A constitution is a vitally important part of any organisation. Sticking to it is what makes a union such as ours run correctly, with a high level of scrutiny and control from members ensuring that the organisation’s governance and procedure is above-board.
One would not expect one arm of the union to attempt to change another, unconstitutionally, at any time – especially not during a vacation break – in a crude attempt to ensure there are as few members as possible to ‘fight back’.
The change which was enforced onto Loughborough Students’ Union (LSU) Media by the LSU Marketing department on Monday 16thJuly 2018, is not only unconstitutional, but a deliberate attempt to use a ‘Henry VIIIth power’ and bypass the constitution at a time when members of the section are away.
This is not only unacceptable from a students’ union’s staff, but unconstitutional.
The LSU Constitution, Schedule IX, Article f) states:
“The non-commercial output of the Section … should be determined by the Media Executive Officer, based on the ideas, submissions and productions of the current Media Committees.”
Therefore, this would also apply to all forms of social media as ‘outputs’ – such as those ‘LSU Marketing’ is trying to control or remove, meaning that Marketing cannot; a) have control; b) admin privileges or; c) remove these channels. The constitution makes no reference to ‘LSU Marketing’, its rights or privileges, and therefore they have no constitutional right to control their output.
Threatening to discipline the section and those involved is a vile attempt to push through their unconstitutional change, and should be condemned by the union executive.
The LSU Branding guidelines state:
“Our sections are at the heart of what LSU offers to students. We are proud of them…”
In this case, allow the sections to run in the way they wish – each is different, and the catch-all approach that is being proposed for all sections does not work. The brands ‘LCR’, ‘Label’, ‘LSUTV’ and ‘Lens’ are valuable as individuals, and do not function as a whole, with each providing different services and content. One individual who follows ‘LCR’ may not wish to follow the actions of ‘LSUTV’, and it should be their choice to do so. Keeping separate channels ensures there will be no information overload to LSU Members.
As an independent media outlet, not under the control of union staff, LSU Media, a student-run section, is entitled to control its output in the way it wants, as long as it abides by the Brand Guidelines of both LSU and LSU Media, which it does. The Education Act 1994 c. 20 clearly states that SU’s must ensure “freedom of speech… is secured for all members” – by controlling LSU Media’s output, with admin privileges that could compromise this independence and freedom of speech they could therefore be in breach of the law.
LSU advertises itself as a ‘student-led’ organisation. So act like one.
The views in this letter may not necessarily represent those of LSU Media or the Union Affairs Committee
The last few years have been a whirlwind for me. Elected to the Youth Parliament at the end of January 2016 I never expected, two years later, to have been as involved as I have. Throughout the last four years I’ve worked my way up from being a member of my local youth council in Kent to running one of the largest youth parliaments in the world – and I’ve loved every minute of it.
Leaving the Youth Voice system gave me a nostalgic desire to look back over my experiences in Youth Voice and this post is, in many ways, something like a diary for me to look back on in years to come and remember the good times I’ve had: My Youth Parliament Journey in some way…
Before Youth Parliament
I spent almost two years in the Kent Youth County Council after being elected in 2014, working on local programmes and campaigns which would improve the lives of young people in Kent hopefully for years to come. Alongside my friend Ollie (who was also elected from the same school as me), we worked on as much as we could, especially getting involved with work on Mental Health and for a Curriculum for life (both committees I chaired over my 2 years in the council).
Creating resources (which can be found here), small-scale campaigns, and regularly meeting with county councillors was great, and I would recommend it to anyone interested in politics, but at the end of the day it wasn’t my passion – and although leading these campaigns and ending up as the Cabinet Member for Education and voted ‘Member of the Year’ was amazing for me, I felt like I was missing something and I wanted to make affect further change, on a bigger scale.
