NUS No Platform Policy

No Platform is a policy of the National Union of Students (NUS) of the United Kingdom. Like other No Platform policies it asserts that no one considered Racist or Fascist should be able to stand in any NUS election or participate in any NUS function. It was instituted in the 1990s to prevent British National Party candidates from standing in NUS elections. The NUS leadership stated that the reason for the policy was to prevent Lesbian and Gay people and people from ethnic minority backgrounds from not attending the NUS Annual Conference for the fear that they would be assaulted by BNP members.^{[citation needed]}

How the policy works

No Platform forbids any officer of NUS sharing a platform with a "fascist", which the NUS has interpreted to mean all public debate regardless of who is controlling the platform or whether a union officer is present. This means that it is forbidden for NUS Officers to attend events at universities where extremist organisations are present and argue with them. Union Officers and in theory ordinary union members can be thrown out of the NUS for breaching these rules. The group Unite Against Fascism maintains that the NUS is not the appropriate place for such a debate and that if union officers were to engage in debates with extremists this would legitimise their arguments.

Organisations currently subject to No Platform

• British National Party
• Combat 18
• Hizb ut-Tahrir
• MPAC UK
• National Front

Support for the policy

Opposition to the policy

In 2003, a dispute broke out between the Keele University Students' Union and the affiliated Keele University England Society after the union used their No Platform policy to shut the society down during their Fresher's Fair launch. The student union reinstated the society a few days later, when their activities were found to be non-extremist. This led to a motion proposing the revocation of the Keele University Students' Union's No Platform policy, which was narrowly defeated.^{[citation needed]}

In 2007 the University of East Anglia Students' Union resolved to officially oppose the NUS No Platform Policy and to mandate their representatives at the NUS Annual Conference to oppose that policy, to write a letter to NUS National President Gemma Tumelty opposing the policy, and decided to hold a referendum on the issue. The referendum question was 'Should UUEAS Support NUS No Platform policy?' The student body as a whole rejected No Platform by 74.5% 430 to 141 votes^{[citation needed]}. Critics of the referendum have argued that a low turnout of 5% was unrepresentative^{[citation needed]}. The Union considers a referendum to be valid if a quorum of 500 is reached. The UEA Students' Union policy used to state that they believe the following (the policy lapsed in academic year 2010-11, and currently UUEAS has no policy on No Platform other than the result of the referendum):

That in order to discredit illiberal, extremist or racist ideologies it is necessary to openly confront these ideas and not merely pretend they do not exist. .. That ideologies based on the equal value of all human beings are more logical and will therefore win if directly counter posed with ideologies which believe in the superiority of a particular race or religion.^[1]

In 2007 debate surfaced in the University of Oxford about the policy when British National Party leader Nick Griffin was scheduled to appear on the University's student radio station, Oxide Radio - at that time, the station did not have editorial independence from its parent company, OSSL, the commercial subsidiary of the Student Union. OUSU backed the NUS decision, but in 2007 the Oxford Union invited Nick Griffin along with controversial historian David Irving to speak. Members of the Student Union picketed the debate and some protesters broke into the Union chambers before being ejected by security.^[2] Subsequently, Oxide Radio was granted editorial independence from OUSU.

Leeds University Union's newspaper, Leeds Student and its TV station, LSTV have both opposed the student union's No Platform policy. An article published in the paper featuring a long interview with the British National Party leader Nick Griffin was considered in breach of the policy. A subsequent interview was initially not allowed to be aired on LSTV, but was later aired, after protests were held. In both February 2007 and 2008, motions to abolish the LUU's No Platform policy were defeated by the union's council before reaching the referendum stage. In December 2008 a motion to renew the No Platform policy was rejected at referendum.

On May 14, 2007, a University of Bath student invited Nick Griffin to speak at a meeting on campus.^[3][4] There were several attempts to prevent this from occurring, and due to the organisation of protests, the students union voted to oppose the university’s decision to allow Griffin to speak. The university, taking into consideration the threat of disruption that allowing Griffin to speak would cause during the summer exam period, decided to refuse permission for the event to take place.^[5] This led the student union to hold a referendum to decide whether it should have a No Platform policy. On February 15, 2008, the results were announced — 158 people voted for the policy and 619 people voted against — and the policy was rejected.^[6]

Some Unions such as Bilborough College Students' Union in Nottingham have attempted to bypass the policy. In an attempt to demonstrate that they believed the NUS no platform policy was an affront to free speech, Bilborough organised a debate between a member of Hizb ut-Tahrir and a member of the National Secular Society. Despite an attempt by some students to persuade the College Corporation to overturn the decision of the Union, the event went ahead. To prevent NUS from removing their NUS cards and therefore their right to represent their fellow students at NUS conference, the union executive did not inform NUS of the event.

