By Jack Cross
The National Union of Students (NUS) is intended to be the national advocacy body for student unions like UWA’s Guild, bringing together each university’s student union to form a single body that can speak on the national stage. However, the NUS has faced sustained criticism for years for its entrenched and volatile factionalism, abuse and misconduct by delegates, and ineffectiveness.
The recent NUS Education Conference (EdCon), held in WA for the first time in a decade, was no different. In the words of the NUS President Ngaire Bogemann,
…it goes without saying that this EdCon was a display of the worst the student union movement has to offer. The NUS cannot continue to run conferences with this level of inaccessibility and lack of regard for safe and respectful discussion, and it is now more than ever very disappointing to see reforms […] continually be rejected by conference floor. (Report to NUS National Executive, 31 July 2024)
What does Bogemann mean by “the worst the student union movement has to offer”?
Bogemann (a senior member of the Labor Left faction, National Labor Students) is referring to the behaviour of some delegates – particularly the members of the Socialist Alternative (SAlt) faction – whose primary method of engagement with their peers is to scream abuse and demands as loudly as possible, as aggressively as possible, as frequently as possible. Bogemann is probably also referencing SAlt’s successful efforts to derail the conference, which meant around half of the scheduled sessions did not proceed as planned, in exchange for some minor media coverage of a speech endorsing Senator Fatima Payman. The organiser of EdCon Grace Franco, who is the NUS Education Officer and a member of the Labor Right faction Student Unity, admitted in her report that the conference was “unproductive and unsafe”.
Guild Council moved to partially acknowledge the situation at its July meeting, endorsing a motion by Access Department Co-Officers Olivia Stronach (who recently penned an article about her experiences at EdCon) and Lucinda Bartlett acknowledging the inaccessibility of the conference. The motion was seconded by Luke Alderslade, who in his report to Council described his experience at EdCon as one of “abrasiveness and partisanship”, although noted the NUS still holds promise.
The only member of Council to vote against the motion was Alevine Magila, elected last year on the Left Action ticket (this year Social Justice) and a senior member of SAlt. Magila defended the actions of the organisation, arguing that “we should not equate discomfort with harm”, and that their actions were necessary to hold NUS officeholders to account for their perceived inaction on SAlt’s policy priorities (namely, supporting pro-Palestine protestors on campus).
This latest NUS spectacle has sparked some serious reflection by student unions around the country. The WA State Branch President Heidee Austic, President of the Murdoch Guild and a member of Student Unity, reported that EdCon “was a big topic at WA universities this month [July]” and that the Murdoch Guild Council “are unsure of their willingness to be a part of the NUS going forward.”
Part of the response to these concerns has been the establishment of an “NUS Reform Working Group”, an initiative spearheaded by Mia Campbell, the President of the University of Technology Students’ Association and also a member of Student Unity. This group, which counts several members of the National Executive amongst its number, has reportedly focused on overhauling the governance structures of the NUS and improving transparency. The working group aims to put forward motions at the next meeting of the National Executive, which is due to be held on 23 August.
What this might lead to is unclear. As Bogemann’s report indicates, any serious reform will need to be endorsed by delegates, both formally to make the necessary changes to the NUS’s regulations, but informally, in that delegates need to make a choice to change their own conduct and behaviour. SAlt is known to be strongly opposed to many of these changes in principle, arguing that they could stifle debate and reduce the accountability of NUS leadership. Although SAlt commands a minority of the conference floor, changes will require near-universal acceptance to be effective. The faction has been invited to participate in the reform discussions, but what changes – if any – it will endorse has yet to be seen.
It is significant that there is now serious consideration of reform even by the National Executive. The NUS is dominated by Student Unity who hold a sizeable majority both on the National Executive and on the conference floor. Endorsement of reform proposals by Unity’s senior leadership could see some changes enacted before December’s National Conference, where more substantial change could be endorsed.
Many reports made to Guild Council over the past few years by NUS delegates have noted the structural and cultural issues the NUS faces. But just as frequently have Guild representatives pointed to the potential of the NUS to be an effective advocacy body if it could overcome its internal issues. Momentum appears to be building within the NUS for serious reform. The direction they move in, or whether they stall out, will shape the future of student advocacy in Australia.