Have Your Say

Policy - Better Union

What we are working on...

The items below are all ideas that have been submitted by students. These ideas were passed and we are now working on these.

• Nestlé Boycott

Policy Level: One,
Expires: 23rd November 2010

This Union Notes:

1. There has been a Nestlé boycott in place in LUU for more than 12 years.
2. This Nestlé Boycott Policy will lapse if not renewed at this referendum.
3. According to UNICEF, more than 4,000 babies die everyday because they are not breastfed.
4. Nestlé promotes artificial infant feeding around the world, breaking the World Health Organization code of marketing.
5. Nestlé, while frequently denying that it has done anything wrong, has lost a number of court battles against various governments and lobbying organisations.

This Union Believes:

1. As a representative organisation, LUU members should have the choice over whether Nestlé products are sold in our shops.
2. The promotion of artificial feeding, particularly in developing countries where their may not be access to safe drinking water, is unacceptable and causes the deaths of many children.
3. 3. By boycotting Nestlé products we are sending a message to Nestlé that LUU strongly disagree with their practices.

This Union Resolves:

1. To continue the boycott of all Nestlé products in all LUU retail outlets.
2. To place advertisement in these outlets explaining why there is a boycott of Nestlé products.
3. To write a letter to Nestlé detailing why we are maintaining a boycott of their products, and stating that the boycott will remain in place until they cease these practices and abide by the International Code of Marketing Breastmilk Substitutes.

Proposer:Rosie Trobe (200103073)
Seconder: Neil Mackenzie (200042867)



• Sale of Cigarettes in Healthy Week

Policy Level: One,
Date of Meeting: 3rd December 2007
Expires: 3rd December 2010
Policy PASSED

This Union Notes:

1. 114,000 people die from smoking-related diseases every year.
2. Tobacco consumption is recognized as the single greatest cause of preventable illness and early death in the UK.
3. Approximately 68% of cigarette smokers want to give up the habit.
4. Healthy Week will be running from Monday 28th January to Monday 4th February, with the aim ‘to encourage staff and students to change their behaviour in order to improve and maintain a healthy lifestyle and state of mind’.
5. Cigarettes are sold in our commercial outlets.

This Union Believes:

1. By continuing to sell cigarettes during Healthy Week, we are contradicting the aim of the campaign.
2. We should maximise the opportunity that Healthy Week presents in order to emphasise the impact of smoking on health, and to be pro-active in helping students and staff change their behaviour.

This Union Resolves:

1. To stop selling cigarettes and tobacco related products in all LUU Commercial outlets during Healthy Week.
2. To provide smoking cessation sessions as part of the Healthy Week programme.
3. To communicate this change heavily to students and staff beforehand so they are aware and prepared for any changes this may pose to their daily routine.
4. To provide the chance for students to feed back on these changes.
5. To feed back to Union Council and members on the impact of this motion to LUU sales.

Proposer:Lizzie Fellows (200060142)
Seconder:Andrew Greer (200121449)



• Kosher Produce

Policy Level: One,
Date of Meeting: 10th March 2008
Expires: 10th March 2011
Policy PASSED

This Union Notes:

1. That the shops in LUU are there to serve Leeds University students.
2. That there are hundreds of students who stick to strict dietary requirements for religious reasons.
3. That there are a number of kosher classified products that are easily available for the union to sell that are not currently made available to students.
4. That it is difficult for a religious Jewish member of LUU to eat on campus.

This Union Believes:

1. That LUU should try to ensure that enough food is stocked that meets the dietary requirements of all its members.
2. That people who keep to a strict kosher diet need easy access to kosher food produce on campus.
3. That a number of kosher products from the “Kosher Food Guide” can be stocked in the union without difficulty or financial loss to the union.
4. That the new products that are stocked will also be popular with other students who do not necessarily stick to a kosher diet.
5. That kosher sandwiches and other products could and would be purchased by all students.
6. That kosher sandwiches are easily available to purchase and sell in LUU shops (from companies such as ‘DD’s Sandwiches’).

This Union Resolves:

1. That LUU shops consult with a student with a strict kosher diet.
2. That LUU shops begin stocking more kosher items, as approved by various kosher organisations (e.g. KLBD, MK & SKA).
3. That LUU shops begin stocking a number of approved kosher sandwiches as part of their sandwich selection.

Proposer:Daniel Gumpright
Seconder:Jak Codd



• Should the Union replace bottled water in Union shops with free drinking water facilities?

