The Road to Wigan Pier Revisited

I usually use my blog to discuss democracy, student politics, being northern and inequality, in this post I am going to discuss all of these things.

In the Road to Wigan Pier Revisited Stephen Armstrong retraces George Orwell's trip across the North West. As he visits Sheffield, Manchester, Wigan and Liverpool, Armstrong finds a landscape that would have not been too unfamiliar to Orwell. He finds people who are living in abject poverty and communities that are fractious and often in conflict with themselves. The book is bleak but brilliant, there is never any judgement from Armstrong, he finds solace in stoic individuals, and takes away some lessons for all of us.

For Armstrong the class struggle is not an intellectual play thing, he feels it acutely with every person he meets. Some of the things that are discussed are worth remembering, in the UK 3.5m children live in poverty, 1.6m of those in severe poverty. Despite being a relatively wealthy country children in the UK have a disproportionately small chance of escaping poverty. Importantly,  Armstrong suggests that the poor make some people very rich, including those who take advantage of them, including Brighthouse who have previously posted revenues circa £200m. It is worth remembering that poverty is a construct, capitalism means there will always be winners and losers, and those who lose, lose badly.

It might seem unusual to bring this back to students' unions, but I think that there are things students' unions can do to help alleviate poverty and inequality, not just with students, but with society more broadly.

Armstrong asserts that it is predicted that up 500,000 people will be using foodbanks by 2015. The nutritional quality of food collected from foodbanks is often poor, food is favoured for its calorific content and the time it keeps before spoiling, rather than nutritional value. Students' unions have opened food cooperatives and sell food at cost price, if we are to integrate ourselves better in to the community we could advertise this service further. Students' unions have previously collected food for foodbanks, and gifted food to the homeless. Ultimately, small steps, but not without some good consequences.

Credit Unions are widely praised throughout the book as a means of providing finance at low interest rates. It is possible for students' unions to offer loans to their students without charging interest, especially poignant given how payday lenders are now specifically targeting students. It is probably beyond the realms of the charitable objectives of students' unions to establish themselves as credit unions, but it is something worth considering as part of our wider role in society.

Finally, the book discusses at length that one of the ways in which communities come together is through shared activity. There is nothing stopping students' unions advertising their societies more broadly to wider society and letting members of the community take part in them more readily. We already offer low cost activities to our students, and there is nothing to stop us extending this further.

In any case these are only some small steps, and will only make a small change to a limited number of people. Give Armstrong's book a read, it summarises my feelings on inequality in society far better than I can articulate them.

The Road to Wigan Pier is a fantastic.

SU 2034: Ideas on NUS Scrutiny.

In our own unions we all talk about the importance of democratic accountability. It is at the forefront of our collective consciousness, and the manifesto promises of many sabbs to improve how students can hold Officers to account. As Officers we generally trust that the work NUS Officers are doing is good, we tend to derive this from the glimpses of their work we catch from conferences, the work they put online, and NUS events. This is of course dependent on what NUS Officers choose to present, and if we happen to physically be at the events they are presenting it at. In other words, for an officer not elected to a position within the NUS democracy structures accountability can be a static process, if you are not at something it is hard to perform effective scrutiny.

The static nature of accountability extends to the democracy structures that are in place. NUS does some truly amazing work, as an Officer I am incredibly proud to be a member, and play an active role in NUS. If I want to hold an Officer to account I can of course email them, or pick up the phone, but again that is providing I know what they are doing. A NUS Officers workplan is often shaped by a mixture of; personal goals, policy passed at conference, work of zone committees, NEC policy and inherited work from previous Officers. On the one hand, it is much to the strength of NUS that there is a real democratic say in how the work of NUS is shaped, the agenda is truly set by Student Officers, and by extension students, in this regard. However, there are also issues with having the place of scrutiny as the place where work is shaped. Individuals in zone committees will no doubt perform excellent scrutiny, however they are also involved in the development of the work, which could be seen as a contradiction. Two, scrutiny comes from individuals elected to these democratic positions, however, the skills required to effectively scrutinise are not the same as those required to win an election, which may exclude some sabbs who would perform scrutiny functions really effectively. Finally, as we saw with NUS Conference, scrutiny is often dictated by political priority, meaning that the work of certain zones (UD this year) is not as discussed as much as it could be.