The Panel at the 2015 Youth Select Committee
Giving evidence at the 2015 Youth Select Committee
Giving evidence at the 2015 Youth Select Committee
The Youth Select Committee was my first view of the real change which could be created by BYC and the Youth Parliament – my involvement with oral contribution to their 2015 report on Mental Health was eye-opening and drew me to the local elections to the Youth Parliament at the start of the following year, with the Members of Youth Parliament on the panel inspiring me. For the next 6 months I looked forward to the elections, and in January 2016 I was lucky enough to be elected for a seat in Kent.
Member of Youth Parliament
2016 may not have been one of most successful or inspiring years politically, with the Brexit and Trump votes respectively dividing nations and communities, but for me it was the year that changed me the most, with the influence of UKYP playing a major part in this.
Every MYP starts their term with an induction residential – mine was in Doncaster – where they get to know new MYPs, network, and learn the important skills necessary for the role: public speaking, lobbying and teamwork. Through BYC’s ‘Forgeford’ mock-council exercises, outdoor activities, and various campaign sessions, we were able to start work on the new campaigns (at the time “Don’t Hate, Educate” and Mental Health), pushing these in our local authorities and Youth Councils. In these sessions, I met one of my best friends to this day and found out first-hand how the Parliament really is a catalyst for change.
The Annual Sitting (now called Annual Conference) was the next major event – where MYPs debate manifesto issues which may later trickle down onto the Make Your Mark ballot and then possibly develop into campaigns – the first of mine was in York. Huge debates on issues such as devolution, votes at 16 and tuition fees headlined the event in the university’s main lecture hall, and those 3 days allowed me to further understand the vision and direction UKYP has, as well as meeting new friends from across the nation.
It was the Procedures Group and their role in York, however, that made me decide to run for the PG role. So, at the next convention in London (where MYPs meet in groups of regions to work on campaigns and assist with further training and networking) I ran for PG, never expecting to really get the role after technically only a year as an MYP.
I ran on three main points, and never really anticipating my campaign to be successful (the incumbent Kelly, as well as two extremely good MYPs were also running):
1. To create a UK Youth Parliament fully led by young people, for young people.
2. To examine and revamp the UKYP Procedures Book and the UKYP Manifesto, concentrating on making it clearer and simpler, improving voting procedure and focusing on the redundant manifesto points from past years.
3. To improve communication & campaign cooperation between all regions.
However, somehow I was elected – and my year as the Procedures Group representative for the South East would start (although still 5 months down the line)!
My first House of Commons event was fantastic – an event I’ll never forget. The liveliness and energy in the room is something which can’t be compared, and each year I’ve been the quality of debate has improved again and again. From debates on a Curriculum for Life to Mental Health, Discrimination and Votes at 16, the debate was thoroughly diverse and fascinating to listen to, with Darragh O’Reilly’s famous ‘Channel 4 Speech‘ on “the old man in Kent” being a particular highlight for most (and something Darragh will never live down, 4+ million views and counting)!
To sit on the green benches is such a privilege and an honour that everyone in that room treasures together. On that day I also met many members of the new procedures group, the group which I would be working with for the next year, and after Convention 3 in December it was time to get ready to become the South East’s Procedures Group Representative.
Procedures Group Representative
We started off our year with a residential where we started to look at the Procedures Book (the document which governs UKYP), our responsibilities, the campaigns for the next year and how to run them, as well as looking at the role we were taking on, whilst getting to know each other much better! It’s safe to say I’ll be staying in touch with every single one into the future.
Despite a long gap after this, it felt as if nothing had changed come the Ashford MYP training residential in April – and although I was a fan of the venue as it was only a 20 minute train ride back home, some of the other PGs and MYPs were not so fond of the food and accommodation at #MyKingswood (yes, I think they got the message Darragh)! However despite this, it was still a great weekend running sessions, managing the Forgeford leadership exercise and helping out the MYPs in the start of their year.
