open letter to the Foreign Secretary William Hague proposing that the government end the war on Afghanistan, refrain from launching new wars in the Middle East and use the money saved to fund education and other public services. To publish this letter on the NCAFC website.

Proposed by: Sean Rillo Raczka (Vice President ULU), Fiona Edwards (Student CND), Kanja Sesay (NUS Black Students’ Officer), Vicki Baars (NUS LGBT Officer), Nathan Sparling (NUS Scotland LGBT Officer), Aaron Kiely (NUS NEC), Stef Newton (UCL LGBT Officer & NCAFC Committee), Ben Hayes (La Swap College anti cuts group Chair), Calum Sherwood (Bristol Labour Students Co-chair) and the Student Broad Left

***

Affiliation to the Coalition of Resistance

Proposer: Cal Corkery (UEA)

Seconder: Liam McCafferty (UEA)

This conference notes:

1) The Coalition of Resistance against Cuts and Privatisation is a broad-based democratic organisation formed to create an effective and united national resistance to the government’s austerity programme and all of its consequences.

2) The Coalition of Resistance is linked to no particular political party, but committed to open working in a non-sectarian way with all organisations seeking to co-ordinate resistance; and is dedicated to supplementing, rather than supplanting, trade union, student, pensioner and community opposition to austerity measures.

3) The Coalition of Resistance seeks to provide a national umbrella for a network of local and sectorial campaigns; and aspires to support, encourage, coordinate, and facilitate a transfer of experience rather than to command.

4) NCAFC is currently affiliated to the Coalition of Resistance

This conference believes:

1) That any effective resistance to the cuts must be united on a local and national level.

2) That the beliefs and mission aims of the Coalition of Resistance are in line with those of NCAFC.1

3) That NCAFC’s ability to build and maintain an effective campaign against fees and cuts is strengthened by affiliation to the Coalition of Resistance.

This conference resolves:

1) To renew the existing affiliation to the Coalition of Resistance against Cuts and Privatisation.

***
Number controls and access

Conference Notes

- That despite successive detrimental changes to many of the gains won in Higher Education under successive Conservative and Labour administrations, the overall trend over the last 30 years has been towards increased access to university. Many students in HE in Britain in 2011 are the first in their family to do so.

- That one of the characteristics of the new system by which HEIs are allocated their quotas of undergraduates is that they will be permitted to recruit students with AAB at A-level [a cohort of around 70,000 students annually] without restriction.

- That for many ‘top’ institutions, the ability to attract these ‘AAB’ students will become a central component of their ability to compete under the new rules. This has already contributed to a shift in the awarding of financial support away from accordance to need as measured by means testing towards academic performance [grades].

- That there is a strong correlation historically between A-level grades and social background.

- That students who have completed, foundation courses, BTECs and other ‘non-traditional’ pathways to university, or those with A levels that individual institutions may have considered equivalent to AAB, and awarded places to in light of ‘contextual data’ such as school, postcode, etc. do not qualify students to be calculated in this ‘AAB’ bracket.

- That HEIs are currently under obligation to submit targets on ‘Widening Participation’ as part of the OFFA administered access agreements.

- That University of Liverpool Vice Chancellor Howard Newbie has described The government’s policy on number controls and the WP targets nationally as being ‘a car crash waiting to happen.’

Conference Believes

That everyone should have the right to study at university level. Society produces enough wealth to support this and that talk of there being ‘too many people wanting to go to university’ is nonsense.

That the current NUS leadership’s counterpoising questions of access and WP to the fight against the White Paper and for free education is a dodge. The only serious strategy for defending access is to seek to break the White Paper.

That is imperative that the NCAFC seize the initiative on this question, and link the question of HE access coherently to the struggle against fees and for living grants.

Conference Resolves

- To mandate the NC to coordinate producing campaigning materials around access, particularly for use amongst FE/school students.

***

The fight is on – National Student Strike

NCAFC Believes

1. That the government has just announced that its HE Bill will not be published until 2015, delaying it by at least 3 and a half years

2. That NCAFC has been at the forefront of organising against the higher education white paper this year: the November 9th national demo was organised explicitly on the basis of opposing it.

3. Liam Burns, NUS President, has announced his intention to push for a week of action in March, including a national walkout.

NCAFC Further Believes

1. That the dropping of the HE Bill is not a complete victory, and should not placate the student movement. Most of the white paper can be implemented without primary legislation.

2. That the dropping or delaying of the Bill is a sign of weakness from the government, and vindicates the tactics that NCAFC and other campaigns have used thus far – mass demonstrations, direct action and supporting staff in industrial action. We must now move quickly in order to undermine the white paper in earnest.

3. That the student movement hasn’t often had victories (however superficial) on HE funding in recent years. This is one, albeit a partial one, and we should say so.

4. That this situation has opened a new space for our goals and politics, and gives us fresh opportunities to work with and within NUS and local students’ unions.

NCAFC Resolves:

1. To continue to oppose all forms of fees, cuts and privatisation in education – however they are proposed and whoever is implementing them.

2. To give full support to NUS’s walkouts and week of action in March

3. To call for radical mobilisations and direct action for the week of 12th – 16th March, under the title National Student Strike

4. To ensure that the student movement pursues a strategy of escalation after the NUS week of action, rather than demobilisation

5. To keep open the option of further walkouts and strikes in third term
Michael Chessum

***

NCAFC NC and Communications

Conference Notes:

1) It was decided in June 2011 to elect a National Committee (NC) in order to broaden the regional and individual participation in NCAFC’s decision making.

2) That currently discussions on the NC e-list cannot be viewed by non-NC members

Conference Believes:

1) That the NCAFC is useful to education activists as: a coordinating body, source of resources and means for conveying ideas in the media

2) NCAFC is only as effective as it is democratically and collectively run

3) The structures adopted by the NCAFC in June 2011 have incompletely addressed the representation of oppressed groups and non-London regions in NCAFC decision-making and public appearances

4) The status quo still inhibits people’s involvement and development within the campaign. This is especially problematic for marginalised groups

Conference resolves:

1) That the NC e-list be a general organisational e-list open to all NCAFC supporters and delegates from anti-cuts groups

2) Monthly NC meetings, either online or physical, advertised well in advance so that anyone can come along

3) The creation of a “communications and inclusivity” working group, to be responsible for:

- Monitoring representation of minority groups in NCAFC media appearances, internal roles, conferences and other events.

- Monitoring the implementation of policy and internal structures

- Organising regular training in media, online communications and meeting facilitation skills for less experienced people

- Ensuring that all policy and minutes are available on the NCAFC website

- Ensuring that at least quarterly physical meetings of the NC happen, are advertised, and alternate between different cities in the country including the devolved regions

- Monitoring what goes on the organisational e-list, with a view to ensuring that no major/ political decisions are taken without being sent around the main e-list

4) That the working group be comprised of:

- All liberation officers

- Two co-chairs who do not sit on the NC, elected at conference

- Open meetings and communications

Proposed: Tali Janner-Klausner

Seconded: Michael Chessum

Amendment A:

Delete Resolves 1

Proposed: Ed Maltby, NCAFC NC

***
MOTION: Elections at NUS National Conference

Over the past year NCAFC has arguably played a bigger role in defending education than any other force in the student movement. As the success of November’s national demonstration showed, we are willing to organise action ourselves when NUS won’t.

Nonetheless, we take the official structures of our student unions and of our national union seriously, because we want to use every possible channel to win the mass-mobilising, fighting student movement we need.

We believe that the candidates below are a good reflection of the strength of the student movement, and we put their names forward for election. We empower the incoming National Committee to enter into negotiations with other groups who share our vision for NUS in order to ensure the best possible presence at National Conference.

* National President: Claire Locke (London Met) or Edd Bauer (Birmingham University)
* Vice President (Higher Education): Michael Chessum (UCL and NEC)
* Vice President (Further Education): Rose Anderson (Hull College)
* In the event that Claire Locke runs for National President, Vice President (Society and Citizenship): Edd Bauer (Birmingham University)
* Vice President (Welfare): Daniel Lemberger Cooper (Royal Holloway)

NCAFC will support the following candidates for the Block of 15 elections:

* Mike Williamson (Edinburgh University) for Open Place
* Michael Chessum (UCL and NEC) for Open Place
* Another candidate will also be on the ballot paper for Open Place, so that if Michael Chessum wins VPHE, NCAFC still runs 3 Block candidates overall.
* Rose Anderson (Hull College) for FE Place

Proposed by:

Michael Chessum

Edd Bauer

James McAsh

Daniel Lemberger Cooper

Jade Baker
Amendment A:

Add: “The new National Committee should enter into negotiations with
other forces on the student left with a view to creating a joint
slate. The object of these negotiations should be to strengthen the
slate and promote the politics endorsed by this conference.