If there are structural difficulties in effective scrutiny there is also some more work to be done in providing sabbs with skills to scrutinise more effectively. The training we receive both from our Unions and nationally is largely focussed on delivering change and political objectives. Therefore, the way we hold NUS Officers to account is through approximating the way we would have done certain things differently, rather than objectively viewing decisions in terms of their delivery and how we could improve them. For example, the discussion around the Free Education Demo will be a discussion on a values match between people who do or do not agree with the demo, not scrutinising things like its cost, route, timing, value for money etc. Part of the reason is that no Officer joins NUS to approve minutes and scrutinise accounts. The second part, is that we aren't particularly encouraged to learn the skills associated with effective scrutiny; reading accounts, project management, and other such skills that allow the divorce of political direction from the effective running of a large organisation.

Therefore, scrutiny has to come from the bottom up, it is our responsibility as Officers to hold NUS to account. There are steps NUS could take to help us in this process. The various training events we attend could have a more practical element to them. When we are learning how to be a Sabbatical Officer it would be good to learn about how we add to the national movement, as well as work effectively in our own Unions, and to learn some 'hard skills' around scrutiny. This may be quite dry for an introduction to the student movement, it might be good to see more tutorials on things like reading accounts uploaded to NUS' online platform. Students' Unions are by their very nature internally focussed, when we hold trustee training we should build this in to a more city wide event, where sabbs from across the City from the no doubt variety of sized unions learn the skills on trusteeship as well as skills around running relatively large charities. We need to strengthen our alumni networks, former sabbs have a wealth of knowledge but are more divorced from the politcial decision making. Finally, it could be the time to reform the NEC and devolved its function to leave it as an interim politcial decision making body, and devolve its scrutiny function to a different committee entirely.

Finally, for effective scrutiny to take place it is necessary to move away from scrutiny as a static process. Scrutiny should not be about ensuring decisions fit within one political mantra (although political debate is incredibly important), but in providing effective mechanism to ensure that our collective decisions are open to all of our members. In reality, we don't talk to our own members often enough about the work NUS does. We await a backlash from hyperbolic headlines we respond to, or we rightly shout about our collective success. There is little in between, we rarely discuss the everyday stuff. How many of our members know that our General Election policies are inspired by the work of NUS, very few students will know NUS is launching a conversation on the role of students' unions in twenty years. For many NUS is a discount card, or a number they borrow off their mates for a Spotify discount. In our Student Councils and General Meetings we discuss our own work, the challenge for us should to be to discuss the work of NUS more broadly.

Let's add to the 2034 discussion and find out what our members want from NUS. With the knowledge of what our members want, we can scrutinise NUS better, and we might just be generally better for it. The 2034 discussions will hopefully include work on how we can alter structures to improve democratic participation, the challenge for students' union will be to equip ourselves and our members with the skills to work with NUS on their future, through the effective scrutiny of their function.

SU 2034: Future Proofing the Student Movement

This year marks twenty years since the introduction of the 1994 Education Act.  The student union movement is at a bit of a crossroads, if we are to survive the next twenty years it will be predicated on the work that we do now.  This means that it is an incredibly exciting time to be involved with the students’ union movement, and it is much to the credit of NUS that they are working on looking at the purpose and function of students’ unions in the future.

In looking forward to 2034 it is important to look at what the ’94 act is.  The ’94 act is primarily a piece of ideology enshrined in law.  Its original purpose was to introduce opt-in membership to students’ unions, John major who backed the bill described students’ unions as ‘one of the last bastions of the closed shop.’  Vigorous campaigning by students’ unions forced the government to water down these reforms, the two crucial things that became enshrined in the act are that students’ unions can only put money toward issues that ‘affect students as students’ and it enshrines in law that some form of students’ unions should exist within educational institutions.

