Reform means the NUS is better placed to fight hate - The Jewish Chronicle

Judging by the storm that surrounded last week's meeting of the National Union of Students' National Executive Committee, you might think that, as a Jewish member of the committee, I must be angry and upset at the outcome.

Far from it - I am delighted that Amendment 2B, which guarantees representation for Jewish, Muslim, migrant, black and LGBT+ students on the NUS's Anti-Racism and Anti-Facism (Araf) committee, was passed.

I helped draft the motion, and I voted in favour of it, because it effectively addresses the lack of representation and the lack of democratic accountability in our anti-fascism work.

Until now there has been a contradiction between the rules and practice of the NUS. In theory, two representatives from the NEC should have been elected every year to lead the Araf work. In practice, the NUS president appointed two students, most of the time - but not always - the NUS' Black Student Officer and a Jewish member of the NEC.

Last year, this contradiction led to a situation in which two Jewish students came forward, expecting to stand in an internal election, as per the rules, only for the then-NUS president, Megan Dunn, to simply appoint one of them. In effect, the non-Jewish NUS president at the time chose which Jewish student she preferred. This rightly led to uproar, and to a realisation that there was a need for reform.

That was the motive behind the amendment, but it has been misrepresented.

First, the NEC doesn't have the power to change the structure of the Araf committee, only our national conference does. The aim of the amendment was to put together an interim solution to have a functioning Araf campaign at a time when we need it more than ever, following the rise in hate crime since the Brexit vote.

The amendment guarantees for the first time the direct involvement of students of different faith groups - including Jewish students - to work within the Araf campaign. It also specifically states that the committee should work with external organisations, such as the Union of Jewish Students.

I have had many discussions with Jewish and non-Jewish students about this issue. That was why I was so distressed to see accusations of antisemitism surrounding the proposal I had put my name to. Jewish students stood on both sides of this argument, and will, no doubt, continue to do so. The decision was between a broader, elected committee, and a smaller, appointed one. The majority of the NEC chose the first option.

Some have argued that electing a Jewish representative from the NEC takes away the right of Jewish students to choose their own voice. However, no faith group currently has independently elected representation within the NUS, and no single member, or set of members, of the NEC has a plausible claim to represent Jewish students. There is, for now, no way in which properly autonomous representation for Jewish students can take place within the NUS - there would have to be a change in the union's rules.

I firmly believe that the structure we have put in place gives us the ability to fight racism and fascism at such a critical time, while ensuring that the voices and experiences of Jewish students are heard at the heart of that fight; and I really hope we can all move on, elect the working group and get to work.

To get more from opinion, click here to sign up for our free Editor's Picks newsletter.