A joint slate should be agreed on the basis of consensus between all
groups in negotiations. If no consensus can be reached, then the NC is
instructed to stand the strongest possible list of candidates.

Amendment B:

Delete: “National President” ; “Vice President (Higher Education)”;
“Vice President (Further Education)”; “In the event that Claire Locke
runs for National President, Vice President (Society and
Citizenship)”; “Vice President (Welfare)”:
NCAFC will support the following candidates for the Block of 15 elections:
“ Open Place”; “FE Place”

Add: The new NC is empowered to decide, over the course of
negotiations and NC meetings, which candidate should be stood for
which place with a view to creating the strongest possible slate.

Proposed: Ed Maltby

Seconded: Bob Sutton

***

Unity on the Student Left
Proposer: Jamie Woodcock, Goldsmiths SU

The announcement of the ‘indefinite’ postponement of the HE Bill means the stakes for our movement are very high. Nevertheless, we are confronted with the wholesale privatisation of our universities, whilst the effects of cuts and the new fee regime are already being felt up and down the country. The tasks facing us are larger than can be achieved by any one existing grouping of activists.

The demonstration on 9th November last year showed there remains a substantial student left who were drawn into activity in the autumn of 2010; however it also showed the limits of what can be achieved when one grouping strikes out on its own without first building wider agreement. The truth is if we are to stop the White Paper then far more is needed, and it will have to be built through all available (both official and unofficial, student and staff) channels.

Opposition to the White Paper must be co-ordinated ideologically, industrially, and on the streets and campuses. This means working alongside academics, UCU both nationally and locally, and the existing student organisations. It means sometimes patient work to get those forces on board, with at the same time a real sense of the urgency of the task. No one group can claim either leadership or ownership of this struggle, and we should be wary of striking out on our own prematurely.

A key part of this will be pressuring NUS to take action. This should be done through petitioning, lobbying, activity in local student unions, and a concerted push for Conference 2012. One tactic in this broader strategy is a united left electoral challenge for the leadership positions. This would allow us to bring pressure to bear on other candidates, particularly those standing for re-election. No one group has the right to declare, dominate or control this united challenge.

Conference Resolves:

- To work towards a united left slate for NUS Elections which is able to bring pressure on the leadership to take action on these issues.

***

A c t i o n f o r E d u c a t i o n !

Proposers: S e a n R i l l o R a c z k a a n d M a r k B e r g f e l d , E d u c a t i o n A c t i v i s t N e t w o r k

* N o t e s : ,

* 1 . T h e U C U h a s c a l l e d i t s n e x t d a y o f i n d u s t r i a l a c t i o n o v e r p e n s i o n s o n M a r c h 1 s t

* 2 . T h e N U S h a s c a l l e d a n a t i o n a l l o b b y o f P a r l i a m e n t o n W e d n e s d a y 7 t h M a r c h 2 0 1 2 a g a i n s t c h a n g e s i n f e e s , e d u c a t i o n c u t s , a n d t h e d e b t r e g i m e ,

* 3 . F u r t h e r , N U S h a s c a l l e d a w e e k o f a c t i o n f r o m M a r c h 1 2 – 1 6 t h a n d f o r a n a t i o n a l s t u d e n t w a l k – o u t t h i s t e r m . ,

* F u r t h e r n o t e s : ,

* 1 . T h e 5 2 , 0 0 0 s t r o n g n a t i o n a l d e m o n s t r a t i o n c a l l e d b y U C U a n d N U S i n N o v e m b e r 2 0 1 0 w a s t h e l a r g e s t e d u c a t i o n d e m o n s t r a t i o n t o d a t e . ,

* B e l i e v e s : ,

* 1 . T h e f i g h t o v e r p e n s i o n s i s c e n t r a l t o t h e f i g h t a g a i n s t t h e H E W h i t e P a p e r a s b o t h s e e k t o d r i v e d o w n l a b o u r c o s t s . P r i v a t e p r o v i d e r s , f o r e x a m p l e , h a v e w a r n e d W i l l e t t s t h a t t h e H E m a r k e t i s i n a c c e s s i b l e d u e t o t h e c u r r e n t p u b l i c s e c t o r p e n s i o n s s c h e m e ,

* 2 . T h e l o b b y i s a n i m p o r t a n t o p p o r t u n i t y t o s h o w s t u d e n t s c o n t i n u e d o p p o s i t i o n t o t h e g o v e r n m e n t i n t h e f a c e o f t h e i n d e f i n i t e p o s t p o n e m e n t o f t h e H E B i l l ,

* 3 . T h e c a l l f o r a n a t i o n a l s t u d e n t w a l k – o u t r e p r e s e n t s a r e a l s h i f t f r o m N U S i n r e g a r d s t o t h e t a c t i c s i t e m p l o y s . ,

* F u r t h e r B e l i e v e s : ,

* 1 . W e a r e s t r o n g e s t w h e n t h e o f f i c i a l u n i o n s s u c h a s N U S a n d U C U a l o n g s i d e t h e u n o f f i c i a l n e t w o r k s s u c h a s C o R , E A N , N C A F C , N o C o n f i d e n c e , C a m p a i g n f o r P u b l i c U n i v e r s i t y m o b i l i z e a n d a c t t o g e t h e r . ,

* R e s o l v e s : ,

* 1 . T o j o i n o t h e r s i n c a l l i n g f o r s t u d e n t s t r i k e s o n t h e r e s p e c t i v e d a y s o f i n d u s t r i a l a c t i o n t a k e n b y U C U o t h e r u n i o n s . ,

* 2 . T o w e l c o m e N U S s c a l l f o r a n a t i o n a l l o b b y a n d s u p p o r t t h e c a l l f o r a f e e d e r m a r c h o n t h e d a y o f t h e n a t i o n a l N U S l o b b y , a n d w o r k t o g e t h e r t o e n s u r e t h a t m a x i m u m t u r n o u t f o r t h e d a y . ,

* 3 . T o w e l c o m e N U S s c a l l f o r a w e e k o f a c t i o n a n d h e l p t o c o – o r d i n a t e i n l o c a l u n i v e r s i t y / c o l l e g e s g e n e r a l u n i o n m e e t i n g s a n d s t u d e n t a s s e m b l i e s a n d m e e t i n g s t o d i s c u s s w h a t t h e m o s t e f f e c t i v e s t r a t e g y a n d t a c t i c s f o r t h a t w e e k a r e . ,

* 4 . T o s u p p o r t t h e c a l l f o r N U S t o n a m e a d a y f o r a n a t i o n a l a u t u m n d e m o n s t r a t i o n n o w . I f N U S d o e s n t f o l l o w t h a t c a l l , t o w o r k t o g e t h e r w i t h t h o s e n e t w o r k s t o m a x i m i z e t h e t u r n o u t f o r s u c h a m o b i l i z a t i o n

***
Privatisation and the HE Bill

Conference notes

1. That while all the facts are not yet clear, it appears that the government plans to significantly delay a vote on the Higher Education Bill, originally slated for this year. It may be delayed until 2013, or 2015 or even later. This delay makes its passage significantly less likely.

2. The HE Bill contains important legal changes which are important to the introduction of private providers for Higher Education. It is not the whole of the HE White Paper project, but it is an important component of it.

3. Delaying the HE Bill or even trying to kick it into the long grass is damaging for David Willetts, potentially humiliating for the government, and it shows the strain put on the Coalition by two years of mobilisations.

4. The HE White Paper project has not gone away, and while it may be altered, the Government is still willing and able to introduce much of its substance without primary legislation, through administrative decree.