It is therefore unsurprising that with another Conservative government there are a tranche of new threats to students’ unions from government.  The governments’ lobbying act which limits the amount of money charities can spend in the run up to an election can be considered the starting gun on limiting the scope to act on issues that ‘affect students as students.’  The biggest single threat from government would be the revival of individual student registration to ‘opt-in’ to be a member of a students’ union.  Student cannot opt out of society, nor can they opt out of the conditions a university imposes on them (other than by leaving.)  Individual registration would limit students’ unions ability to claim to be the authentic voice of students, and would inevitably lead to a decline in the popularity of students’ unions, and the resources put in to them.  Furthermore, the government continues to privatise elements of universities which excludes students’ unions. There is a rise in private institutions where laws on student representation don’t apply and last week it was announced that the quality assurance process for universities would be put out for public procurement.  The QAA who are currently responsible for quality assurance ensure students are at the heart of quality reviews, this could change in a new regime.  If students’ unions lose their voice through increased privatisation and through limiting the opportunity to take part in review the academic quality of their institutions, there is a real danger that the government could limit the function of students’ unions as a whole.

In light of this it is also worth considering the role universities play in the future of students’ unions.  Students’ unions at their best are integral in the long term planning and quality assurance of their parent institutions.  When treated as equals students’ unions can work incredibly effectively in improving students overall educational experience.  Instead of equality what is frequently happening is that institutions are purposely encroaching on the role of students’ unions, opening up ‘student experience departments,’ running student services better placed with unions and playing an ever greater role in managing supposedly independent democracy structures, such as course reps.  Even where students’ unions are functionally independent they are often prevented from having an equality of voice in decision making, many students’ unions are barred from sitting on committees that makes high level decisions, and in many cases are not made aware of the financial environment in which the university operates.  Students’ unions are dependant on universities for block grant, by the nature of this umbilical relationship there will always be a threat that one day the university sector could turn round and dramatically reduce funding, with an ever increasing consumerist agenda in education it may not be as unlikely as it would have once seemed.  If universities undertake some of the role of students’ unions, deny them an equality of voice and starve them of funding it is important that students’ unions assert their independence in other ways.

Students’ unions continue to survive by adapting to the environment they are in.  In an era where students’ unions are also registered charities financial stability is key.  Between 1997-2007 students’ unions commercial revenue declined by around 40%.  The increased commercialisation of students’ unions premises has been unpalatable for some, but there must be a balance between ensuring financial independence from parent institutions and maintaining a sense of identity in students’ union buildings.  As a movement the strength of students’ unions is in their relevance to students.  If students’ unions forget they are before anything else political representatives then they lose their function.  Students’ unions will save themselves by continuing to make the lives of students better.  It sad but it is a fact of modern higher education that existence is predicated on the ability to show value.

Whilst this may be bad news students’ unions have reasons to be optimistic.  In the UK students’ unions are in many respects the best mass collection of unionised individuals.  Whilst NUS is not a trade union in a classic sense its 7m membership is more than all other UK trade unions combined.  It is a collective voice that has no doubt made the lives of students better over a number of years.  In recent months  NUS forced the government to make a U-turn to cuts to Disabled Students’ Allowance.  NUS time and time again makes the government think again, it forces change to the higher education sector and is a powerful mechanism through which wider societal change is achieved.

It is encouraging NUS are looking forward to the next 20 years.  With continued hard work and a continued focus on what is the purpose of students’ unions the student movement will remain strong for some time yet.  In being aware of the threats of the future, the movement is best armed to ensure its continued existence.

Democracy in Schools

This week I spent some time talking to the Schools' Parliament. Schools across Liverpool elect representatives who meet to discuss issues from across the City, collectively they form the Schools' Parliament. There is a lower house for pupils from infants school, and an upper house for pupils from junior schools. The two houses are supposed to feed in to the Council's planning for the year, especially in areas relating to young people. On Wednesday I worked with some junior school pupils on the things they would like to see the Council do in the coming year.

The Schools Parliament had achieved some pretty impressive things in recent years, including successfully lobbying the Council for a young persons' bus pass. Furthermore, the issues the pupils came back with were better formed than I would have previously assumed. The most pressing concern for many of the pupils was the number of homeless people in the City, after a bit of prodding the pupils thought this was possibly down to lack of affordable rented housing in Liverpool; although one year 8 thought it was the deficit to blame, which seemed to be a very nuanced answer for a 12 year old. The other issues that pupils came back with were; youth unemployment, lack of things to do, poor transport and lack of mental health provision in school. As this activity continued it quickly became apparent that students' unions aren't alone in some of the issues we campaign for, and we could involve schools more. Surprisingly many of the pupils had an NUS card.