Policy Level: One,
Date of Meeting: 10th December 2008
Expires: 10th December 2011
Policy PASSED

This Union Notes:

1. 40% of bottled water comes from taps.
2. Bottled water costs an estimated 500 times more than tap water.
3. Producing a bottle uses up to seven times the amount of water it will eventually contain, as well as quarter of the bottle of oil.
4. In the academic year of 2007-08 the Union sold 180,698 bottles of water.
5. Plastic bags were successfully replaced by paper bags in a past referendum.
6. 16 universities in the Americas have banned bottled water in areas of their campuses.
7. Last year the union made £32,940 profit from selling bottled water.

This Union Believes:

1. Many students spend a lot of money on water which should be more freely obtainable through the provision of water fountains and the sale of reusable bottles.
2. The University of Leeds, as a leading university, should lead the way in environmental sustainability.
3. The Union should be active in assisting the global reduction of consumption necessary to avoid irreversible climate change. This is also in accordance with the March 2007 referendum passed ‘Calling the Union to take action on climate change’.

This Union Resolves:

1. To install a minimum of 5 free drinking water fountains in convenient locations in the Union building.
2. To replace bottled water sold in the Union shops with long-lasting, affordable, re-usable bottles by Green Week 2010.
3. To clearly advertise new and existing drinking water sources.
4. To make students aware of the environmental and economic disadvantages of bottled water
5. To lobby the university to install free water fountains throughout campus.

Proposer:Alison Vernon
Seconder:Hannah Greenslade



• Body Beautiful Motion

Policy Level: One,
Date of Meeting: 2nd June 2008
Expires: 2nd June 2011
Policy PASSED

This Union Notes:

1. The number of people receiving treatment for eating disorders is estimated at 90,000, with many more people who have not been diagnosed, in particular, those with bulimia nervosa.
2. The prevalence total for people diagnosed and undiagnosed with an eating disorder in the UK is an astounding 1.15 million. (Beat 2000)
3. Gender and sexuality are significant factors. Approximately 10% of people with eating disorders are men and approximately 20% of men with eating disorders identify as gay, which is double the proportion of gay men in the population. (Beat 2000)
4. Young people in the age group 14 – 25 are most at risk of developing this type of illness. This includes a large proportion of the student population. (UK Eating Disorder Statistics 2004 provided by Disordered Eating)
5. That, in April 2008, The French National Assembly passed a groundbreaking bill which seeks to criminalise the promotion in the media of extreme thinness which would clamp down on websites, fashion houses, magazines and advertisers.

This Union Believes:

1. Eating disorders are a particularly vicious disease and LUU should take every step possible to protect their members.
2. The government has an ethical responsibility to combat the promotion of mental illnesses, particularly eating disorders and LUU should take initiative and encourage the government to do this.

This Union Resolves:

1. To write to the PM asking for a similar bill to that of France to be passed.
2. To lobby MPs to support more funding and awareness about eating disorders.
3. For the Women’s Assembly to run a campaign during the Eating Disorders Awareness Week from 25th February to 1st March in cooperation with the Welfare Officer, Welfare Assembly and LGBT Assembly.

Proposer:Madeleine Harris Smith (200192571)
Seconder:Sophia James (200242570)



• Communication of Policies and Boycotts

Policy Level: One,
Date of Meeting: 2nd June 2008
Expires: 2nd June 2011
Policy PASSED

This Union Notes:

1. At November 2007 referendum the Union resolved to “continue the boycott of all Nestlé products in all LUU retail outlets.” And “To place advertisement in these outlets explaining why there is a boycott of Nestlé products.”
2. There is currently no such information available in Essentials and Extras.
3. At February 2008 referendum the Union threatened a boycott of the Royal Bank of Scotland (and its subsidiary Natwest).

This Union Believes:

1. Union members should be informed of the ethical and environmental credentials and campaigning activities of the Union.
2. Union members should be aware of policies and boycotts resulting from referendum and Union council motions.
3. Placing posters and information next to boycotted or potentially boycotted products or services would help to inform members of the union’s actions, expand these campaigns and combat general student apathy.

This Union Resolves:

1. To place posters in the relevant confectionary areas of retail outlets in LUU, explaining why Nestle is boycotted, and that this action was taken after referendum.
2. To place a poster next to the Natwest ATM in the Union building explaining why there is a potential boycott of RBS and that this action was taken after referendum.
3. To clearly communicate the ethical and environmental policies of LUU relevant within shops and spaces.
4. To fulfil resolves 1, 2 and 3 before Intro Week 2008.
5. To take more care in ensuring resolutions from referendum are fulfilled promptly.