5. The NUS, rather than declaring victory, has called a lobby of parliament on 7 March, a week of action 12-16 March and a walkout day this term

6. That the UCU will take strike action over pensions on 1 March

Conference believes

1. That the developments with the HE Bill are a vindication of the whole strategy of the NCAFC over the last two years – the decision to call walkouts; to pile on pressure at every level; to use ambitious demands that fit people’s needs, rather than political triangulation; to support and organise direct action; to unilaterally call demonstrations when the NS would not; to rely on the activist strength of students, workers and our supporters, rather than on back-room Westminster manoeuvre.

2. That these developments mark not a lull in hostilities, but rather the moment for us to pile even more pressure on the government and education bosses and exploit their retreat

3. That the NUS’s decision to call a week of action and walkouts is to be welcomed

4. That based on the previous record of the NUS, NCAFC supporters will need to organise independently to ensure that the protest actions are effective and organised around good slogans

5. That we support strike action over pensions and welcome the UCU’s decision to take action

Conference further believes

1. We should not be content with a partial scrapping of the HE White Paper, or with merely fending off attacks. We want free education, a publicly-owned, democratically-controlled education sector, funded by taxing the rich and big business, and a living grant for all students.

2. That the NUS is advancing a radically less ambitious, inadequate list of demands which fundamentally accept the current shape of the education sector and conceive of students as consumers

Conference resolves

1. To continue to fight against the implementation of the HE White Paper, against the new funding model, against cuts in central funding and against the entry of private providers into the framework of the public HE sector.

2. To demand the immediate scrapping of all the measures in the HE White Paper and to demand that Vice Chancellors pledge to oppose the White Paper

3. To raise positive demands for the kind of education system we want to see

4. To organise actions in the run-up to the 1 March strike – rallies, flash occupations, local demonstrations, press releases and stunts in support of the strike, in concert with local UCU branches and the wider labour movement

5. To issue a statement of solidarity addressed to the UCU

6. To support the NUS actions and independently organise an NCAFC week of action including walkouts, occupations, demonstrations and other direct action directed against education bosses, VCs and the government in the period 7-16 March and to mandate the NC to produce appropriate literature and guidance for local groups

Proposed,

Daniel Lemberger Cooper, RHUL

Seconded

Ed Maltby, NCAFC NC

***

Class and identity

Preamble: the proposers of this motion believe that the motion on the
setting-up of a caucus for “lower socio-economic background students”
has opened up an important debate on how we understand class. While we
are not necessarily hostile to CG’s and NB’s motion or its motivation,
we believe that it approaches the question of class from a
sociological angle, and not from a Marxist angle. We are against the
conception of class oppression as something that can be solved through
tolerance, understanding and mitigation of “privilege”, as we believe
that class can and must be abolished

as a precondition for the liberation of humanity. We would like this
motion to be debated alongside CG’s and NB’s motion.

Conference notes:

1) There is a real problem with the domination of the student
(and wider) left by white men from middle-class,
educationally-privileged backgrounds.

2) Capitalist society is based on class division within which
the capitalist class economically, politically and ideologically
subjugates those who live by selling their labour. This subjugation is
experienced as a multitude of different oppressions.

3) However, a “liberation caucus” for people who “self identify”
as coming from a “lower socio-economic background” would not solve the
problem.

4) Class is not merely a system of oppression of a particular
group – and it is not a socio-cultural identity. It is the basic
system which structures our society – the way we organise all economic
life. It springs from the ownership of all industry by a minority
which makes profit from the labour of the dispossessed majority, which
includes all those who have nothing to sell but their labour.
Membership of the working class is based on one’s place in the economy
– boss or employee – and not on a ‘self-defined’ cultural identity.

5) Classes, and class oppression, can only be finally abolished
by taking all economic life into democratic, common ownership. Only
the working class has the interest and the social power to achieve
this.

6) The only way to fight against, and advance towards the
abolition of, the economic, political and ideological subjugation of
working-class people in the here and now, is to assert the interests
of the working class in society through industrial and political
struggle. An aspect of this is that a heightening of the class
struggle will draw more working-class people into political and
economic organisations and create a liberating process of
self-education and subjective change.

7) The struggle waged by the NCAFC – against austerity in
education and for a democratic system of education available to all –
is a class battle, in which we find ourselves on the side of the
working class nationally and internationally. We will, in the final
instance, rely on the strength of the working-class movement to win.
The working-class movement is our fundamental ally in this fight. Our
common cause is against subjugation and profit and for the enrichment
of human life.

Conference Resolves

1. To reaffirm our solidarity with the workers’ movement and our
understanding that the working class movement is key agent of social
change

2. To reaffirm that our fight is a class fight, against capitalist
domination and profit, and that the fight for free and
democratically-controlled education is a fight to assert working-class
interests

3. To mandate the new NC to launch a drive to create closer unity
between the student movement and the workers’ movement, through
circulating regular information on the workers’ movement to student
activists, and designing educational materials and a training day on
labour movement organising, student-worker unity

4. To mandate the NC to prepare training materials and a training
day on activist skills, including public speaking and writing
political propaganda, to help us self-educate, self-develop and
challenge the domination of the radical left by over-educated, white,
middle-class men. Looking at the historical tradition of independent
working-class self-education (including initiatives such as the Plebs’
League) may be informative here.

***
Defend our rights at work

Conference notes:

1. That the UK government is currently overhauling employment law.

2. That from April 6th 2012 workers will not be able to claim unfair dismissal until they have worked for two years in a position.

3. That 26% of private sector workers and 20% of public sector workers in the UK have been with their employers for less than two years and will therefore face working with no job security.

4. That the unemployment rate in the UK (as of October 2011) stands at 8.6% overall, while for people aged 16-17 it is 38.4% and for 18-24 year olds it is 20.1%.

5. That in 2006 a similar change, the contrat première embauche (CPE), was proposed in France.

6. That the CPE would have intoduced a trial period of two years within which employees could have been sacked without cause.

7. That the CPE would have applied only to workers under the age of 26, while the changes being introduced in the UK will apply to workers of any age.

8. That the CPE was greeted with mass resistance from students and workers: half the universities in France were closed by student blockades, thousands of students attended mass rallies, millions marched against the proposals, workplaces and roads were blocked and occupied.

9. That the protests were successful in forcing the French government to withdraw their plans.

10. That so far there has been no similar campaign and little publicity about the proposed changes to employment law in the UK.

11. That due to current anti-strike laws it would be illegal for unions here to ballot over these changes.

Conference believes:

1. That the current crisis is being used as an excuse by the government to remove workers rights.

2. That due both to the higher unemployment rate experience by them, the shorter period of time they have been in employment and the type of work they engage in, young people are likely to suffer disproportionately due to these changes.

3. That the imposition of a two year limit for full employment rights will intensify the precarization of work and encourage employers to hire more people on short term and temporary contracts.

Conference resolves:

1. To coordinate a national campaign against these changes in employment law.

2. To work with other campaign groups, trade unions, political organisations and anti-cuts activists to organise resistance to this attack.

3. To encourage demonstrations, occupations and other actions across campuses and cities to raise the profile of these changes and force the government to reconsider.

Proposer: Alasdair Thompson (Edinburgh Uni Anti-Cuts Coalition)

Seconder(s): Max Crema (Edinburgh Uni Anti-Cuts Coalition), Gordon Maloney (Aberdeen Defend Education Campaign)

***

Take back your campus motion

Believes

1. A growing number of students across the country are dissatisfied with many current systems of student union governance. Many complaints are centred on the belief that the voice of students is being ignored and that structures are opaque, unaccountable and undemocratic.

2. There are considerable differences in governance between student unions. Birmingham University has the lowest proportion of students on the Board of Trustees: only half of the 14 trustees are students or student officers. Imperial College London is the next lowest, where 60% of trustees are students or student officers. By contrast, 100% of the trustees at LSE and Glasgow University are students or student officers.

3. Many students’ unions hold regular general meetings – LSE holds weekly GMs with full decision making powers under company law. Many other student unions do not have regular general meetings, however, and everywhere students and officers are often over-ruled or constrained by Trustee Boards, many of whom are unelected non-students, acting in line with a bureaucratic conception of legal duties rather than the will of their members.

4. Democratic accountability for officers has become similarly patchy. In some students’ unions, the power to remove an officer has been taken entirely out of the hands of students.

