Transform NUS into a Democratic Fighting Union

Bob Severn

The National Union of Students, NUS, is made up of 5.2 million members from the Higher and Further Education sectors. This, as the NUS is proud to mention, makes up 13% of the British electorate. So why then has this body failed to stop New Labour making post-18 education more and more expensive?

In April 2004 top-up fees were voted through the House of Commons by only five votes. While that crucial vote was taking place, the NUS failed to mobilise the widespread opposition to further attacks on Higher Education in a mass demonstration to exert pressure on the government.

NUS again failed to call for a national demonstration in England in autumn 2004, which showed a lack of fight and missed the opportunity to mobilise thousands of students. No wonder many students now know the Union only as a discount shop.

The demonstration that did take place in Cardiff on December 2^nd 2004, with the idea of stopping fees being passed by the Welsh assembly, seemed to be more an admittance of defeat in England rather than a solid tactical move. The change of venue, along with the lack of promotion, resulted in only 3000 demonstrators.

Following the Commons vote, the Education Bill approving variable or ‘top-up’ fees passed through the House of Lords in July 2004, so the extra price for attending Higher Education will be introduced to new students from September 2006. The average total cost of a degree is nearing £20,000. By 2008, due to top-up fees and increased living costs, the average student graduate debt could be as high as £33,708.

NUS also has a financial crisis; a massive deficit of well over £500,000. The NUS leadership pushed through ‘democratic reforms’ at two emergency conferences in 2004 as part of their attempt to reduce this debt. These extra-ordinary conferences gave less democracy for decisions than the NUS Annual Conference due to the reduced delegations and lack of event promotion. A higher proportion of delegates were local students’ union full-time paid executives, rather than rank and file students. Less promotion and time was given for local union students to put forward motions and amendments.

The ‘democratic reforms’ voted through have resulted in less opportunity for democratic input, especially from Further Education (FE) students. In the second extra-ordinary conference of 2004, at Wolverhampton in November, the NUS leadership pushed through the main ratification motion vote (to make the passed motions of the previous extra-ordinary conference constitutional) as a whole without allowing debate on each component.

The FE component removed the requirement of a Further Education committee and conference. Half of the NUS debt is due to FE Unions disaffiliating from the national union and cancelling their subscription fees due to lack of representation in the NUS. This constitutional change is more likely to increase FE disaffiliation rather than solve financial problems!

The National Conference length has been reduced to two days by the National Executive Committee (NEC) due to cost, but NUS President Kat Fletcher has been reported to propose spending up to £80,000 on an external consulting to review campaigning. Kat Fletcher was, in 2004, elected as the first non-Labour Students NUS president for over 20 years, showing the anger that exists among students against New Labour spin and careerism. Now, however, Fletcher seems to be limiting both democracy and action.

At the 2005 National Conference no Labour Students candidates were elected to the NEC. There are, however, ‘Independents’ – elected by claiming they have no links to New Labour or Labour Students – who, after election, support right-wing ‘reforms’ and democratic cuts. Some (including Kat Fletcher), though not being members of Labour Students, are members of the Labour Party.

Another ‘reform’ voted through at Conference 2005 was the introduction of the ‘NUS Extra Card’; a £10 card giving extra discounts at shops and services in contract with NUS. This card would create a two-tier union and strengthen the image of NUS as a discount club, instead of a Union fighting for students’ rights.

To defend and improve the standards of Education for all - not just those who can afford it – NUS must be a fighting democratic union of students. An act being written into law, like variable fees have now been, does not mean it is irremovable. It does mean firm, active opposition is needed to defeat that law. The right to strike and the rights for working class men and women to vote were all fought for from the bottom-up but with conscious leadership.

The NUS Education Manifesto, accredited to President Kat Fletcher and Vice-president Hannah Essex, points out that the union should not just be seen as fee fighters (some might say they are not even seen as fee fighters). This document gives some good policies that Socialist Students agree with, from ‘the abolition of tuition fees and any form of student contribution’ to ‘teachers and lecturers must be adequately valued for the work they do’. There are policies to improve the funding and quality of education in full-time, part-time, 16-19, nursing, adult learning, key workers and teacher training, as well as building trade unionism among student workers.

Many of the manifesto statements, however, fall short of making any real challenge to education management though. On housing, the document pushes for ‘safe, secure and affordable housing’ through regulation of public and private student halls and landlords. No argument is made for the reversal of (or even opposition to) the continuing selling-off of student halls by universities into private hands, to companies such as Unite whose very nature makes profit their senior concern. Student halls should be publicly owned and managed by student representatives who put safe, secure and affordable housing among their priorities, so that rent revenue is put directly back into student accommodation and education instead of a director’s back pocket.