After an Annual Sitting meeting to view the location and plan out some of the events, our first convention came relatively quickly, and although getting to know the new regional MYPs and starting to facilitate was nerve-wracking and tiring, the three of us at our regional convention took this in our stride and went into Convention 1 with gusto, with Annual Sitting 2017 (now renamed by us as ‘Annual Conference’) just round the corner!
Despite the very early start to go up North for Annual Sitting, the long journey was worth it, as attending the conference from a staff perspective gave me a whole different insight into the effort and time that goes into its planning and running the event (especially as a fair amount of that, including sessions and the debate sessions were up to us)! The event started with the traditional opening ceremony, inspirational speakers and sessions for the MYPs, and by the Saturday the conference was in full swing, with John Bercow (Speaker of the House of Commons) the main attraction, with debates chaired by the PGs up and running later on in the day.
Topics debated were varied and broad, including motions to ‘Support for Young Carers’, for further ‘Digital Security in the Curriculum’ and even to ‘Consult young people in regeneration projects’. All of these had a great quality of debate and were impressive from an outsider’s point of view, with the 2017 manifesto the culmination of the weekend’s work. Looking back on it now, it was one of the best events I have ever experienced, not just because as a group we managed to pull off a great weekend, but because the MYPs had a fantastic time, met new people, and grew as people throughout.
This continued into the conventions later in the year, with MYPs growing and developing through to the House of Commons Sitting in November. Our convention team (formed of Matthew (East of England), Oscar (London) and I) were fantastic and although Matthew constantly wanted a song and dance at each convention, we managed to limit it to only one (and Oscar and I managed to dodge it entirely)! Teaching MYPs how to develop their campaigns and work on both a national and local level was a great experience and it was great to impart the knowledge we had gained over the several years beforehand onto our new MYPs, assisting their own development and creating the next set of PGs in the process.
Convention 2 prepared the MYPs for the House of Commons Sitting, the highlight of the year for any MYP. Hours of speechwriting and practicing for the front-bench representatives from each region and nation culminated in the event in which all 400+ MYPs meet again in London and decide on the two campaigns which will be worked on for the next year, based on the top 5 issues from the ‘Make Your Mark’ ballot which ran earlier in the year.
The quality of the debate once again was fantastic, and to be able to sit back and relax from the side and enjoy it was a great experience. After the event, we headed to the outskirts of London for our final residential meeting, where we went through the Procedures Book and discussed what to change and how to improve Youth Parliament in the future, as well as considering how a future with Britain outside of the EU will change operations and parliamentary education as a whole. Many changes were made, and the direction of the new campaigns (Curriculum for Life and Votes at 16) were decided on, before we had to deal with the inevitable teary final farewell to the group we’d spent so long with over the last year.
Leaving the Youth Parliament is a strange feeling. Not just the fact that I’ll be leaving a group of friends who have all become so close over the last year, but because a major part of my life (and to some extent my identity) is coming to an end. For years, if anyone has asked what I do, I say ‘Youth Parliament’ and inevitably end up explaining my role and the organisations’ importance. But now – that’s all over. Handing over to a new set of PGs at the final convention somewhat accentuated this; I have to give up this identity to the next set of individuals who will be able to steer Youth Parliament in their own direction.
My ‘Youth Voice Journey’ as BYC likes to say, has come to an end. Now it’s time for a new journey, and for a new generation to travel the same path as I did. Not a new journey where I simply abandon my passion for Parliamentary education, but instead one where I help to champion it as an adult that’s been fortunate enough to grow through the system which I owe so much to.
I want to say a final thank you to everyone I’ve worked with over the last 4 years:
Thanks to Claire, Sadie, Hannah and the rest of the staff at Kent Youth County Council for starting my journey, and to Joe, Skye, Ollie, Thea, Elena and the rest who were on the journey with me!
Thanks to Zoe, Brendan, Sascha, Francesca and the rest of the staff at UKYP – although admittedly we had differences in vision we still made positive change (as Darragh would call it, ‘Reform’) and you managed to guide me in the right direction through those two years, always wanting the best for UKYP.