5. University governance has similar democratic disparities. Universities like Edinburgh, Oxford and Cambridge have elected senior positions and large representative and elected decision making bodies. Many universities have “courts”, “senates” and “councils” with vary proportions of elected members.

6. University governance has become significantly more corporate at many universities, with much power being taken out of the hands of academics and placed with unelected managers. This is especially true for newer universities, but

7. Campaigns are already underway to democratise campuses. At UCL, students have just held a vote of no confidence in their Vice Chancellor, Malcolm Grant. At UCL and a number of other campuses, there is now a campaign for democratic governance.

8. Concentration of power has gone alongside a concentration of wealth: the salaries of university Vice Chancellors have risen by an average of about £10,000 in the last year, and the number of Vice Chancellors and other senior managers “earning” over £100,000 has sky-rocketed in the past decade.

9. Students who have attempted to fight against fees, managerialism and privatisation on campus have been repeatedly faced with disciplinaries, injunctions and police victimisation. This has escalated significantly since NCAFC last met.

Further Believes

1. Universities should be independent and democratic, and should be run in for the public good rather than for private interests.

2. Student unions should democratic and responsive to needs of students. They should be run wholly by students and seek to enact the democratic will of students, and should not internalise the logic of years of anti-union reform by successive governments.

3. If universities and student unions continue to become more undemocratic, the goals of NCAFC will become harder to achieve.

4. That NCAFC, and the student movement as a whole, has a duty to challenge threats to students’ ability to resist fees, cuts and privatisation on campuses, including injunctions, police on campus and managerial victimisation.

Resolves

1. NCAFC cuts will launch a major campaign called “take back your campus”, designed to

* Win a public argument for democratic university governance, and see it fought for on every campus
* Win a better form of student union governance, and build a consensus around our principles on it
* Defend the right and ability of students, staff and activists to fight for their rights and the future of education

2. NCAFC will push for NUS to take up this campaign, in particular in its guidance on governance and trusteeship to students’ unions and its willingness to fight against regressive government reforms to unions.

Mandates

We mandate the incoming National committee to oversee this campaign.

***
UCU Elections

Conference:
Notes:
* Voting in the the University and College Union (UCU) elections
begins in early February 2012.
* Mark Campbell and Angie McConnell have been endorsed by UCU Left as
left-wing candidates for General Secretary and Vice-President.
* Both Campbell and McConnell are the only opposition to candidates,
including incumbent general secretary Sally Hunt, who have
consistently opposed industrial action by UCU.
* Sally Hunt also publicly condemned the student occupation of 30 Millbank.

Believes:
* Lecturers care about the student voice;
* Left activists have consistently supported & engaged well with NCAFC
and other student activist groups;
* A key opportunity exists for UCU to take on a left leadership;
* A key opportunity exists for UCU to take on a leadership more in
tune with students’ needs.

Resolves:
* To encourage NCAFC supporters to approach UCU grassroots activists
and make themselves available to support left-wing UCU candidates
where practical.
* To endorse Mark Campbell, Angie McConnell and other left candidates
in the upcoming UCU elections.

Proposed: Edmund Schluessel, CAFCC, Cardiff University UCU executive
committee (personal capacity) & UCU Cymru council (personal capacity)

***

> International Student Fees:
> Conference:
> Notes:
> * Universities in the UK are increasingly relying on international
> student fees.
> * Some universities charge international students extremely high fees,
> exceeding £19,800/year (Undergraduate: Arts & Humanity),
> £20,750/year(Undergraduate: Science and Lab), £20,450/year (PG: Arts&
> Humanity), £25, 000/year (PG: Science & Lab), MBA: £37,229/year.
> * International student fees are an example of an unregulated market.
> * International student fees are rising quickly, with students being
> handed higher bills part-way through their courses in some instances
>
> Believes:
> * “The working class has no country.” The same principles should apply
> to international students’ fees as to UK-domiciled students.
> * Education is a right, regardless of country of origin.
>
> Resolves:
> * To call for international student fees to be equal to UK-domiciled
> student fees, with a goal of fully state-funded education without
> tuition fees for all.
> * To encourage NUS to take this position.
>
> Proposed: Christina Yan Zhang, NUS International Students Officer
>; Edmund Schluessel, Cardiff University>

***
>
> Disciminatory immigration
> Conference:
> Notes:
> * UK Home Secretary Theresa May stated that international students
> “count towards 2/3 of the net migration in the UK”.
> * May has announced plans to reduce international students number by 80,000
> * May and other members of the government have publicly opposed key
> portions of the Human Rights Act legally protecting routes for
> students to migrate to the United Kingdom.
> * Further government plans will make it more difficult for
> international student graduates of UK universities to continue study
> and work in the UK, such as:
> ** Restriction of student visas to five years, while completing a
> Masters Degree-level course in Scotland takes six years;
> ** Requiring students to find a job with an income of over
> £20,000/year for post-study work, while the average wage in much of
> the UK is as low as £17,000; this is especially an issue in Scotland,
> Wales, Northern Ireland which face lower average salaries than elsewhere
> in the UK.
> * Research indicates immigration of skilled workers helps, rather than
> harms, the economy.
> * A similar experiment in drastically slashing student visa numbers in
> Australia resulted in massive harm to the multicultural experience on
> campus, as well as academic research in that
> country.
>
>
> Believes:
> * A thriving culture of international exchange is critical to academic
> Freedom, multicultural experience of all students on campus, and
> productive research;
> * International students, as a vulnerable part of the migratory
> community, are being singled out by the UK government as a scapegoat
> to distract from the government’s poisonous economic policies;
>
> Resolves:
> * To campaign against the plan to single out international students as
> the easy target to reduce “Net Migration”
> * To mandate NCAFC to work with and lobby NUS to launch a national
> campaign to take international students out of the “Net Migration” debate.
> * To mandate NCAFC to work with NUS International Students Campaign and
> NUS Black Students Campaign to defend the equal human rights and working
> rights of international students
> * To mandate NCAFC to work closely with NUS and NUS International
> Students Campaign on international students immigration related issues.
>
> Proposed: Christina Yan Zhang, NUS International Students Officer
>; Edmund Schluessel, Cardiff University>

>
> Racism and International Students
> Conference:
> Notes:
> * Lancaster University student Anuj Bidve, an Indian citizen, was
> murdered in Salford on 26 December 2011. Police are treating the
> murder as racially motivated.
> * Kaplan College student Ashraf Haziq, a Malaysian citizen, was beaten,
> then robbed in London
> on 8 August 2011.
> * Research carried out by NUS indicates that hate incidents against
> students are widely underreported, often because students do not feel
> police will take the incidents seriously.
> * Hate incidents and racially-motivated crimes against students cross
> “black/white” ethnic lines, with students of Eastern European origin
> increasingly targeted.
> * Hate groups in the UK such as the EDL have increasingly turned their
> attention to Eastern Europeans, Catholics, and other groups not
> included under the traditional scope of “BME”.
>
> Believes:
> * The UK government has tacitly encouraged a pre-existing mood of
> discrimination against all non-English residents of the UK;
> * It is common that Students’ unions’ structures are less effective in
> engaging with and supporting
> international students than they support UK-domiciled students;
>
> Resolves:
> * To recognize the systemic discrimination in the UK against non-English
> people and people of all minority religions and ethnicity;
> * To create a dedicated International Students Rep position in NCAFC’s
> structures to campaign on issues of international students.
> * To mandate NCAFC to work with NUS International Students Campaign and
> NUS Black Students Campaign to challenge racism against international
> students.
> * To mandate NCAFC to work with NUS International Students Campaign and
> NUS Black Students Campaign to produce a briefing to all students union
> to ensure the safety of international students against all forms of racism.
> * To mandate NCAFC to work with NUS International Students Campaign and
> NUS Black Students Campaign to engage more international students in
> events advocating multiculturalism on campus and in the UK, eg “One
> Society, Many Cultures”.
>
>
> Proposed: Christina Yan Zhang, NUS International Students Officer
>; Edmund Schluessel, Cardiff University

***
Defend our pensions

Conference notes:

1. That pensions of workers in local government and education are currently under attack from government and employers.

2. That the proposed changes will increase employee contributions, raise the retirement age, change the inflation uprating from RPI to the generally lower CPI measure and result in an absolutely smaller pension for most workers.

