State of the Unions PAPER BRIEFING How to Restore Free Association and Expression, Combat Extremism and Make Student Unions Effective
State of the Unions BRIEFING PAPER How to restore free association and expression, combat extremism and make student unions effective By Maximilian Young and Lucky Dube EXECUTIVE SUMMARY • Student unions are student-led groups that are supposed to represent students on campus to university administrations, provide useful services, and support clubs and associations. • Student unions cost taxpayers and students £165 million per annum, an average of £75 per student per annum or £225 over a three year degree course. This is evenly split between taxpayers and students. They employ 600 full-time stu- dent sabbatical officers. • Student unions are perceived as ineffective by students, lack democratic legiti- macy, and undermine freedom of association and expression. • This has little to do with money available: student unions that receive higher block grants from universities tend to be poorer performing in the National Stu- dent Survey. • Only one-in-ten students actively participate in student union elections. Nev- ertheless, students are forced to be members of student unions, undermining freedom of association. • Many student unions are using taxpayer and student money to pursue a narrow political agenda that is irrelevant to representing students. These campaigns tend to follow a specific, “social justice,” political agenda focused on tackling alleged “structural oppression” against minority groups. • In pursuit of this agenda, student unions have sought to control student activ- ity, such as stopping students from wearing sombreros, putting on fancy dress, buying Bacardi rum, clapping, whooping and cheering, and eating meat. • Student unions have also sought to limit free speech, by limiting or blocking the selling of certain publications, failing to prevent or encouraged violence at meetings, seeking to approve speeches in advance, blocking the formation of free speech societies, imposing meeting rules, barring certain groups from freshers’ fairs, and requiring excessive red tape for speakers of which they dis- approve.
[Show full text]