Hugh Murdoch argues that Student Council is becoming distracted from its purpose.

I’ve been involved in student politics since I started at Edinburgh, initially as a first year rep, and then as a member of Student Council’s Executive. I’ve enjoyed being a part of an organisation that does good things, making concrete gains for students – sometimes big things, but a lot of the time little things that will make students’ lives just a bit easier. I know we don’t do a good enough job of communicating what we do, and that’s something that needs to be worked on, though I’m truly impressed by what EUSA has achieved while I’ve been a student at Edinburgh.

We have Student Council meetings once every three weeks or so. They’re a forum for discussion on a whole host of issues that matter to students: from a lack of study space in the library to tuition fees, from holding the university to account when it makes unethical investments to ensuring that students have enough money in their pockets to make their way through the academic year. Often, there have been passionate debates and strong differences of opinion; though Student Council has always been a place where ideas are nourished and collaboration is valued. The environment has been one of co-operation – working together to win for students.

However, this air of collaboration has taken a hit over the last semester with a number of motions being discussed that have little bearing on students’ lives. Though at first glance suggesting openness, these motions actually serve to make EUSA a harder organisation for students to get involved in to effect the change they want to see. A bundle of motions that were discussed at last week’s Student Council fit into this category. Under the shared title “Accountability and Democracy” these motions offered nothing of the sort. They will create unnecessary bureaucracy and breed an unhealthy attitude of suspicion that will put people off from getting involved in EUSA’s democracy.

The first motion proposed the recording of votes made by representatives on Student Council and goes against everything that we’re all at university for. University is a different place to Parliament: when you go to university you’re expected and encouraged to change your mind on issues. University is about expanding your understanding of the world, engaging in debates and being won over by good arguments made in those debates. You don’t make it through your time at Edinburgh without changing your mind on ideas and issues hundreds of times. Keeping a record of how student reps vote implies that changing your mind is something to be ashamed of, not embraced.

The second motion in this bundle focused on external political affiliations, saying that student reps who stand for election to positions in external organisations should declare this to student council. The sentiments of this motion seem harmless enough, though again it is a motion that makes a suggestion that something which is so integral to many people’s enjoyment of university should be treated with suspicion. It suggests that involvement in another organisation means that a rep votes according to that organisation’s line, not their conscience. The reason people get involved in external organisations is the same reason they get involved with EUSA – because they want to make the world a better place and view those organisations as a good way to do it.

Third was a motion that makes sabbatical officers seek approval before receiving gifts from organisations that may be seen as seeking to lobby them. There already exists a register of interests where such gifts are declared and this is the right place for that to happen. This again asserts that reps are unable to make individual decisions of conscience, needing to rely on Student Council to act as a moral arbiter. It’s right that Student Council and the wider student body know about gifts that EUSA’s officers receive, but to suggest that they need to be approved is a bureaucratic intrusion into people’s lives and their consciences.

These motions do nothing to open up EUSA and make it more accessible to the 27,000 students at Edinburgh. They make it a less attractive organisation to be involved in, steeping it in bureaucracy and bringing an uncomfortable level of intrusion into student reps’ lives. EUSA should be aspiring to provide a stronger voice for students, rather than making it harder for those who seek to get involved.

Hugh Murdoch is Academic Services Convenor for EUSA.