3. That in the USS pension scheme, which applies to academic and academic-related staff in pre-92 HE institutions, a two-tier system will be created where existing members retain a final salary scheme while new entrants will become part of a care-averaged (CARE) scheme.

4. That the USS pension scheme was valued to be in surplus in 2008 and has a positive cash-flow.

5. That on November 30th of last year the UK saw the largest display of collective industrial action in decades.

6. That in light of this display the government made approaches to public sector and university trade unions and made a new ‘final offer’.

7. That the UCU NEC voted by a margin of 3 to 1 to reject the proposal for the TPS scheme, which covers staff in post-92 HE and FE institutions, and that the proposals were also rejected by other teaching unions the NUT and NUSUWT.

8. That the university employers association have offered to hold two reviews, relating to the CARE scheme for new entrants and issue around redundancy, for the USS scheme.

9. That on Tuesday January 31st UCU will hold a special conference to decide whether to suspend or escalate action in the USS dispute.

Conference believes:

1. That everyone deserves a decent pension.

2. That the current attack on university and public sector pensions is motivated not by a desire to make the schemes affordable but as a means for government and management to save money and represents a direct attack on workers.

3. That young people not yet in pension schemes will be disproportionately hit by the proposed changes and it is therefore in our own interests to support action in defence of pension schemes.

4. That industrial action was instrumental in forcing the minor concessions already offered in both the USS and TPS pension schemes and that further improvements will only happen if action is escalated not suspended.

5. That the proposals currently on offer for both USS and TPS represent a deterioration of previous conditions, will require workers to work longer, pay more and get less and should therefore be rejected.

Conference Resolves:

1. To issue a statement condemning the government and employers’ proposals to reform the TPS and USS pension schemes.

2. To call on UCU not to back down while their members’ interests are still threatened and while momentum from November 30th and the recent partial victory over the HE bill still exists.

3. To offer our unconditional support to UCU in whatever action they deem necessary, including but not limited to extended strike action and non-marking of exams, in order to win their fight and to call on the NUS and students’ unions to do the same.

4. To work with UCU at both a national and local branch level to support future action and to highlight the need for solidarity between staff and students.

5. To call for a campaign of direct action including occupations of university buildings in support of future action.

Proposed: Alasdair Thompson (Edinburgh Uni Anti-Cuts Coalition)

Seconded: Kate Harris, Mike Williamson (both Edinburgh Uni Anti-Cuts Coalition), Craig Gent (Royal Holloway Anti-Cuts Alliance).

***

Don’t Attack Iran
Proposed: Sean Rillo Raczka

This Conference notes:

1.1 The recent discussions of a possible future war with Iran over an alleged nuclear weapons programme.

1.2 That UK officials have indicated a plan is in place to engage militarily with Iran and that ministers in Israel are calling for a ‘pre-emptive strike’ against Iran.

1.3 That former head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Hans Blix, who was instrumental in the decision to go to war with Iraq, has condemned war with Iran as having the potential to lead to “serious and devastating conflagration in the Middle East which could undermine regional peace and stability”.

1.4 That estimates say that between 600,000 and 1,000,000 Iraqi civilians were killed as a result of the war and that many more were made homeless and displaced.

1.5 That the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have cost Britain £20bn – £13bn more than is spent on Higher Education.

1.6 That the Stop the War Coalition has condemned a war with Iran.

This Conference believes:

2.1 That we must not allow ourselves to be led down the road to war based on spurious accusations and double-standards.

2.2 That war with Iran would be disastrous for the stability and peace of the Middle East and could plunge the entire region into conflict.

2.3 That the loss of life, human and financial cost of engaging in military action against Iran would be unacceptably high, and that spending exorbitant sums waging war when cuts are being made to the most vulnerable in society is entirely immoral.

2.4 That Israel’s insistence that, as a nuclear power, ‘all options are on the table’ is incredibly worrying and reckless.

2.5 That nuclear weapons are a serious and impending threat, but that war is not the solution to this problem.

2.6 That nuclear disarmament should be a long term goal, not just in the Middle East, but for the international community as whole

This Union resolves:

3.1 To condemn any future with war with Iran, and release statements to this effect.

3.2 To organise with others to actively oppose military action against Iran.

3.3 To call for negotiation and co-operation in order to bring about a sustainable plan for peace in the Middle East.

3.4 To advocate for nuclear disarmament and to support organisations which campaign for disarmament.

Amendment A:
Add: “1.7 The war waged by the tyrannical, misogynist, homophobic,
anti-working class regime against Iranian student activists and trade
unionists, women and LGBT people”

“3.5 To make links with left-wing Iranian student organisations and
Iranian trade unionist and socialist groups, and reaffirm our
solidarity with them against both war and the regime led by
Ahmadinejad”

Proposed by Bob Sutton, LgoS

***

March 7 Demonstration

Notes:

1. The UCU has called its next day of industrial action over pensions on March 1st

2. The NUS has called a national lobby of Parliament on Wednesday 7th March 2012 against changes in fees, education cuts, and the debt regime

3. Further, NUS has called a week of action from March 12-16th and for a national student walk-out this term.

Further notes:

1. The 52,000 strong national demonstration called by UCU and NUS in November 2010 was the largest education demonstration to date.

Believes:

1. The fight over pensions is central to the fight against the HE White Paper as both seek to drive down labour costs. Private providers, for example, have warned Willetts that the HE market is inaccessible due to the current public sector pensions scheme

2. The lobby is an important opportunity to show students’ continued opposition to the government in the face of the indefinite postponement of the HE Bill

3. The call for a national student walk-out represents a real shift from NUS in regards to the tactics it employs.

Further Believes:

1. We are strongest when the official unions such as NUS and UCU alongside the unofficial networks such as CoR, EAN, NCAFC, No Confidence, Campaign for Public University mobilize and act together.

Resolves:

1. To join others in calling for student strikes on the respective days of industrial action taken by UCU other unions.

2. To welcome NUS’s call for a national lobby and support the call for a feeder march on the day of the national NUS lobby, and work together to ensure that maximum turnout for the day.

3. To welcome NUS’s call for a week of action and help to co-ordinate in local university/colleges general union meetings and student assemblies and meetings to discuss what the most effective strategy and tactics for that week are.

4. To support the call for NUS to name a day for a national autumn demonstration now. If NUS doesn’t follow that call, to work together with those networks to maximize the turnout for such a mobilization.

***

PROPOSAL FOR THE FUTURE DIRECTION OF THE NCAFC

Conference notes:

- There has recently been a downturn in popular involvement in the student movement. This has been shown in the decreased attendance of national demos. November 9th saw 10,000 attend (at the most optimistic estimate), as opposed to the 50,000 during the 2010 mobilisations.

- The increase in anti-cuts activity in other sectors, as shown with the electricians strike, and the November the 30th strike. These struggles against cuts are now predominantly led by people struggling over the conditions of their workplaces, employment terms and pay, whether they are employed in the education sector or not.

Conference believes:

- The NCAFC has a responsibility as the leading network of student activists to fight against cuts in any, and all, forms they take.

- As a consequence of the changes described in conference notes, we should be looking towards developing a new approach orientated towards the new struggles.

Conference resolves:

1. The NCAFC moves away from the strategy of calling national student marches, until there is a clear opportunity for student mass mobilisation as we saw in late 2010.

2. The NCAFC move toward the building of support for emerging strike actions in any sector.

On a practical level, this entails:

a) Supporting pickets where they occur

b) Establishing working relationships with labour activists involved in building for strikes.

c) Distributing material in support of actions, on the day and before the strike.

3. The NCAFC to support local groups through the production of material in support of upcoming strike actions. This would allow a group to print off the existing leaflet rather than lay out their own, and remove duplication of work.

Submitted by

Tom McKee, Joseph Brownridge, Joseph Jones

***

We have political prisoners: we should defend them

Believes

1. That since November 10th 2010, there have been numerous arrests and prosecutions of student demonstrators, with many being jailed for lengthy periods of time – for instance Frankie Fernie, who received a 12 month sentence for throwing sticks.
2. That Edd Bauer, VP Education at Birmingham Guild, was remanded in custody for 10 days prior to trial for doing a banner drop.
3. That state repression of emerging social movements has occurred by legal and policing means many times before – from the poll tax protests to the trade union movement.
4. That there are more than 100 student and anticuts protesters still awaiting trial for jailable offences.

