LGBT Campaign Policy 2006-2010 Contents Purpose of this document 2 Policy Lapse 2 What you need to do 2 Policy Policy passed at LGBT Conference 2006 3 Policy passed at LGBT Conference 2007 15 Policy passed at LGBT Conference 2008 29 Policy passed at LGBT Conference 2009 49 Policy passed at LGBT Conference 2010 76 Purpose of this document This document contains all the policy currently in effect for the NUS LGBT Campaign. This is the policy that the LGBT Officers and Committee are responsible for implementing and is sometime known as ‘Live Policy’. The Committee reports back on the resolutions of the previous Conference in its report to LGBT Conference Conference, but does not have to mention policy from the preceding meetings. Policy Lapse Policy Lapses in 2 circumstances 1. If a subsequent policy over-rides it 2. After 5 years unless LGBT Conference votes to renew it. Policy passed at Conference 2006 will lapse at the end of LGBT Conference 2011. What you need to do If you are considering submitting policy to LGBT Conference you should first check whether any policy is currently ‘live’ for that issue and whether you need to change the National Union’s current stance on that area of work. If you require this document in an alternative format contact [email protected] POLICY PASSED AT LGBT CONFERENCE 2006 This Policy lapses this year STRONG & ACTIVE UNIONS ZONE Heading: Blood – The fight goes on Conference Believed: 1. The high profile campaign to change the homophobic policies of the National Blood Transfusion Services being run by the NUS Scotland LGBT campaign and Liverpool Guild LGBT. 2. The newly adopted stance of the American Red Cross which states that it is time for the American Ban on Gay blood donations to be lifted and a time limited deferral to be put in place 3. The current stance of Blood Transfusion organisations in Australia, Spain, Italy, South Africa and most recently Portugal, who all accept donations from Gay men. 4. The changing epidemiological profile of HIV/Aids which now sees infections amongst heterosexuals increasing at a much larger rate than homosexual people. Conference Further Believed: 1. That the NUS Scotland blood day of action on march 9 th was a huge success, increasing participation in the campaign and informing the public about the discrimination faced by gay and bisexual men. 2. That changes to blood donation regulations in other countries is strengthening the case for the permanent ban on gay and bisexual blood donations to be lifted in the UK. 3. That Gay and Bisexual men should be allowed to donate blood in line with other blood service regulations. 4. That a time limited deferment would be better placed to protect the nation’s blood supply because it would be based upon an individual’s behaviour not their sexual orientation. Conference Resolved: 1. To continue as a priority the blood transfusion campaign using the NUS Scotland campaign as an example of good practice 2. to continue the constructive engagement with the Blood Transfusion services. 3. To continue to contact LGBT organisations abroad to share good practice and keep up to date with an ever evolving picture across the globe. 4. To work with NUS–USI LGBT, NUS Scotland LGBT and NUS Wales LGB to coordinate the campaign nationally. Heading: Disabled LGBT Students Conference Believed: 1. That Disabled people are often seen as asexual. 2. That Disabled people who are also LGBT face multi oppression. 3. That society is exclusive to disabled people and, in particular, the gay scene can be incredibly inaccessible. 4. That a recent study of London’s gay scene found that 9 out of 10 venues were physically inaccessible and 8 out of 10 of Manchester’s gay scene was physically inaccessible. 5. That the social model of disability argues that discrimination and barriers cause disability, not individual impairments. Conference Further Believed: 1. That the LGBT campaign and the SWD campaign have recently been working hard together to ensure that the issues faced by Disabled LGBT students are considered. 2. That LGBT/SWD cross liberation work is vital for our national union to engage in. 3. That both campaigns should be congratulated for their work on this issue so far. 4. That the social model of disability is conformed to by NUS and the SWD campaign. 5. That the SWD campaign recently changed its name to ‘Disabled Students Campaign’ to conform to the social model of disability. Conference Resolved: 1. To ensure that Disabled LGBT people are a significant part of one of the LGBT priority campaigns in 2006-2007. 2. To make every effort to conform to the social model of disability. 3. To empower the steering committee to change all references to ‘SWD’ and/or ‘students with disabilities’ to ‘Disabled students’ in the standing orders and renumber accordingly. 