Proposer:Guy Mitchell



• Should LUU be more Body Beautiful by promoting a more positive body image?

Policy Level: One,
Expires: 4th December 2011

This Union Notes:

1. The number of people receiving treatment for eating disorders is estimated at 90,000, and many have not been diagnosed, particularly sufferers of bulimia nervosa.
2. The prevalence total for people diagnosed and undiagnosed with an eating disorder in the UK is 1.15 million. (Beat 2000)
3. Gender and sexuality are significant factors. Approximately 10% of people with eating disorders are men and approximately 20% of these men identify as gay. (Beat 2000)
4. Young people in the age group 14 – 25 are most at risk of developing this type of illness. This includes a large proportion of the student population. (UK Eating Disorder Statistics 2004 provided by Disordered Eating)
5. That, in April 2008, The French National Assembly passed a groundbreaking bill seeking to criminalise the promotion of extreme thinness in the media, clamping down on websites, fashion houses, magazines and advertisers.
6. Leeds University Union currently sells and endorses media which could be said to promote distorted views of beauty to our members.
7. LUU’s Union Council endorsed a “Body Beautiful” motion on the 2nd June 2008 and as a result the Women’s Assembly will be running a “Body Beautiful” campaign during Eating Disorders Awareness Week (w/c 25th February) in cooperation with the Welfare Officer, Welfare Assembly and LGBT Assembly.

This Union Believes:

1. All students have the right to feel beautiful on campus, and not discriminated against due to their appearance.
2. Eating disorders are a vicious disease and LUU should take every step possible to protect their members.
3. The government has an ethical responsibility to combat the promotion of mental illnesses, particularly eating disorders, through the media and LUU should take initiative and encourage the government to do this.

This Union Resolves:

1. To write a petition to the PM asking for a similar bill to that of France to be passed.
2. To lobby MPs to support more funding and awareness about eating disorders.
3. To ensure that all LUU fashion shows, displays and events take into consideration our diverse range of beautiful students and do not discriminate against those of larger build, different skin colour, or disability. This should have notably visible results within said events.
4. 4To amend the Equality and Diversity Policy prior to the three year review date, taking into consideration the severity of current issues surrounding body image.

Proposer:Suzy Tobias
Seconder:Madeline Harris-Smith



• Should LUU be neutral on issues of international conflict while it represents people from both sides?

Policy Level: One,
Expires: 12th March 2012

This Union Notes:

1. That Leeds University Union represents over 30,000 members, each of whom has their own political views.
2. That each member has the right to have and express his or her opinion without being labelled with a contrasting view because he or she belongs to Leeds University Union.
3. That Leeds University Union aims to encourage diversity, but is limiting itself by supporting one side in a conflict while it represents members from the opposing side.

This Union Believes:

1. That every member has the right to freedom of speech and freedom of thought and should not be defined by the views of Leeds University Union.
2. It is not Leeds University Union's role to take sides in ongoing conflicts while it represents members from both sides of such conflicts.
3. That international conflicts are too complex to simply put forward referendum motions which subscribe LUU to opposing atrocities committed by only one side of such conflicts.

This Union Resolves:

1. To openly discourage the submission of motions which may compromise Leeds University Union’s impartiality in international conflicts whilst it represents members from both sides.
2. To promote each member's freedom of thought and freedom of expression and allow continued protest at the nature of international disputes by members from both sides.
3. That this motion should not prevent its own overturning in future referenda.

Proposer:Richard Mellor
Seconder:Mark Sellick



• Should Leeds University Union have a ‘green’ information point?

Policy Level: One,
Expires: 12th March 2012

This Union Notes:

1. In 2007/8 LUU was one of only three unions to receive Gold in the Sound Impact Awards, which recognises efforts to reduce their impact on the environment.
2. The university was rated 14th in the People and Planet 2008 Green League.
3. The Centre for Climate Change Economics and Policy, led by Lord Nicholas Stern was recently launched at Leeds University in partnership with London School of Economics.
4. There are many societies and volunteering projects that are environmentally-orientated.
5. The UK government has set an 80% reduction target for greenhouse gases by 2050.