5. That a motion similar to this one was proposed by Michael Chessum to the NUS NEC and passed almost unanimously in November.

Further Believes

1. That the student movement now has political prisoners: people who are, or will be, sent to jail for extremely long periods of time not because of they pose a corresponding danger to society, or the ethical nature of their crime, but because their (alleged) acts took place in a political context.
2. That the case of Edd Bauer’s banner drop, as well as the use of the charge of violent disorder in other cases, illustrates the political use of the legal system to target political dissent.
3. That it is a fundamental duty of all serious political movements to defend political prisoners.
4. That in protest situations the police are a political organisation, not a neutral arbiter.

Resolves

1. To commit to providing political and material support as far as possible for student and anti-cuts protesters who end up in jail for essentially political reasons, including public campaigning and personal support such as letter-writing.

2. To do our best to keep track of what is happening and to whom within our movement, working with organisations like Green and Black Cross.

3. To campaign for the ‘official structures’ of the anti-cuts movement such as NUS and major trade unions to take up this cause, materially and politically.

***

Support further action over USS Pensions

Conference:
Notes:
* Lecturers in pre-1992 universities are members of the Unified
Superannuation Scheme (USS) pension system, which is not
publicly-funded;
* University and College Union (UCU) members in pre-1992 institutions
are currently in dispute with their employers over imposed changes to
the USS system which mean lecturers:
** will be easier to sack,
** face a higher retirement age,
** pay a higher portion of their salaries toward pensions
** receive a considerably smaller pension in return
* UCU pre-92 members have undertaken action short of a strike since
October 2011 and have taken three days of strike action, including on
30 November 2011, over USS pensions
* Members of UCU’s national executive have recommended the suspension
of the dispute, including the stopping of all industrial action, in
exchange for minor concessions from employers;
* UCU pre-92 members will be debating the union’s response at a
special conference on 31 January 2012.

Believes:
* Lecturers are right to fight to defend their full pensions without
detrimental changes;
* Industrial action is the best tool a trade union has to defend its
members’ interests;
* Students, who are largely current or future workers, should support
their lecturers’ action against pension cuts.

Resolves:
* To coordinate with grassroots activists in UCU to show student
support for UCU members’ continuing the fight;
* To propose to these activists a student lobby of the special
conference on 31 January at noon in University of London Union, Malet
Street, London;
* To make a public statement announcing student support for further
industrial action by pre-92 UCU members, as part of a class-based
strategy of coordinated industrial action against the cuts.

Proposed: Edmund Schluessel (CAFCC & Cardiff University UCU (personal capacity))

***

Defend Eric Jinks and the occupy Cardiff Protestors

Conference:
Notes:
* On 11 November 2011, Eric Jinks, a student at Cardiff & Vale
College, Cardiff, was arrested along with seven other peaceful
protesters while attempting to launch a camp on public property as
part of “Occupy Cardiff”.
* Jinks was aged 17 at the time.
* Jinks has been charged under section 61 of the Criminal Justice &
Public Order Act 1994 based on claims by Cardiff Council that the
protest was damaging public property and faces up to three months
imprisonment if convicted. Jason Simons was also charged.
* Cardiff Council’s leader claimed Occupy Cardiff members were
hammering nails into Cardiff Castle, but has not produced any evidence
to support this claim.
* Occupy Cardiff are demonstrating peacefully in defense of Jinks and
the other arrestees on the date of their trial, 8 February 2012 , and
have circulated an e-petition in support of those charged.

Believes:
* Eric Jinks was not engaged in criminal behaviour at Cardiff Castle
on November 11th;
* The legal rights of Eric Jinks and other protesters were infringed upon;
* Cardiff Council and South Wales Police taking a draconian step in
threatening a teenager with imprisonment and a criminal record for
taking part in positive, peaceful protest.

Resolves:
* To write to Eric Jinks offering solidarity & support;
* To write to Cardiff Council and to South Wales Police demanding
charges be dropped against Jinks & Simons;
* To circulate Occupy Cardiff’s e-petition, available online at
http://www.petitionbuzz.com/petitions/right2protest , to NCAFC’s
members and supporters;
* To publicise the 8 February demonstration at 9am at Cardiff
Magistrates Court, Fitzalan Place, Cardiff.

Proposed: Steffan Bateman, Alesh John, Andrew Bagshaw (Cardiff & Vale
College); Edmund Schluessel (Campaign Against Fees & Cuts Cymru,
Cardiff University).

***

Motion: To Boycott the NSS

This conference notes:

1. The NCAFC has publicly stated its opposition to the Higher Education White Paper and made it a focus for its agitation over the previous several months.
2. That the National Student Survey (NSS) is an integral part of White Paper, as it is the key mechanism for students to ‘rate’ their modules and courses as ‘consumers’ (see sections 3.5-3.9 on ‘Student engagement’).
3. That ‘January and February see the launch of the National Student Survey (NSS) 2012 at most Higher and Further Education institutions across the UK.’ (http://www.thestudentsurvey.com/).
4. That boycotts of the NSS for reasons related to the marketisation of education have previously been encouraged at Nottingham, Sussex, and Portsmouth. In 2010 the boycott was encouraged by the University of Sussex Student Union.

This conference believes:

1. The NSS’s function is to increase the marketisation and commodification of higher education, consistent with the vision outlined in the Higher Education White Paper.
2. That boycotts of the NSS can and should form part of an effective campaign against the Higher Education White Paper.

This conference resolves:

1. To support a boycott of the NSS.
2. To commit the NCAFC to producing propaganda against the NSS and encouraging affiliated anti-cuts groups to organise an NSS boycott on their local campuses.

Proposed: Liam McNulty (Cambridge Defend Education)

Seconded: Chris Page (Cambridge Defend Education).

***

Motions on NCAFC NC and voting

1. “That the number of ordinary members of the NCAFC NC increases from 14 to 21″
Amendment A: “… increases from 14 to 18″

This amendment is for flexibility of discussion

2. That the number of reserved places for self-defining women be 40% of the total seats

3. To discontinue the use of STV. Elections for the NCAFC NC ordinary members take place by the method that each voting delegate be allowed half the number of votes as there are places on the committee, each equally weighted.”

Michael Chessum NCAFC NC

***

Liberal Democrat Spring Conference Demonstration

The Liberal Democrat Spring Conference is in Newcastle/Gateshead on 9th-11th March. Anti cuts campaigners ACN and NFEN are planning a demonstration at the conference.
NCAFC resolves to work with local organisers, pledge its support for the protest and call on National Union of Students, and other Student Unions to make this a northern national demo against the coalition government’s attacks against working people and students.

Luke Neal, NFEN

***

Motion to clarify the voting process for National Committee elections
This conference notes:
1) In August 2011, a motion was passed at conference for the implementation of the Single Transferable Vote (STV) voting system in National Committee elections, for the purposes of achieving proportional representation.
2) The results of STV fundamentally rely on a calculation determined by the type of quota used.
3) Of the various quotas, the most commonly accepted for the purposes of proportional representation is the Droop quota.
4) There was no discussion of the appropriate quota to use at conference in August 2011.
5) The quota used in August 2011 was the result of a Google search for STV calculators.
5a) The quota used in August 2011 was the more obscure Hagenbach-Bischoff quota.
6) Under the Hagenbach-Bischoff quota, it is possible for more candidates to achieve quota than there are seats available, meaning if there is a tie a candidate is disqualified at random.
6a) Under the Droop quota this is mathematically impossible.
7) Ties and random disqualifications can distort the results of successive rounds and the distribution of votes within them
7a) This is not conducive to achieving proportional representation as originally intended.
In the elections of August 2011, had the Droop quota been used it is possible that every round after round one (the election of Edward Bauer) could have produced a different result.

This conference believes:
1) Proportional representation was the desired effect of selecting the STV voting system.
2) Proportional representation is more likely to be achieved by adopting the Droop quota.
3) The Droop quota will prevent the random disqualification of candidates.

This conference resolves:
1) To use the Droop quota for all STV elections in future.