4. To hold a liberation workshop day in 2006 or 2007 in conjunction with the SWD campaign to educate student officers on the issues faced by Disabled LGBT people and encourage proactive campaigning on this issue. Heading: Trans Conference Believed: 1. That the Trans community only has 1 representative where as other liberation groups Conference Resolved: 1. To carry out a review of all cross-liberation post and the standing orders. To empower rules revision committee to create and insert a second “Trans representative” post into our Standing Orders. To empower the Trans caucus to decide whether this is a non-franchised or a franchised women’s post. 2. To send a motion to annual conference (the number 13) in line with this amendment. Heading: FE within the LGBT Campaign Conference Believed: 1. FE is a substantial caucus within the LGBT campaign. 2. Homophobic attitudes are often more prevalent in FE than HE 3. With 14 to 19 age brackets in college there are younger members of our community in colleges who are not represented. 4. In FE Sexual health is an issue, which is often ignored. 5. Many FE officers are do not have much experience and often need higher levels of support. 6. There is a lack of relevant training for FE LGBT officers and groups 7. Many LGBT campaigns and events do not fit in well in FE and are not inclusive of the issues in FE. Conference Further Believed: 1. The representation and involvement of FE within the Campaign is essential. 2. FE LGBT officers and groups need LGBT trainings, events and campaigns that are relevant to them and can be used in FE colleges 3. Homophobic attitudes often go unchallenged in FE 4. FE college LGBT officers and groups are often in need of support from local HEs, due to poor funding and lack of experience 5. Many LGBT social events involve alcoholic environments, which are inaccessible to many FE students 6. There has been a history within the LGBT campaign, of HE delegates patronising FE delegates and of intimidation towards FE, which is unacceptable Conference Resolved: 1. To run a priority campaign involving FE that will increase the participation of FE colleges and work on FE specific issues. 2. To run an FE caucus day which will highlight the issues of being LGB or T in FE therefore increasing participation, raising awareness and working on issues. 3. Work alongside the FE Reps of other liberation campaigns to produce an “FE Liberation Pack” 4. To liaise with the FE caucus to ensure that campaign materials are relevant to and able to be used in FE. 5. To ensure that events run by the LGBT campaign are accessible to FE students. 6. To produce a briefing for FE LGBT groups and officers to help them campaign and highlight FE LGBT issues. 7. To include FE specific training in the training and events part of the LGBT campaign 8. To highlight both the importance of FE and what FE LGBT issues are to HEs and to encourage HE LGBT groups and officers to support FE LGBT groups and officers 9. To work towards combating homophobic attitudes in FE. Heading: The Really Big and Important Motion Conference Believed: 1. That successful struggles for LGBT liberation in our colleges, campuses and communities require strong and active LGBT groups in all our member unions in Further and Higher Education. 2. That too often, LGBT groups are not integrated and involved with the wider work of the students’ union; many officers do not sit on the union executive, council or other decision making structures. 3. That many LGBT groups find their autonomy compromised by a misreading of ultra vires laws and a lack of autonomous decision making structures. 4. That many LGBT groups do not receive sufficient resources to undertake the wide range of work needed to support the education and welfare of its members. 5. That some LGBT groups find it difficult run vibrant campaigns where there has not been an established campaigning culture in place. 6. That in FE some students have encountered barriers to establishing LGBT groups, particularly sixth form colleges. 7. That many LGBT groups can find our democratic structures difficult to navigate and costs of participation prohibitive. 8. That the LGBT movement is still dominated by gay men; LBT women, bisexual women and trans students must also feel welcome and involved in our movement so that their needs may be addressed. 9. That we need a strong volunteers strategy, for recruiting, retaining and developing our activist volunteer base. 10. That we should organise our campaign around the four zones of work our campaign politically organises around. 11. previously we have had committee members who are based in the NW being responsible for East Anglia – this idea is ludicrous.