This Union Believes:

1. As a university and union recognised for its leading role in sustainability and its commitment to tackling climate change, the union should make an effort to enhance this image
2. Many students are interested in environmental issues and should have a place to discuss and learn about such issues.
3. Environmental issues are becoming increasingly relevant and the union has a responsibility to empower students through knowledge.

This Union Resolves:

1. To allocate an easily accessible and visible space in the union (such as part of the Info Point) to environmental information, to be ready by Green Week 2010.
2. To ensure that all students have a say in what goes in the area. A forum will take place in Green Week 2009 so that all students can input into the initial stages.
3. To ensure the space is used as a means of monitoring the union’s environmental impact and carbon emissions, so that all students can see the union’s progress.
4. To include in the space a recycling point, bike maintenance, educational material on the science behind climate change and a charity shop in which proceeds go towards student-led environmental projects.
5. To use the space as an information point on environmental societies and projects; environmental volunteer and work placements and how to live sustainably.
6. To look into the possibility of powering the room with renewable energy.
7. To mandate the Ethical and Environmental Assembly Chair and the CIA officer to ensure this project is fulfilled and to maintain its existence.

Proposer: Emma Hargrave
Seconder: Sarah McIvor



• LUU Energy and Environmental Engineering Society

Policy Level: One,
Date of Meeting: 26th January 2009
Expires: 26th January 2012

This Union Notes:

1. That the committee and general membership of the Energy and Environmental Engineering Society are committed to furthering the global use of renewable energy sources.
2. That the Energy and Environmental Engineering Society received £100 in subsidy funding from LUU for the entire academic year.
3. That this subsidy plus general fundraising limits our activities as a society.
4. That, considering the current economic climate and LUU’s projected capacity to financially support clubs and societies in the future, we cannot expect an increase in LUU subsidies.
5. That a great deal of funding could potentially be sourced from external companies currently banned under the ethical section of the LUU Advertising Policy.
6. That the University already works with and promotes energy companies currently banned under LUU’s Advertising Policy.

This Union Believes:

1. That building a relationship with energy companies gives our students a chance to better impact our commitment to renewable energy sources on those companies.
2. That our commitment to renewable energy, developed at an academic level, will not be altered or corrupted were companies to give us aid, financial or otherwise.
3. That challenging and questioning energy companies practices and values can be done through a variety of means, whether it is protest or dialogue.
4. That the LUU Advertising Policy’s aim to be a ‘one size fits all’ document is not working.

This Union Resolves:

1. To exempt the Energy and Environmental Engineering Society only from the ethical ban on oil and energy companies until an effective, alternative way is provided to fund the
2. To mandate the Ethical and Environmental Assembly Chair, Communications and Internal Affairs Officer and Activities Officer to monitor any relationship that develops between the Energy and Environmental Engineering Society and a previously banned energy company.
3. To mandate the Energy and Environmental Engineering Society to fully cooperate with the above officers in this process.

Proposer: Lucy Myers (200326171)
Seconder: Aiysha Ahmed



• Black History Month

Policy Level: One,
Date of Meeting: 11th May 2009
Expires: 11th May 2012

This Union Notes:

1. That Black History Month 2008 was an overwhelming success and was organised for the first time in conjunction with the University of Leeds.
2. That £150 was set aside in the campaigns budget for Black History Month this year and that this figure would not have even covered the costs of printing for the month.
3. That the International Culture Week received a budget of around £1,500 this same year.
4. That without additional funding of approximately £800 kindly provided by the University of Leeds Equality Service, Black History Month 2008 would not have been successful, or have inspired other institutions to run similar programmes and would definitely not have received the recognition that it gained from the University and other external organisations.

This Union Believes:

1. That if LUU wants its members to believe that it takes Black liberation, anti-racism and culture-change seriously it must reflect this in its budget.
2. That it is likely that the University will wish to make further financial contributions to Black History Month due to its success amongst staff members, but this does not mean that LUU should not make a significant contribution so that the quality of the event can continue to improve.
3. Black History Month should not receive lesser funding from the Union because it is student-led and highly political in nature.

This Union Resolves:

1. To increase the budget for Black History Month for the year 2009/2010 to £1,500, divided equally between LUU and the University.
2. For the spending of this budget to be decided and agreed upon by the Student Steering Group for Black History Month, which will include the Black & Asian Assembly Convenor, and will be chaired by LUU’s Equality & Diversity Officer.
3. That this increase in budget will not adversely affect budgets for other events focusing on liberation and culture-change on campus.