On February 1, 2010, the Aberdeen University Students' Association (AUSA) took fascism and fascist groups out of its No Platform Policy. The policy now only stops groups and individuals sharing a platform with the AUSA if they break their Equal Opportunities Policy, which protects students from discrimination.

In February 2010, the NUS came under extreme criticism after two of its officers forced a proposed debate on multiculturalism at the University of Durham to be cancelled.^[7] The debate, organised by Durham Union Society, was to have featured two prominent British National Party members: Andrew Brons MEP and Leeds City Councillor Chris Beverley.^[8] Upon hearing of BNP involvement in the debate, NUS Black Students' Officer Bellavia Ribeiro-Addy and NUS LGBT Officer Daf Adley jointly sent a letter to both Durham Union Society and the university demanding its cancellation. The pair incorrectly stated that the debate would be illegal and threatened to organise a "colossal demonstration" in tandem with Unite Against Fascism, adding that "if any students are hurt in and around this event responsibility will lie with you".^[9] The subsequent cancellation of the debate by Durham Union Society President Anna Birley on safety grounds was met with fierce backlash. NUS President Wes Streeting was prompted to personally appear before Durham Union Society to apologise for the actions of the officers concerned, though outrage among Durham students was sufficient that a significant number protested outside the debating chamber at the time.^[10] A further protest group on Facebook quickly amassed over 2,500 members. An official petition was soon lodged with Durham Students Union to call for a referendum on disaffiliation from NUS.^[11] On 12 March 2010, the referendum concluded with a majority of voting students having voted to disaffiliate.^[12]

Status of the policy

The NUS, who remain dedicated to No Platform (as of 30 January 2008), included it as a policy in their governance review which was due to be voted upon at National Conference in Blackpool, 28–31 April 2008. At a recent^[when?] EGM the membership of NUS voted overwhelmingly to include No Platform in the core constitution.^{[citation needed]}

Footnotes

1. ^ [1]^{[dead link]}
2. ^ Taylor, Matthew (2007-11-27). "Irving and Griffin spark fury at Oxford Union debate". The Guardian (London). http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2007/nov/27/highereducation.studentpoliticseducation. Retrieved 2010-05-20. 
3. ^ [2]^{[dead link]}
4. ^ "Internal News - 03 May 2007 - University of Bath". Bath.ac.uk. 2007-05-03. http://www.bath.ac.uk/news/2007/5/3/meeting-request.html. Retrieved 2010-05-31. 
5. ^ "Press Release - 10 May 2007 - University of Bath". Bath.ac.uk. 2007-05-10. http://www.bath.ac.uk/news/2007/5/10/griffin.html. Retrieved 2010-05-31. 
6. ^ "No Platform? No Thanks!". Bathstudent.com. http://www.bathstudent.com/news/article/No-Platform-No-Thanks/. Retrieved 2010-05-31. 
7. ^ "Security concerns stifle free speech". Palatinate.org.uk. http://www.palatinate.org.uk/news/national-news/security-concerns-stifle-free-speech/comment-page-1/. Retrieved 2010-05-31. 
8. ^ The British National Party - Blog - Labour party thugs dictate what university students can listen to^{[dead link]}
9. ^ "Multiculturalism Debate & Potential Anti-Fascist Protests - Van Mildert JCR". Dur.ac.uk. 2010-02-02. http://www.dur.ac.uk/vm.jcr/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1561&Itemid=496. Retrieved 2010-05-31. 
10. ^ "Student union apologises over BNP claim (From the Northern Echo)". Thenorthernecho.co.uk. 2010-02-10. http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/4997928.Student_union_apologises_over_BNP_claim/?ref=rss. Retrieved 2010-05-31. 
11. ^ "NUS mis-handling prompts backlash". Palatinate.org.uk. 2010-02-08. http://www.palatinate.org.uk/news/national-news/nus-mis-handling-prompts-backlash/. Retrieved 2010-05-31. 
12. ^ http://vote.dsu.org.uk/index.cgi/results/51

External links

• 'NUS No Platform policy' from nusonline.co.uk