News from Felix: Council rejects split Sabbatical

But Round Two begins as the proposals return to Council for a last ditch attempt to split the Deputy President Education and Welfare

Author: Kadhim Shubber Deputy Editor of Felix

A controversial motion to split the role of Deputy President Education and Welfare (DPEW) has fallen at Union Council as tensions rise in the Sabbatical team.

The motion, proposed by Jennifer Morgan, President, would have created two new sabbatical roles, Deputy President Education and Deputy President Welfare, while scrapping the current DPEW position. Although a majority of Council members supported the motion, voting 20 for and 12 against, the motion did not reach the required two-thirds majority.

Criticisms of the paper came thick and fast as Council members took offence at what they perceived to be a poorly written and poorly prepared paper. Council members were not reassured when Jenny Morgan admitted that she had not had the time to write up the proposal properly, as she was unwell, and that what was submitted was essentially a rough draft. The question of funding was raised and there was some concern that the proposals didn't mention where funding would be sourced. Jenny Morgan responded by telling Council that she knew that many high-ranking College staff supported the move to increase student representation, including the Rector, Sir Roy Anderson.

The motion was supported by DPEW Hannah Theodorou who argued strongly that the motivation for the new roles was the large workload associated with her position. With these new positions, she argued, there would be more time to actively engage with the student body rather than being bogged down with meeting after meeting.

The DPEW and the President were united on the proposal with Deputy President Clubs and Societies Lily Topham remaining mostly silent throughout Council. However a clear split emerged when Deputy President Finance and Services Christian Carter dramatically attacked the proposal claiming that his job had a similar workload to the DPEW. He accused the President of trying to rush an unprepared motion through Council and warned that if the College did not provide funding for the position then the Union would be forced to divert money away from clubs and societies.

Christian Carter received support from the Faculty Union Presidents who claimed that some welfare responsibilities could be transferred to the faculty level away from the central union. DPEW Hannah Theodorou dismissed this notion, arguing that the faculty unions did not carry enough weight to effectively represent students to the college or outside of university on complicated welfare issues.

Consternation eventually gave way to fatigue as discussions continued into their third hour despite some efforts to end debate of the issue; one council member was strongly reprimanded by the Council Chair for calling the debate of the issue "stupid'. Confusion about funding remained right up to the vote as Jenny Morgan strongly asserted that College would provide funding and Christian Carter rebuffed her saying she was gambling with clubs and societies' funding. The DPFS claimed that the Union might he left high and dry by the College even if College Council permitted the new roles in the knowledge that they would be expected to fund them. He warned that the College might make cuts to the subvention (money the College gives to the Union each year - amounting to over £1 million) elsewhere.

Several Medic councillors had to leave Council early and therefore a vote was called on the motion, which was narrowly defeated.

DPFS Christian Carter commented after the meeting that there had been "no real discussion of the alternatives or any professional assessment of whether a new role is needed at all." He lamented what he called "the manner in which the proposers are trying to rush through something so important without consulting those whom it actually affects."

Social Clubs Committees Chair (SCC) Peter Mabbott agreed with Christian Carter saying that although "the President and DPEW held an open meeting on the subject before Council" that because most Council members were considering the proposal for the first time it was not the right time to vote on the Constitution. However he attacked the DPFS suggestion that money would be lost from clubs and societies if the role was created. The SCC chair said it was wrong to bring in the issue of money "in the way he did" and that "No one should have been put in a position where they were thinking "I agree with the idea, but feel it is more important to make sure that clubs and societies get that £25,000, so I'll vote against it.""
Despite the support of the majority of council members, the proposal's future is now uncertain as this year's Sabbatical elections draw closer. Before being implemented, the Trustee Board must rubber-stamp the new positions and then the College Council must approve the proposals when it meets on 13 February. On Tuesday 12 January, the Trustee Board met and it agreed to approve the position if the Union Council decided to cre¬ate it, provided that an assurance was given that College funding would be obtained.

The paper will be brought to Council again on 18 January and with only a few councillors to convince, it seems all but certain that the Deputy President Education and Welfare will be split in half.