Proposer: Maryam Amhad
Seconder: Laura Mcfarlane-Shopes



• Make LUU Family Friendly

Policy Level: One,
Date of Meeting: 8th June 2009
Expires: 8th June 2012

This Union Notes:

1. Research into the experiences of student parents conducted by NUS, the University of Leeds Lifelong Learning Centre and work conducted by the LUU Student Parent Assembly found that student parents are an under-represented and disenfranchised group within the student body.
2. 77 per cent of those taking part in the NUS survey said they did not think it was easy to get involved with university life. When asked what would help them become more involved in student life the most popular answer was 'child-friendly attitudes' (68 per cent of responses).

This Union Believes:

1. The demographic of the student population is changing, resulting in an increasingly diverse student body with needs that are arguably different to those groups of students that Unions and Universities traditionally cater for. Many student parents feel that they are only welcome to join activities and use Union facilities if their children are also welcome.
2. In light of recommendations from the different research conducted, LUU should take steps to become family friendly by creating a dedicated space in the student Union building where student parents and their children are welcome, to organise more activities for student parents and to help these students make contact with one another.

This Union Resolves:

1. To create an accessible and visible space in the Union building for students with children.
2. This space should be comfortable for parents with appropriate furniture, and child-friendly with a play area for games and activities. The space should also include an information point so student parents can access information about activities and events taking place and also have a way of keeping in touch with other student parents.
3. LUU should consult with the Student Parent Assembly Chair(s) and other student parents, with particular focus on international students with children, to decide what else should go in the space.
4. For the Events team to organise events for students and their children during International/UK Intro weeks and to provide support to student parents wishing to organise activities at other times of the year.
5. To facilitate the development of an online community of students with caring responsibilities by creating a dedicated space for these students to contact one another on the LUU website.
6. These facilities should be advertised by targeting students with dependants through Banner and the Lifelong Learning Centre.
7. That the creation of this space will be part of the redevelopment of the union building in line with LUU’s plans.

Proposer: Maryam Ahmad
Seconder: Sophia James



• Oppose the points based immigration system

Policy Level: One,
Date of Meeting: 8th June 2009
Expires: 8th June 2012

This Union Notes:

1. A new Points Based Immigration System (PBS) has been introduced for students arriving from non European Economic Area (EEA) countries (overseas students).
2. The annual intake of overseas students generates approximately £8.5bn for the UK economy.
3. The new regulations require that institutions wishing to recruit overseas students must receive a license from the UK Border Agency (UKBA).
4. Overseas students must be sponsored by a UKBA licensed institution, supply fingerprints, carry a biometric identity card and meet a stringent set of criteria.
5. Institutions will be required to input all data on overseas students into the Sponsor Management System, a database for use by the Home Office.
6. A maintenance test is to be introduced requiring students to show that they can cover the cost of their fees in addition to £9,600 for living expenses for the year plus £535 per month for any dependants. International students therefore cannot study here unless they produce evidence of very large reserves in their bank accounts.
7. In 2007/2008 motion 3.2.4 passed to make the official stance of LUU as anti-ID cards.
8. PBS requires that staff monitor and report information about students to the Home Office which “will be used to take enforcement action against them”. Information required includes:
   • If a student fails to enrol on the course at the expected time-the information must be passed on to the Home Office within 10 working days and must include any reason given (e.g. a missed flight);
   • If a student has missed 10 “expected interactions” (e.g. tutorials, submission of coursework);
   • Suspicions that staff may have that a student is breaching the conditions of his or her leave
   • Changes in a students circumstances;
   • Details of students' records, used for reporting for up to two years after the student is no longer sponsored;

This Union Believes:

1. The Points Based Immigration System is discriminatory against non EEA national students. The rules and requirements are likely to increase racism and discrimination against Black and overseas students.
2. They will serve to exclude poorer students from overseas from access to education in the UK.
3. They will undermine the trust between staff and students required in their relationship as co-producers of education.
4. They will require university staff to monitor and report on the activities of students on behalf of the UK Border Agency and act as Immigration Officers.
5. Overseas students are being used as “guinea pigs” for ID cards before these are forced on the general UK population.
6. The proposals represent a possible breach of Article 8 (right to a private life) and Article 3 (degrading treatment) of the European Convention on Human Rights and the Human Rights Act 19983.

This Union Resolves:

1. To write to the Home Office detailing LUU's opposition to the Points Based System including the reasons for this as detailed above.
2. To work with interested parties such as NUS and UCU to build a campaign against the implementation of the new system, and for the Government to abandon this policy
3. To maintain the official stance of LUU as anti-ID cards.