While ‘NUS is encouraged by Government targets for participation in education, training and employment across the Department for Education and Skills (DFES) and Department for Work and Pensions’ no clear challenge is made to Labour’s aim to cut 104,000 civil service jobs – 20% of the workforce - which threatens the quality of civil services.

Most importantly, the Education Manifesto says that the document’s policies can be ‘funded through system of progressive taxation of personal and business income.’ While an active mass students and workers movement could force a government into short term concessions of this nature, since the election of New Labour in 1997 the only tax increases have taken money from the hands of working and middle class people, while billionaires have seen their contributions go down.

Socialist Students of course support progressive taxation: higher taxes on the rich to fund essential services. In today’s global free market economy, however, dominated by a few corporations, multinational companies would attempt to escape these contributions by, for example, registering their home office in another country or moving production abroad (which often means workers loosing their jobs). In the mid 60s, when Howard Wilson’s Labour Government spoke of even a measly profit tax, big business threatened a strike of capital to prevent this.

The only way to ensure in the long term that education is properly publicly funded is through the democratic nationalisation of the top corporations and financial institutions and managed by elected workers instead of overpaid executives. This, again, would require a mass movement with a conscious leadership.

The current NUS leadership are now acting as a barrier to any mass mobilisation. For the December 2004 Cardiff demonstration the slogan used was ‘take your vote to the streets’ as a main campaigning strategy seems to be ‘register to vote’. Vote for whom? No indication was made, just that ‘[the] general election provides NUS with the opportunity to ensure political parties, MPs and the present Government respond to the needs of today's students.’

The response of the Tories is to cut fees by cutting courses to reverse opportunity in HE participation to that of 40 years ago, and the Liberal Democrats say they would remove fees but privatise almost everything. All three mainstream parties represent and are funded by different sections of big business. That many students do not vote shows the anger at lack of representation as much as it is apathy. No step is made to support left wing, socialist and community candidates whose ties are with ordinary people instead of profiteers. NUS argue that ‘Unity is our strength’, but with an NEC mainly containing Labour Students members, ‘independents’ and careerists with a minority of left representatives, it seems they are united on this issue by a deafening silence.

In the past few years NUS has made some good steps in building opposition to attacks on public education. In March 2003 there were weeks of action including a day of national strikes where thousands of students demonstrated instead of attending lectures. The 2004 NUS national strike was held in solidarity with the Association of University Teachers (AUT) members, striking to defend decent pay and workers rights. This shows the potential of students and workers linking-up to oppose all attacks on education.

NUS have also continually lobbied MPs, ministers and senior civil servants. Events have proven thought that this is not enough. Measures such as ‘email your MP’ only have a very limited effect and do little to help build a mass movement. Showing the lack of force NUS has is that in 2003, out of 5.2 members, only ‘750,000 registered users of nusonline were emailed asking them to take action. 2600 emails have been sent from the site.’ Unfortunately the NUS leadership is now stepping back on mobilisation. The Cardiff demonstration was only attended by 3000 students as supposed to 23,000 on the 2002 London demo.

Since then, the Welsh Assembly has voted against the introduction of top-up fees in Wales. This is only a limited (and temporary) success though, protecting just Welsh students attending university in Wales; English students attending in Wales and Welsh students in England will still have to pay top-up fees from 2006. A stronger NUS leadership, building on the anger of rank and file students, could defeat all fees across all of England and Wales.

The possibility of stopping fees and winning living grants needs both NUS and local students’ unions to organise regular mass action against fees as part of a campaign to support and defend non-payers of tuition and top-up fees. A first term national demonstration in London against all attacks on Higher and Further Education should be called for and mobilised – through activities and meetings – as a step towards wider action including a national education shutdown to make two-tier education inoperable.

This is not possible, however, unless NUS works alongside Trade Unions. Attacks on education are not just the fault of Tony Blair and a few New Labour ministers, but an offensive by the ruling class on the welfare state and the working class in an attempt to further profits through cuts and privatisation.

Departments are threatened with closure; lecturers are threatened with redundancy; civil servants and public sector workers are threatened with longer working hours, reduced sick pay, reduced pensions or unemployment! Many graduates start work in the public sector, often on a casual or agency work basis. NUS should campaign for the rights of graduate workers and working students while working alongside Trade Unions; to support education staff by mobilising students and workers against cuts and closures. This could culminate in an all public sector strike of workers and students in defence of our services, education, and jobs. If a capitalist party cannot permanently provide these basic rights, this shows that NUS and Trade Unions should support the formation of a new mass workers’ party, for democratic ownership of essential resources by society, for the many not the few!

Return to contents