UPDATE: The referendum was tied on 77 votes each for options one and three. A total of 185 students voted in the referendum (around 1% of the student body). A run off (another round of voting) will decide between the two options from Monday 27th to Friday 31st January. To vote visit www.swansea-union.co.uk

FOLLOWING a long, tortuous and botched consultation process in which the views of students seemed destined never to be taken into account, the decision on what the five new students’ union officer roles should be was finally being revealed on Monday [27 January].

Students voted early last term to cut the number of full-time roles from seven to five. At the time SU president Zahid Raja promised: “There will be a university-wide survey of how students want to be represented.”

But the online consultation and lunchtime focus groups that followed, designed by the NUS, never actually gave students an opportunity to say what they thought the new roles should be.

A leaked email from Zahid Raja also showed that that the NUS was not going to take the focus groups data into account when compiling their report, in any case.

The report subsequently produced by the NUS came up with recommendations for the new roles – including scrapping the international officer – but it was withdrawn in embarrassment when it was discovered that the recommendations breached the NUS’s own policy guidelines.

With the consultation process now in disarray and students away from university for the Christmas break, Swansea SU quickly arranged an online poll to finally give students a chance to say what they thought the new roles should be.

With time running short though, only 88 responses were received. These responses then formed the basis of yet another online poll, with students being given a choice of six combinations of roles to vote for.

The result of that poll will go before the students’ union executive on Monday for it to be acknowledged. SU president Zahid Raja described the poll as “pretty much binding”.

Some students have expressed anger and disappointment over the way the whole process has been handled.

One student, who asked not to be named, said: “I’ve voted or taken part in an online consultation five times now and I still don’t feel like I’ve had any impact.”

Lewys Arôn, Welsh affairs officer, said: “Given the circumstances that followed a botched and frankly unprofessional report from NUS, I feel that the union had to “make do” with the responses provided online.
“Given the magnitude of the decision I do not feel that the responses of around 90 students provides a sufficient mandate to decide five full-time officer roles, although this had to be done, given the time scale.
“It is essential that the next batch of FTOs in the following academic year carry out a full, professional consultation in order to accurately represent the views of students.”

During the NUS consultation last term, Swansea University students were asked how they wanted decisions to be made on their behalf. The results showed that 83 % of students wanted campus-wide ballots where everyone gets a vote. Only 6% wanted elected reps to make decisions on their behalf.

We put some questions to Zahid Raja, SU president, and this is what he said:

1) Why was the consultation not set up originally to ask students what they thought the new roles should be?
The students’ union wanted an external organisation to carry out the consultation. NUS assured us (whilst we considered the referendum over the summer) that they would be able to carry out the consultation and produce an independent report outlining 5 roles based on student feedback.

2) Why was it left until after Christmas to give students a chance to say what they thought the new roles should be?
Unfortunately, the NUS report came out after term had finished, leaving the Students’ Union no time to mobilise.

3) Why is the decision being taken by the students’ union executive when only 6% of students want elected reps to make the decision on their behalf, with no guarantee that students’ wishes will be taken into account?
The NUS report that you’re citing was not strong enough to base a decision. I therefore put forward a proposal that the executive committee make no decision and give students the final say. Student feedback about the roles was used to construct possible teams which are being voted on by students.

4) Do you think that the whole consultation has been a fiasco?
I’d say it’s been less than ideal. A fiasco would have been a committee which most students know little about making a decision on the roles based on an NUS report which students have little confidence in. We’ve not done that. We’ve given students the final say. We made the difficult decision to cut into the time which we’d usually use to promote the elections to make sure we give students the biggest possible opportunity to have their say.

Comment Below (Moderated)

comments