Thank you and good luck to everyone else I’ve met through my time in Youth Voice, from my region to everyone else I met at Annual Sittings, Conventions and in the Commons!
But finally, I want to thank the whole PG group for being a fantastic group of people to be around, making my last year at UKYP an amazing one!! You’ll all be missed!
Sometimes I have to be surprised at how amusingly annoyed I get with online articles, and reading this one certainly fitted that bill. Harry Forbes, a “student” as we are told, is a young conservative and has a point to prove. Unfortunately to make his point he has to write an article and post it online, on the ‘Conservative Home’ website. For a bit of context before I respond to his article, the UK Youth Parliament is a nationwide organisation set up to give the youth of the country a voice – something which they lacked before it’s formation in 1998 and first sitting in 2001 (that’s Forbes’ first mistake). The idea was, and still is, to make young people get involved in politics and to give young people who do not have the vote the ability to bring about social change through representation in the UKYP and through campaigning.
Importantly this isn’t an attack on his political alignment, nor is it an attack on his views – we’re entitled to believe whatever we like – but this is instead a look at Forbes’ article itself. He made a number of mistakes – the most major of which is to not reference his sources, or in fact use any sources at all; not only does this anger me as a participant of youth politics, but it angers me as a student myself (something which he apparently is). In fact, his lack of sources opens up a large amount of holes in his article, most obviously where he got his facts from. He writes that he “started with some internet research, which provided me with stories of MYPs spending £15,000 on a party for themselves and wasting taxpayers’ money on chauffeur driven cars to meetings.” This quote is a perfect example of how weak his argument is, and shows his lack of referencing perfectly. As we all know, the internet is a mysterious place with incorrect information everywhere and as far as I know there has no MYP that I know of that has been spending £15000 on a party and chauffeured cars, and the idea of this is absolutely insane.
Along with this, Forbes goes on to comment on the electoral process, saying that only “After trawling the Internet for several hours I finally managed to find some information on how to stand” which for a fact is wrong, as a simple google search for the term “how to become a member of youth parliament” (or adding the county at the end) gave me all the information I needed.
Simple enough search (15 seconds)
Slightly longer search (20 seconds)
In fact, both searches which I did took no longer than a minute, and both sites gave me all the information I needed from both the UKYP as a whole, and my local authority. Seems simple enough, and definitely did not take me an hour.
At this moment, I realised just how fabricated this article was, with a quite clear agenda and hugely biased – but what hammered it home was with his argument about how unrepresentative it was, completely ignoring the huge amount of votes (969,992 from across the UK) that the Youth Parliament achieved in a vote with 10 possible options, and the support from most of the Local Authorities across the country. He also criticises the MYP election process, denouncing the whole process “North Korean style” (which completely does not make sense) just because he was apparently denied from standing in the election by Wiltshire County Council (not UKYP), of which he has no proof of.
All in all, he is completely misinformed and if he really has a personal issue with the UKYP (which he obviously does) he should talk to a member, discuss what they do (because what they do is brilliant), and not refer to un-cited information. But for as much as I can write contradicting this article, I think that Speaker John Bercow (incidentally another party criticised in Forbes’ article) sums up the apparently “against all parliamentary tradition” UK Youth Parliament well, in his statement before its 2015 annual sitting:
“Welcoming the Youth Parliament for their annual sitting in the has become one of the House of Common’s most pleasant traditions. Almost a million young people across the United Kingdom participated in this year’s vote, and I am pleased that they are taking advantage of the opportunity to make their voices heard in the heart of democracy in ever increasing numbers.” – John Bercow MP
Update: MYP Owen Winter’s Reddit Post gives some more insight into the article from a MYP’s viewpoint.
Bellway Homes are currently planning a development of 250 houses in the beautiful village of Otham, which is wholly inappropriate in an village of 190 houses. In fact, the simple idea of their being this development is astonishing.