NUS in future years could well seek to extend its reach further in to schools. In years gone by it would have seen inconceivable that NUS would have worked with colleges so successfully, it would have seemed even more unlikely that NUS would begin work with student apprentices. Working with schools with present issues, school pupils lack much free time due to 9-5 scheduling, they lack independent governance structures and schools are generally underfunded in setting up schools councils, relying on already overstretched teachers to give up their free time. This is not to say students' unions could not help to alleviate some of these barriers.

Where students' unions could provide more support is in helping schools' councils develop a level of independence from their school. There is scope for Officers and Staff to work with pupils on developing skills they would need in order to run their own student council; public speaking skills, chairing meetings, writing an agenda etc. This would help develop pupils skills which will serve them later in life, as well as helping pupils develop an independence of thought that will allow them to serve as that 'critical friend' to their school. There are so many possibilities in helping to develop schools councils. Offering local pupils the chance to do work placements, offering free room space, running debates with students on schools councils, and generally being a place for advice and guidance could all help student councillors develop.

In supporting school pupils to run their own governance structures we amplify the voice of young people in the city in which we live. There are no doubt a number of challenges, and the function and purpose of schools councils are by no means always clear. With time and the right levels of support schools could be the next place that NUS can exert and influence, and represent on a national scale.

Crime, Collectivism and Cooperatives.

It has been a good week at Liverpool Guild of Students. We're little over a week from the beginning of Welcome Week which means that we are planning a whole range of things in anticipation of the students coming back. It is all a bit too quiet over at Guild towers, and I can't wait to see everyone again. Not that it hasn't been nice to see our Postgraduate and some of our medical students filtering back this week.

The first thing that we've been working on this week is bike crime. It might not sound very important, or indeed very glamorous, but bike crime is the number one crime on our campus. From September up until Christmas there is a spike in bike crime across the University. Giving that we are a students' union committed to sustainability we don't want anybody to have any excuse not to travel in an environmentally friendly way. There is no bigger excuse than not cycling due to having lost your bike through theft. To reduce bike theft we have ordered 50 bike locks that we will be handing out in the weeks following Welcome Week to students who have particularly poor bike locks. Alongside this the security on campus will be installing new signs to deter thieves as well as remaining ever vigilant. It has cost us a bit of money to hand out the bike locks for free, but it will be money well spent if we can reduce bike theft significantly across campus.

Secondly, this week we have finalised plans for Liverpool Guild's very first food cooperative. The Guild is in a difficult place in selling retail, it is surrounded by retail outlets on every side. Where we differ from retailers is that our motivations are not drive by shareholders, they are driven by our student membership. We know that the cost of living is ever increasing, and that vegetables may often be one of the first food stuffs to be dropped from the shopping list when times are hard. Shortly after Welcome Week we will launch our food cooperative wherein we are looking at selling four vegetables all year round, with a rotating stock of three seasonal vegetables. As the cooperative expands we will be looking to sell vegetables that we grow in our roof garden, as well as developing the provision to order vegetables in advance. Green, cheap for students and supporting local business.

Finally, in what is the campaign I am most proud to have taken part in, in my time as an Officer the government has made a u-turn over their decision to cut Disabled Students' Allowance! Disabled Students' Allowance is funding that provides disabled students with specialist equipment and non-specialist support. After receiving testimonies from students throughout this campaign it quickly became apparent that this funding was the difference between attending, and not attending, University for some of our students. Students' unions lobbied the government to reverse this cut, and today it was announced that this cut has been postponed for at least a year. A remarkable win for students, and a testament to the power of students' unions when they work together.

This week has been a particularly good one. Next week is the final week before all of our students get back; I can't wait.

Why The Guild Makes Money

Last week I attended National Union of Students Services Convention. NUS Services is the commercial arm of the NUS. NUS Services resources students’ unions through three core services: purchasing, commercial development and infrastructure support. The idea of the NUS having any sort of commercial activity sits uncomfortably with some. Much like the Guild all of the money NUS generates is directly reinvested into the experience of the membership. The money generated is invested into things like offering students’ unions discounts on goods, providing staff support and ensuring the NUS remains financially viable in the long term future.