Proposed: Craig Gent (Royal Holloway Anti-Cuts Alliancea)
Seconded: James McAsh (Edinburgh Uni Anti-Cuts)

***

Motion for the creation of a lower socio-economic background caucus

This conference notes:
1) The NCAFC is an organisation fighting tuition fees, public sector cuts and the charter for privatization set out in the H.E. white paper.
2) The NCAFC liberation caucuses (women’s, BME, LGBTQ, disabled) exist in the recognition that these groups are both systemically disadvantaged in society and disproportionately affected by tuition fees, public sector cuts and privatization in H.E.
3) People from lower socio-economic backgrounds are both systemically disadvantaged in society and disproportionately affected by tuition fees, public sector cuts and privatization in H.E.
4) People from lower socio-economic backgrounds are also specifically affected by the scrapping of EMA, cuts to the provision of free school meals, cuts to free milk provision by local authorities, and the H.E. white paper’s attempt to discourage bursaries in favour of fee waivers.

This conference believes:
1) Disadvantaged groups should be at the forefront of the National Campaign Against Fees and Cuts.
2) This can be ensured by the representation of a lower socio-economic background place on the National Committee.

This conference resolves:
1) To create a lower socio-economic background caucus.
1a) Membership of the lower socio-economic background caucus will consist of those who identify as being from a lower socio-economic background.
2) To create a place on the National Committee for a representative from the lower socio-economic background caucus.

Proposed: Craig Gent (Royal Holloway Anti-Cuts Alliance)
Seconded: Naomi Beecroft (Edinburgh Uni Anti-Cuts)
***

Motion for the creation of a school and FE caucus

Motion for the creation of a school and FE college caucus

This conference notes:
1) The NCAFC is an organisation fighting tuition fees, public sector cuts and the charter for privatization set out in the H.E. white paper and taking place through the academies and ‘free schools’ programmes.
2) The NCAFC caucuses succeed in representing either that a group is systematically disadvantaged in society; disproportionately affected by tuition fees, public sector cuts and privatization in H.E.; or has a special interests (e.g. SAC).

This conference believes:
1) School and FE students are a valuable part of the student movement and subsequently the wider anti-cuts movement.
2) School and FE students should be better facilitated within the NCAFC structures to retain their participation.

This conference resolves:
1) To create a school and FE student caucus.
1a) Membership of the school and FE caucus will be limited to school and FE students, and those within one year of leaving school or FE.
2) To create a place on the National Committee for a representative from the school and FE student caucus.

Proposed: Craig Gent (Royal Holloway Anti-Cuts Alliance)
Seconded: Tali Janner-Klausner (University College London)

***

Left Unity and March 1st

The recent debate over the NUS Left Slate has demonstrated a broader problem within the student movement in the UK. Members of the NCAFC National Committee have responded to the annual problem of assembling a left slate from the myriad of different progressive student campaigns by proposing a slate composed entirely of NCAFC leaders, which they argue can be amended and voted on at the NCAFC conference with the aim of giving NCAFC a policy in entering into discussions with the other groups.

The student movement is larger than just NCAFC and any slate running for leadership of the NUS needs to reflect that fact. The NCAFC conference is not the most appropriate forum to vote on a left slate as it will, by definition, marginalise those activists who are not supporters of this campaign.

It is difficult to see how any arrangement could be seen as satisfactory by all the anti-cuts campaigns and left-wing groups when there is a culture of hostility and suspicion between these different organisations.

One of the problems was the student movement of 2010/11 was the disunity that existed between left-wing groups, which was reflected in the anti-cuts movement. Demonstrations, conferences and assemblies had to organise between a number of different campaigns, and local groups were forced to pick which national organisation they’d affiliate to, and to choose between national events to mobilise for.

This is not a trend which should be allowed to continue, where work is duplicated by different national campaigns all competing with one another. To overcome this, the incoming NCAFC NC will propose a unity conference to be co hosted by NCAFC, EAN, SBL, PS, and all others interested in finding unity in action, to be held in the summer.

REVO, Sally Roberts

Amendment:
After “EAN” insert “, Youth Fight for Jobs”

Proposed: Edmund Schluessel, Cardiff University Youth Fight for Jobs

***

**************
NCAFC Women’s Motion
Esther Townsend UEL
Aimee Kent Payne Hull Uni

NCAFC conference believes that the gains made by women’s movements over the last five decades are under attack from the Tories’ dual agenda of cuts and reactionary moralism. In education, too, the Tories’ attacks will affect women disproportionately, from attacks on sex education, to higher student debt which women will take longer to pay off, to the gutting of subject areas where women students and workers are concentrated.

Student women have been at the forefront of the revival in feminist discussion and activism. There is an obvious, pressing need to build a strong student women’s movement. We think this movement should be based on the principles of anticapitalist feminism – organising women workers and students for self-liberation, to challenge the structural basis of women’s oppression under capitalism.

In that spirit, we will give our support to efforts to build NCAFC Women as a strong national campaign among women students and education workers.

NCAFC Women will base its work around a Charter for Women in Education, which we will seek to develop over the coming months. Some ideas for the kind of demands we want to include in this charter are included below. We will seek to make links with broader feminist and women’s activist groups and women activists in UCU, Unison, NUT and other education unions in this campaign.

We will also seek to make links with campus women’s groups, and help activists to build women’s groups where they don’t currently exist; campaign for a women’s officer, and other dedicated liberation officers, in every student union; and seek to build a left opposition in NUS Women’s Campaign, with the goal of transforming it into the kind of fighting campaign student women need.

***

Charter for Women in Education – some ideas

* A commitment to support all those fighting sex and gender discrimination in our universities, schools and colleges.
* Fight the funding cuts, which will effect subjects where women are concentrated. Fight for publicly owned universities with decent funding.
* Free education and a living grant for every student to eliminate student debt.
* Support workers’ fight to depend they pay, conditions and pensions – women will lose out worst from the Tory attacks.
* Defend and extend university and student union childcare provision. Improve representation and support for student carers; and fight barriers to learning, including cuts to services and grants.
* Defend sex education against the Tories’ reactionary moralistic agenda. Fight the religious take over of parts of our school system. Defend and extend sexual health and reproductive rights services on campus.
* Fight for safety on campus – for decent lighting and transport, stop the cuts to campus support workers.
* Eliminate poverty pay – a living wage for all workers on our campuses.
* A serious fight to make equal pay a reality in our universities and colleges. Explore why women are underrepresented in our universities and how we can fight to change this.
* A woman’s place is in her union – no to sexism in our student unions. Campaign for a women’s officer and a full-range of liberation officers in every SU. Fight to scrap men’s officers wherever they exist.
* For a campaigning women’s group on every campus

Students at University College London have condemned the results of a referendum of No Confidence in their Vice Chancellor after university management sent an email to all students effectively urging them to vote against it. The vote eventually fell by 1185 to 1699, with 391abstentions.

Students had been calling for a vote of No Confidence in Malcolm Grant, Provost of UCL, in connection to his record on supporting higher tuition fees, refusing to pay the London Living Wage and taking a key role in the government’s health reforms. For more information on the campaign, click here: http://grantoutnow.wordpress.com/

However, in the critical days before voting closed, Rex Knight – Vice Provost Operations – used his managerial email privileges to email every student at UCL, singing Grant’s praises. He claimed that the no Confidence campaign was lying about the London Living Wage and claiming that Grant’s time at UCL had brought numerous benefits to the College.

Preliminary data shows that just after Knight’s email was circulated there was a 750 spike in hits on the UCLU website, higher than the margin of victory. Luke Durigan, the Chair of UCLU’s Trustee Board, said: “We currently investigating how many students voted immediately after reading Rex Knight’s email.”

In a response to Rex Knight’s email, No Confidence campaigners described it as “shocking that UCL managers have used the resources of the College to interfere in the democratic process.” A full response can be viewed here: http://grantoutnow.wordpress.com/2012/01/24/response-to-rex-knight/

Michael Chessum, the campaign leader for the no confidence campaign, said: “It has become clear that some university managers at UCL are using the resources and position of the College in order to protect their own position from criticism. If we have to re-run this referendum in order to at least get a fair result, then that’s what we’ll do.”

Ben Beach, a second year Architecture student and supporter of the no confidence motion said: “UCL security have told us explicitly that they were under orders to rip down our posters. There has been a clear attempt to interfere in the democratic process from the outset.”

ENDS

Contact: 07964791663

No further motions or amendments (other than minor textual amendments) may be submitted for voting by the conference.