Proposer: Maryam Ahmad
Seconder: Sophia James



• Should Leeds University Union (LUU) lobby the University for better provisions in the Worsley Building?

Policy Level: One,
Expires: 1st December 2012

This Union Notes:

1. The Worsley Building is the home building for all Medical and Dental students; whilst also containing the Health Sciences Library (HSL) which is one of the main campus libraries.
2. There is currently no cash point (ATM) in the Worsley Building.
3. Overseas students must be sponsored by a UKBA licensed institution, supply fingerprints, carry a biometric identity card and meet a stringent set of criteria.
4. The two closest ATMs are in the LUU building and in the Leeds General Infirmary (LGI).
5. Unnecessary movement within hospitals helps the spread of infectious diseases such as MRSA and Swine Flu.
6. There is a minimum £5 spend to pay by card in the Worsley Building Cafe and there is no option for ‘cash back’.
7. Currently guests to the Worsley Building have to be escorted to the LUU building to get cash out.
8. There is currently poor access to taps providing drinking water in the Worsley Building.
9. Water is essential for concentration and general well being.

This Union Believes:

1. It is unfair for students to have waste so much time searching for an ATM and drinking water.
2. ATMs are the main access of cash for students.
3. Having an ATM and easily accessible drinking water will add to the value of the University.
4. Having to escort guests across campus to find an ATM is tiresome and embarrassing.
5. Every student should have easy access to free drinking water.

This Union Resolves:

1. To lobby the appropriate authorities/university for all ATM provisions.
2. To lobby the appropriate authorities/university for easy access to drinking water.
3. To increase the involvement students based in the Worsley Building with LUU.

Proposer: Kate Sutton
Seconder: Ian Butler



• Should LUU disallow access of any groups or individuals who have been convicted by the Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006, or Section 74 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008?

Policy Level: One,
Expires: 1st December 2012

This Union Notes:

1. Leeds University Union (LUU) is a membership organisation.
2. LUU is responsible for the safety of its members.
3. LUU holds equality as a core value and has recently won awards for the diversity within the organisation.
4. Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006 and section 74 of the Criminal Justice an Immigration Act 2008, recognise the danger of individuals or organisations who aim to provoke hatred or violence against particular social groups.
5. These Acts protect freedom of expression.
6. The National Union of Students (NUS) has a definition of safe space which all LUU’s members must abide by at NUS events.
7. As a safe space LUU cannot tolerate groups who contradict the above laws.
8. Safe space policy ensures that our union, and furthermore, our campus is a secure and welcoming place for all our students.

This Union Believes:

1. Students have the right to learn in a comfortable environment, regardless of ethnicity, faith, gender (identity), sexuality, ability, age or nationality.
2. Any situation where many students feel unsafe on their own campus is wrong.
3. We can reveal the nature of harmful groups without inviting their intimidating presence to campus.
4. Members already consider LUU as a safe space because the welfare of our members takes priority.
5. Freedom of speech is an important right which should be defended. However, freedom of speech doesn't extend to inciting hatred.
6. If LUU or a student group affiliated to LUU were to allow speakers or groups who initiate hatred, then this could be seen as an endorsement of their views.
7. Inciting to hatred aims to undermine the liberty of other social groups.

This Union Resolves:

1. To recognise LUU as a safe space for all its members.
2. To automatically disallow access of any groups or individuals who have been charged under the above Acts and who's sentence or punishment is currently ongoing.
3. To formulate an appeals process for access for any individual on the grounds of having reformed (e.g. ex BNP members who now work to expose them) The appeal to be put to Union Council, until the creation of the complaints group.
4. To mandate the Student Executive to run an active ‘Get the Vote Out’ campaign in order to provide students accurate and fair knowledge of all political parties and what they stand for.
5. To mandate the Student Executive to consider options for a Union based complaints procedure regarding speakers or groups on a case by case basis, to be approved by Union Council at an open and well publicised meeting.
6. [The union still withholds the right to deny access to any individual should such a decision be taken democratically by the student body (i.e. UC or referendum) but only where such exclusion is lawfully justified.]