Otham, in my opinion, is one of the most beautiful, unspoilt villages in the world – one with character, charm and history. A village like this is one of a kind – there is no village exactly like this and there will never be one again, and adding houses to a small village like Otham is ridiculous. The developments will be detrimental not only to Otham but also to the surrounding area and to the British people who deserve to have villages not spoilt and destroyed by developers who not only don’t care about the village itself but the people who live in and around it. Not only would it be a disgrace by Bellway Homes to build these houses but a disgrace from Maidstone Borough Council whose members were elected in by the people of the borough, for the people of the borough, and who would seem to have no regard for the upkeep of a beautiful piece of British countryside and a beautiful British village which should be kept the way it is and not have a huge loss of identity.
Not only would it be detrimental to the village, but it does not make sense to put a disproportionate amount of housing in a small village which has so much history and problems of its own such as the limited capacity of roads and other weak infrastructure such as the internet connectivity and poor bus connections which make the site wholly unsuitable for any large-scale developments like the one currently being planned. The Amey Transport Report suggests that by 2031 the roads in Otham will increase in usage by 69% and is the worst case that they have seen as a ‘do nothing’ option. How Bellway and Maidstone Borough Council believe that this evidence is fine to ignore is unbelievable and if this building work does go ahead it would show the pure incompetence not only of the borough council but also of Bellway who believe that people would want to buy their houses in a small village with very little infrastructure, poor roads and a future of gridlock.
It would be dangerous and foolish to believe that this would not be an issue and that the continual use of Otham’s roads alongside the additional usage from Bicknor Green would not make a difference, hence this proposal should not be approved. In fact, their plan’s idea for a new access point onto White Horse Lane to bypass Gore Court Road and Church Road rat-running is also absurd – neither this addition or the closure of the White Horse Lane Junction will deter the use of thee village roads as a rat-run and prevent the destruction of a mostly peaceful village.
Along with this, the amount of housing proposed is much too high, not only for the reasons already explained, but due to Maidstone Borough Council’s Local Plan which stated that there should only be 190 houses in this site. Somehow, Bellway have managed to increase their proposed amount of housing to 250 whilst still keeping ‘the same’ density – something logically impossible – and if any housing was even to be proposed it should be kept to the draft local plan’s specification. In fact, housing on this site should be held off until the release of MBC’s full Local Plan, which should detail where houses should and should not be built. The sheer audacity of Bellway to propose housing and to pass the proposals just before the Local Plan’s release is astonishing – it is despicable behaviour and their proposals should be blocked as a matter of principal, at least until the release of the Local Plan which would state in much more detail the amount of housing that should and should not be built in and around the beautiful village.
This site should not be built on. Sites similar such as the Gore Court site have already been rejected due to site access and destruction of the countryside – so why should Bicknor Green be any different? It is in the same area and suffers from the same road issues and encroachment onto the countryside so why the Bicknor Green site is being considered for planning permission is once again, astonishing. Otham is a beautiful village, and to build on it would not only continue to ruin the beautiful Kent countryside but would also ruin the village. Just in the same way that a councillor would not like a disproportionate amount of houses being built in their town or village – the same applies to Otham. Think about other people, about thevillage and about the quality of life which could just be about to be ruined by another terrible planning decision made by Maidstone Borough Council.
Here is a link to the British Youth Council’s Youth Select Committee on Mental Health; one of the processes that go into writing a report into the state of Mental Health services and education throughout the UK. BYC is a UK charity that works to empower young people and promote their interests and is run by young people, existing to represent the views of young people to government and decision-makers at a local, national, European and international level; and to promote the increased participation of young people in society and public life.
You can view the Final Report (pdf) and Oral Evidence Transcript (pdf) provided to the select committee below, which describes in detail everything discussed, and the important final conclusions that BYC has come to on young people’s mental health issues – the funding for state services, the role of education and awareness and stigma of issues.