THIS MOTION PASSED IN THE EUSA REFERENDUM, SPRING 2012. We are continuing to campaign for its full implementation, although already any (non-elected) member can now attend and vote in any of the student councils.   
 
EUSA is currently a representative democracy. This means that once or twice a year we elect people to represent us at Student Council. Once elected they are under no obligation to communicate with you any further, or even to do what they promised in their manifestos. This system has alienated the majority of the student population, as is evident from low voter turnouts and widespread disinterest. Power ultimately rests with a minority of these elected officials: the four paid sabbatical officers, the Student Council Executive, the Committee of Management, and the Board of Trustees (several of whom are not even elected). Such a system is not truly democratic and cannot truly represent the opinions and interests of EUSA’s members.

Voting YES to this proposal would support EUSA becoming a direct democracy. Ideally this would mean bringing together the entire student population for regular assemblies, but with roughly 27,000 students this is impractical. For this reasons we propose that power should rest with a number of autonomous councils. Each council would meet regularly and be open to all its members. They would decide upon issues they want raised, and what their opinion is on issues that already been raised. They would then send a delegate to a more central council, an individual mandated to present their views, but not to pursue his, her or their own agenda. Such delegates would be temporary, recallable, and preferably rotated, although the final decision on such matters would rest with the council in question. Under this system power would be devolved to the entire student population.

There are already structures in place that would support such a system. Each individual school could have a regular open council, concerned not only with departmental matters but also the university as a whole. Liberation and campaigning groups might also hold such councils, and send delegates to the central council. Voting YES to this proposal will simply register a desire to see EUSA reorganised along these lines. The precise details will then be up for discussion by each individual council and eventually, through a system of delegates, the union as a whole.

The benefits of such a system should be immediately apparent. It would encourage greater participation, allowing any who are interested to attend smaller, more intimate, and most importantly open councils. Greater participation would mean greater accountability, as decisions would be made directly by those that they will affect. This system would allow every student to have their say on every issue, as opposed to a small percentage of students voting at best four or five times a year, on very general issues.

So vote YES to this question if you want to see a EUSA that truly represents you, a EUSA that is dynamic and relevant, and a EUSA that is literally the most democratic union in the UK.

(Should you have any further concerns or queries, please email eusadirectdemocracy@gmail.com, and we will respond as soon as possible.)


The following motion was passed at last year’s AGM, showing support for the above proposals. The only reason that it has not yet been implemented is that the AGM was not quorate, which is why it has come to referendum:

Motion for Direct Democracy

The GM NOTES:

1. That there are roughly 27,000 students at the University of Edinburgh.
2. That there is no building big enough to hold 27, 000 students within the University of Edinburgh.
3. That approximately 7000 voted in the latest EUSA election.
4. That EUSA AGMs attract even less attention than this, and are rarely quorate.
5. That the purpose of a union is to engage with and represent its constituents.

The GM BELIEVES

1. That a union that only elicits a quarter of potential votes is neither representative nor engaging.
2. That EUSA must be radically reorganised before it can truly represent anyone.
3. That given the impracticalities (EUSA Notes 2) of holding truly representative meetings  for direct democracy, a bottom-up system of nested councils is the next best option.

The GM RESOLVES

1. To devolve all decision making powers to the lowest possible level of school and departmental councils, and to establish such councils where they do not already exist.
2. To ensure that such councils are well advertised, open to all concerned and run by consensus.
3. To establish a system of elected, rotated and recallable delegates to represent the decisions of such councils when any higher-level decision must be made.
4. To, as and when they become obsoleted by the function of the councils, remove power from all named EUSA positions, including the four paid sabbatical officers.