Proposer: Sophia James
Seconder: Richard Allen



• Should LUU expand the current facilities of the Peanut Gallery

Policy Level: One,
Expires: April 2013

This Union Notes:

1. That the Peanut Gallery is an open space for all LUU members, and is the only student-run non-commercial space on campus.
2. That the Peanut Gallery is the sole provider of a number of facilities for students in the Union, such as kitchen facilities and a piano for general use.
3. That the Peanut Gallery is used by an increasingly large number of LUU societies, other student groups and individuals on a daily basis.
4. That the schedule is often overbooked due to the popularity of the space, leading to overheating, meetings taking place in the corridors outside the Peanut Gallery, and cancellation of events.

This Union Believes:

1. That LUU should have as much space as possible available to societies and groups to run their events in a comfortable, accommodating and inclusive environment.
2. That in being an open, inclusive and non-commercial space, the Peanut Gallery offers an alternative to other spaces in the Union.
3. That a larger space, or additional space, would benefit more members of the Union.

This Union Resolves:

1. To mandate the Community Officer to investigate the possibility of providing more space for the Peanut Gallery.
2. To mandate the Community Officer to investigate allocation of resources to the new space.
3. To improve signage directing people to the current Peanut Gallery, and any new space provided.
4. To carry out Resolves 1, 2 and 3 in consultation with Peanut Gallery users.

Proposer: Akram Salhab
Seconder: Guy Mitchell



• Should the LUU Advertising Policy be amended to better support Student Activity Groups?

Policy Level: One,
Expires: April 2013

This Union Notes:

1. That the current advertising policy passed in March 2008 is extremely prohibitive in respect to who societies can accept funding from.
2. That LUU is unable to satisfy the needs of all societies’ requests for grants from the Union.
3. That several societies severely struggle to obtain sponsorship which affects the ability to take part in Student Activities due to increased cost and as a result this lowers participation.
4. That in research held by LUU in 2009 the number one concern for students was employment upon leaving University.
5. That in the November 2008 Referendum, with a 75% vote Sports Groups were made exempt from the current Advertising Policy and currently have no guidelines.
6. That at a Sports Assembly in June 2009 there was a unanimous vote to accept Resolve 4 (below).

This Union Believes:

1. The current policy is unfair on societies.
2. That the policy can be updated and won’t put the Union at significant financial risk and will particularly benefit Leeds Student, which has had to lose three issues in the year 2009/10.
3. That it is necessary to outline the situation for Sports Groups in regards to resolves from the November 2008 Referendum.
4. Certain students are being prevented access to activities that would greatly benefit their overall University experience, in particular their potential employability upon leaving Leeds University.

This Union Resolves:

1. To remove all companies currently banned by the ‘Commercial’ element of the LUU Advertising Policy March 2008 to allow them to sponsor Activity Groups with the exception of competitors of Union Books as currently outlined.
2. To remove that Activity Groups need to seek approval from their Development Coordinator to permit them sponsorship from a bar or club.
3. That if any Club or Society wishes to accept funding from any business or organisations currently banned under Union policy, including bars and clubs, that they make a request to a committee of the Activities Officer, the Communications and Internal Affairs Officer and their Development Co-ordinator who decide whether to allow the sponsorship based solely on the premise of it clearly heightening the education or potential employability of their members.
4. That in line with the unanimous decision at Sports Assembly on 4th June 2009 Sports Clubs would only not accept sponsorship on some Ethical issues. Namely that there would be a ban on sponsorship from Tobacco companies and Strip Clubs.

Proposer: Josh Landy
Seconder: Chris Belcher




Appendix
The following was passed unanimously on June 4th 2009 at Sports Assembly.

LUU Sponsorship Policy for Sports Clubs
We have split the companies we will not accept sponsorship from by the reason for excluding them:

• Welfare; accepting sponsorship jeopardizes the welfare of our members
• Ethical; accepting sponsorship compromises our values




Welfare
Ban on all forms of sponsorship:

• Tobacco products
• Credit Cards
• Jobs that are paid on a commission only basis
• Housing agents deemed unacceptable by the Student Advice Centre
• Companies with student employment practices deemed unacceptable by the Student Advice Centre




Ethical
Ban on all forms of sponsorship:

• Tobacco companies
• Strip Clubs


• Should LUU commit to reducing its edible waste?

Policy Level: One,
Expires: April 2013

This Union Notes:

1. That the union continuously creates lots of waste that is still edible.
2. That this is not only a waste of food but a waste of money and resources.

This Union Believes:

1. That this waste is unnecessary and should be reduced.
2. That there are people in Leeds who could greatly benefit from this food.