All motions submitted will be posted on the website presently

More will be submitted soon – watch this space.

NCAFC supporters can submit motions and amendments by emailing againstfeesandcuts@gmail.com, the deadline is 5pm Thursday 26 Jan

The Liberal Democrat Spring Conference is in Newcastle/Gateshead on 9th-11th March. Anti cuts campaigners ACN and NFEN are planning a demonstration at the conference.
NCAFC resolves to work with local organisers, pledge its support for the protest and call on National Union of Students, and other Student Unions to make this a northern national demo against the coalition government’s attacks against working people and students.

Luke Neal, NFEN

*** Motion to clarify the voting process for National Committee elections
This conference notes:
1) In August 2011, a motion was passed at conference for the implementation of the Single Transferable Vote (STV) voting system in National Committee elections, for the purposes of achieving proportional representation.
2) The results of STV fundamentally rely on a calculation determined by the type of quota used.
3) Of the various quotas, the most commonly accepted for the purposes of proportional representation is the Droop quota.
4) There was no discussion of the appropriate quota to use at conference in August 2011.
5) The quota used in August 2011 was the result of a Google search for STV calculators.
5a) The quota used in August 2011 was the more obscure Hagenbach-Bischoff quota.
6) Under the Hagenbach-Bischoff quota, it is possible for more candidates to achieve quota than there are seats available, meaning if there is a tie a candidate is disqualified at random.
6a) Under the Droop quota this is mathematically impossible.
7) Ties and random disqualifications can distort the results of successive rounds and the distribution of votes within them
7a) This is not conducive to achieving proportional representation as originally intended.
In the elections of August 2011, had the Droop quota been used it is possible that every round after round one (the election of Edward Bauer) could have produced a different result.

This conference believes:
1) Proportional representation was the desired effect of selecting the STV voting system.
2) Proportional representation is more likely to be achieved by adopting the Droop quota.
3) The Droop quota will prevent the random disqualification of candidates.

This conference resolves:
1) To use the Droop quota for all STV elections in future.

Proposed: Craig Gent (Royal Holloway Anti-Cuts Alliancea)
Seconded: James McAsh (Edinburgh Uni Anti-Cuts)

Motion for the creation of a lower socio-economic background caucus
This conference notes:
1) The NCAFC is an organisation fighting tuition fees, public sector cuts and the charter for privatization set out in the H.E. white paper.
2) The NCAFC liberation caucuses (women’s, BME, LGBTQ, disabled) exist in the recognition that these groups are both systemically disadvantaged in society and disproportionately affected by tuition fees, public sector cuts and privatization in H.E.
3) People from lower socio-economic backgrounds are both systemically disadvantaged in society and disproportionately affected by tuition fees, public sector cuts and privatization in H.E.
4) People from lower socio-economic backgrounds are also specifically affected by the scrapping of EMA, cuts to the provision of free school meals, cuts to free milk provision by local authorities, and the H.E. white paper’s attempt to discourage bursaries in favour of fee waivers.

This conference believes:
1) Disadvantaged groups should be at the forefront of the National Campaign Against Fees and Cuts.
2) This can be ensured by the representation of a lower socio-economic background place on the National Committee.

This conference resolves:
1) To create a lower socio-economic background caucus.
1a) Membership of the lower socio-economic background caucus will consist of those who identify as being from a lower socio-economic background.
2) To create a place on the National Committee for a representative from the lower socio-economic background caucus.

Proposed: Craig Gent (Royal Holloway Anti-Cuts Alliance)
Seconded: Naomi Beecroft (Edinburgh Uni Anti-Cuts)

Motion for the creation of a school and FE caucus

Motion for the creation of a school and FE college caucus

This conference notes:
1) The NCAFC is an organisation fighting tuition fees, public sector cuts and the charter for privatization set out in the H.E. white paper and taking place through the academies and ‘free schools’ programmes.
2) The NCAFC caucuses succeed in representing either that a group is systematically disadvantaged in society; disproportionately affected by tuition fees, public sector cuts and privatization in H.E.; or has a special interests (e.g. SAC).

This conference believes:
1) School and FE students are a valuable part of the student movement and subsequently the wider anti-cuts movement.
2) School and FE students should be better facilitated within the NCAFC structures to retain their participation.

This conference resolves:
1) To create a school and FE student caucus.
1a) Membership of the school and FE caucus will be limited to school and FE students, and those within one year of leaving school or FE.
2) To create a place on the National Committee for a representative from the school and FE student caucus.

Proposed: Craig Gent (Royal Holloway Anti-Cuts Alliance)
Seconded: Tali Janner-Klausner (University College London)

***

The recent debate over the NUS Left Slate has demonstrated a broader problem within the student movement in the UK. Members of the NCAFC National Committee have responded to the annual problem of assembling a left slate from the myriad of different progressive student campaigns by proposing a slate composed entirely of NCAFC leaders, which they argue can be amended and voted on at the NCAFC conference with the aim of giving NCAFC a policy in entering into discussions with the other groups.

The student movement is larger than just NCAFC and any slate running for leadership of the NUS needs to reflect that fact. The NCAFC conference is not the most appropriate forum to vote on a left slate as it will, by definition, marginalise those activists who are not supporters of this campaign.

It is difficult to see how any arrangement could be seen as satisfactory by all the anti-cuts campaigns and left-wing groups when there is a culture of hostility and suspicion between these different organisations.

One of the problems was the student movement of 2010/11 was the disunity that existed between left-wing groups, which was reflected in the anti-cuts movement. Demonstrations, conferences and assemblies had to organise between a number of different campaigns, and local groups were forced to pick which national organisation they’d affiliate to, and to choose between national events to mobilise for.

This is not a trend which should be allowed to continue, where work is duplicated by different national campaigns all competing with one another. To overcome this, the incoming NCAFC NC will propose a unity conference to be co hosted by NCAFC, EAN, SBL, PS, and all others interested in finding unity in action, to be held in the summer.

REVO, Sally Roberts

***

**************
NCAFC conference believes that the gains made by women’s movements over the last five decades are under attack from the Tories’ dual agenda of cuts and reactionary moralism. In education, too, the Tories’ attacks will affect women disproportionately, from attacks on sex education, to higher student debt which women will take longer to pay off, to the gutting of subject areas where women students and workers are concentrated.

Student women have been at the forefront of the revival in feminist discussion and activism. There is an obvious, pressing need to build a strong student women’s movement. We think this movement should be based on the principles of anticapitalist feminism – organising women workers and students for self-liberation, to challenge the structural basis of women’s oppression under capitalism.

In that spirit, we will give our support to efforts to build NCAFC Women as a strong national campaign among women students and education workers.

NCAFC Women will base its work around a Charter for Women in Education, which we will seek to develop over the coming months. Some ideas for the kind of demands we want to include in this charter are included below. We will seek to make links with women activists in UCU, Unison, NUT and other education unions in this campaign.

We will also seek to make links with campus women’s groups, and help activists to build women’s groups where they don’t currently exist; campaign for a women’s officer, and other dedicated liberation officers, in every student union; and seek to build a left opposition in NUS Women’s Campaign, with the goal of transforming it into the kind of fighting campaign student women need.

***

Charter for Women in Education – some ideas

* A commitment to support all those fighting sex and gender discrimination in our universities, schools and colleges.
* Fight the funding cuts, which will effect subjects where women are concentrated. Fight for publicly owned universities with decent funding.
* Free education and a living grant for every student to eliminate student debt.
* Support workers’ fight to depend they pay, conditions and pensions – women will lose out worst from the Tory attacks.
* Defend and extend university and student union childcare provision.
* Defend sex education against the Tories’ reactionary moralistic agenda. Fight the religious take over of parts of our school system. Defend and extend sexual health and reproductive rights services on campus.
* Fight for safety on campus – for decent lighting and transport, stop the cuts to campus support workers.
* Eliminate poverty pay – a living wage for all workers on our campuses.
* A serious fight to make equal pay a reality in our universities and colleges.
* A woman’s place is in her union – no to sexism in our student unions. Campaign for a women’s officer and a full-range of liberation officers in every SU. Fight to scrap men’s officers wherever they exist.
* For a campaigning women’s group on every campus
Esther T, University of East London