EUSA's Annual General Meeting is becoming increasingly controversial, as political groups have begun to weigh in on the debate surrounding the 'No Platform' motion.

The motion also faced an eleventh hour setback when Gabi Jones, the Welfare Convener of EUSA and the student originally scheduled to present the motion at Tuesday’s meeting, withdrew her support.

Margaret Woods, spokesperson for Unite Against Fascism, has urged students to vote for the motion, saying that “university students implementing a ‘No Platform’ policy would be a big step forward in the fight against fascism.”

Woods joined with EUSA President Thomas Graham in heavily criticising the BNP, one of several named groups which, if the motion was passed, would be prevented from attending, speaking at or taking part in meetings and events on campus.

She said: “Our position is that the BNP will use democratic processes in order to destroy them. They are fascists and outside of the mainstream of politics.There is nothing to debate with people that deny the holocaust. Wherever the BNP raise their heads racist attacks increase. We do understand concerns over freedom of speech, but we would argue this defends freedom of speech and freedom of expression.”

Woods's comments followed disputed claims from the leader of the BNP in Scotland that the motion represented ‘a manifesto of the left's fascism’ and that ‘the BNP is not a racist party.’

Gary Raikes's statement came just days before the BNP polled higher than ever before at a Scottish by-election, coming 62 votes behind the Conservative party in the Glasgow North East constituency.

When questioned on how BNP policies would affect foreign students, he said that, “universities admit large numbers of foreign students for purely financial reasons, often at the loss of places for British students. However most foreign students are not immigrants so would not be affected by BNP policy.”

Woods, however, argued that Raikes' comments on international students were just another example of the BNP’s campaign of ‘misinformation’, and were typical of their ‘nasty racism.’

The comments have also angered EUSA President Thomas Graham, who said: “As a racist party, it's hardy surprising that the BNP have issues with international students. The BNP does all it can to breed intolerance and hate, so I am obviously concerned that they may try to change peoples views of international students.”

The motion has, however, provoked wider concerns over the limitations it would place on freedom of speech, and is expected to face stiff opposition at the AGM. Concerns have been raised that the motion is undemocratic, and that open debate is the best way of exposing extremist groups for what they really are. Furthermore, strong feelings have been aroused that censoring such groups does not silence them, and in fact risks generating sympathy. The proposal also has the potential to punish societies who host 'racist' or 'fascist' speakers.

Writing in a comment piece for The Student last week, President of Edinburgh University’s Politics Society Dante Mazzari criticised the proposal, saying: “I do not believe the students of Edinburgh University need to be censored by anyone, much less their own union.”

Moreover, he said the motion, which would authorize the Student Representatives Council to identify specific groups as ‘racist’ or ‘fascist’, would place “an enormous concentration of coercive power in the hands of the SRC. No criteria are ever explicitly given... this overall ambiguity leaves the SRC an enormous amount of potential discretion.”

One SRC member told The Student: “It's obvious that the BNP will feel hard done by with this motion. But there is a strong current of opinion that banning them from campus altogether will be counter-productive to exposing their racist lies. Just now, the motion doesn't seem to stand much chance of passing.”

Explaining her decision to withdraw support, Gabi Jones said: “Basically a friend wrote the motion but didn't want to speak on it so after speaking to them about the issue and the motion they wanted to write, I agreed to sign and present it.”

She told The Student that she believes it would not be “fair to speak on the issue when I'm not 100 percent behind it…obviously this is unusual but I can honestly say that when I signed the motion, I was doing so with the best intentions.”

She did not want to comment on who had compelled her to present the motion, but there has been speculation it was a high-ranking EUSA official.

In the run up to the AGM,

Other motions are also expected to provoke tense debate. The Student spoke with Students for Justice in Palestine with regards to the proposed boycott of Israel.

A spokesperson said, “As an international organization – responsible for educating individuals, distributing ideas and interacting economically with many parts of the world – Edinburgh inevitably has to take a stand in political issues in various capacities.”

“We would argue that…it’s possible for people to distinguish an opposition to the foreign policy and military actions of a country and opposition to that country as a whole, as witnessed for example in the opposition to the American invasion of Iraq, which few would describe as being a matter of anti-Americanism.”

Howevever, opposition to the motion is expected to object to stipulations under which EUSA would have to “refrain from participation in any form of academic and cultural cooperation, collaboration or joint projects with Israeli institutions.” A similar motion by the lecturers' union, the University Colleges Union, was rejected after legal advice suggested that such a boycott would be against the law.

The EUSA AGM will take place at George Square lecture theatre on Tuesday November 17 at 7pm.

Comments

Add New

Write comment
Name:
Email:	do not notifynotify
Title:
Please input the anti-spam code that you can read in the image.

Powered by !JoomlaComment 3.26

3.26 Copyright (C) 2008 Compojoom.com / Copyright (C) 2007 Alain Georgette / Copyright (C) 2006 Frantisek Hliva. All rights reserved."