On the idea of the future of students’ unions one of the main areas of discussion was around operating franchises from within students’ unions. This is inviting private companies to run outlets such as; bars, coffee shops, retail spaces and food outlets. Evidence shows that students prefer spending money at franchises rather than in services ran by their students’ unions. One students’ union spoke at length how having a franchise generated hundreds of thousands of pounds they were able to directly reinvest into the student experience. Financial freedom from universities and colleges is one of the best ways students’ unions can ensure they can be an effective voice at lobbying their institution on behalf of students.

The higher education climate we currently operate in is subject to market conditions. We have seen other students’ unions receive a cut in their block grant when their institutions have had to make budget cuts. A commercially and financially successful students’ union is the best way to insulate ourselves from the reach our parent institution, and from the threats presented by an uncertain financial climate. Given that Liverpool Guild of Students is a charity all of our money is reinvested into improving the lives of students, it is imperative to our existence and your experience that the Guild remains profitable.

Of course this profit doesn’t need to solely come from franchising . University of Gloucester Students’ Union delivered a presentation on social enterprise schemes they ran. These are businesses ran by students wherein the profits are reinvested into the students’ union. They had found particular success in growing their own chilies which they made into a variety of products for sale. Other students’ unions have ran a whole range of social enterprises; from farming bees to make honey, to running property agencies.

 Liverpool Guild of Students operates under an ethical investment policy. Everything we do is in the best interest of our members and in the interest of securing the long-term future of our organisation. There are so many opportunities to be innovative in making the Guild financially successful whilst opening up business opportunities for students that will provide skills for later employment. The financial success of Liverpool Guild of Students allows us to do all the things we do for our members, this must be tempered against the fact that our primary aim is not to make money. As one delegate at the convention quipped ,‘If students’ unions were interested in just making money they would open a betting shop.’

What Can the Labour Party Offer Young People?

Tony Blair proclaimed in 1997 that his three main priorities in government were ‘education, education, education.’ This has not translated to an increase in votes from young people. Voter turnout between 1997 and 2005 amongst those aged 18-24 fell from an estimated 54.1% of this age range in 1997, down to 38.2% in 2005. By contrast, voter turnout amongst those who are aged over 65 has never fallen below 70% since 1964. As voters aged over 65 are more likely to vote for Conservative, Labour must build a consistent electoral base by widening their appeal to young voters.

These statistics become even more shocking when looking at recent EU elections where only 18% of young people voted. A recent report carried out by the European Youth Forum and International Institution for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, found that this lack of turnout was because young people felt ignored by politicians. Quite simply young people do not vote as politics and politicians do not seem relevant to them.

Labour are set to lower the voting age to sixteen if they are elected at the next election. This is an important first step in engaging young people with politics. There is an odd disconnect in that at 16 it is possible to pay taxes and join the army, yet young people are unable to take part in a democratic process that affects their daily life. If Labour are to align themselves as the party who are on the side of young people there can be no better start than allowing more young people to vote. Allowing more young people to vote will enable a shift in the policy of any party elected, and Labour must be ready for such a change.

If Labour are to extend the number of young people eligible to vote they must offer policy to engage them. It was correct to introduce compulsory citizenship classes – however, these are often poorly taught. If young people are to engage in politics, citizenship must be taught properly and extensively throughout the country. In terms of policy, with young people facing the spectre of both an increase in the cost of living and a lack of available full time work Labour must keep to its promise of a job guarantee. This should be coupled with a greater provision for training in the workplace. Labour should help small businesses provide additional training for young people they employ, to help their company to grow and to help young people ward off the prospect of returning to long term unemployment.

Labour need to look more fundamentally at what it can offer young people. Britain has an education system that is distinctly favoured toward the wealthiest in society. It may seem impossible in the current climate but Labour needs to offer hope to those who are not born in to wealth. Hope that they can achieve. Hope that there will be jobs for them to go to, hope that they will have access to free health care, hope that they will one day be able to own their own home, and hope more than anything, that after years of financial mismanagement ‘things can only get better’. Labour was the party that led the way on issues such as sure start centres to ensure young people could get the best start in life. If Labour is to be successful with young people it must make the fundamental changes that mean young people can succeed, whilst offering policies that make young people buy into the Labour Party.

Labour must ensure that as many young people as possible are eligible to vote in the next general election. This is the demographic that are most likely to vote Labour – and the demographic who are most ignored by politicians.