This Union Resolves:

1. To reduce the amount of edible waste by either; Ordering food in accordance to demand hence aiming to reduce all edible waste.
2. Selling all edible products at a reduced price for longer period before throwing them away.
3. Donating them regularly to Bracken Court and other beneficiaries.

Proposer: Amy Carson
Seconder: Elsie Grace Bickmore



• Society Fair Consultation

Policy Level: Two,
Date of Meeting: 5th October 2009
Expires: 5th October 2012

This Union Notes:

1. That at the 2009 society fair (fresher’s fair) there was large involvement of companies and other outside bodies doing promotions and advertising products.
2. Some societies felt that the level of involvement distracted from recruitment.
3. Some societies felt that some of the activities of the companies (e.g. the handing out of FHM) was offensive and contrary to their aims whilst also contradicting LUU’s values of responsibility and diversity.
4. The justification for having outside bodies advertise in societies fair is that money made by LUU will be reinvested back into the running of the union and funding societies.

This Union Believes:

1. That society’s fair is a space for societies to promote themselves.
2. That LUU is not for profit.
3. That LUU should strive to be as democratic and bottom-up in structure.
4. That LUU should adhere to its values at all times.

This Union Resolves:

1. To mandate the Activities Officer, and the Equalities and Diversity Officer to hold a consultation in which all societies should be actively encouraged to join in, accessing how societies feel about current levels of involvement by outside bodies and the activities carried out by outside bodies as well as how the fair should be promoted and what it should look like.
2. To mandate the Activities Officer, and the Equalities and Diversity Officer to report back to the next union council session on how they have or plan to carry out this consultation and to report the results of this consultation to Union Council.
3. To mandate the Activities Officer, and the Equalities and Diversity Officer to vet the proposed activities of all outside bodies at society’s fair to make sure they adhere to the LUU’s values.


• The Great Climate Change Swoop

Policy Level: One,
Date of Meeting: 5th October 2009
Expires: 5th October 2012

This Union Notes:

1. That many motions have past union council and referendum concerning action on climate change including against coal.
2. That ‘The Great Climate Swoop’ is a mass action taking place on October 17-18th against e.on’s Ratcliffe coal fired power station organised by Climate Camp, Climate Rush, Plane Stupid, Rising Tide and the Campaign Against Climate Change, it has been billed as the most exciting climate event of the year.
3. Last year LUU took part in campaigns against the expansion of Leeds-Bradford Airport, against the building of Fairburn Ings open cast coal mine and for Hook Moor Wind Farm.
4. Members of LUU have been involved in the organisation and promotion of The Great Climate Swoop.
5. LUU has made strides in becoming ‘green’ and reducing its carbon emissions; this has won it acclaim including the winning of a sound impact award.

This Union Believes:

1. That students, the majority of which are young people, will be disproportionately affected by climate change.
2. No matter how much LUU and students reduce their own personal emissions this will have little impact unless the UK moves away from burning coal.

This Union Resolves:

1. To sell tickets for transport at no added cost at the help desk, CATs, or essentials.
2. To actively promote ‘The Great Climate Swoop’ and transport in LUU’s weekly email mail out, the Gist and on the website.


• News Just In

Policy Level: One,
Date of Meeting: 5th October 2009
Expires: 5th October 2012

This Union Notes:

1. Magazines were handed out by Union employees during freshers week.
2. Complaints were received regarding the distribution of these magazines.
3. Freshers' fair is an individual's first contact with Leeds University Union.
4. A motion was passed in June stating that "LUU will make real attempts to not propagate the objectification of women in its advertising or events and will thoroughly vet all external promoters to make sure that their events and advertising are in line with this agreement.".
5. LUU holds the values of equality and diversity at the core of its organisation. This is a result of democratically led strategic reviews.

This Union Believes:

1. LUU should be a safe space for all, including groups which fall under the Equality and Diversity mandate.
2. As the country's leading student union we should be at the forefront of representation and progressive politics.
3. It is important for all students to receive a positive message about the inclusive values of LUU. This is especially relevant during Freshers’ week.

This Union Resolves:

1. That media promoted by LUU that may offend groups which fall under the Equality and Diversity mandate will be vetted by the equality and diversity officer.
2. That the equality and diversity officer will report to union council on decisions made relating to the above clause.
3. That if an issue arises concerning vetting procedure, this will be referred to the liberation assemblies to vote on as a whole.
4. That the equality and diversity officer will be mandated to renew this motion every two years.


• Food Labelling and Choice for Specific Dietary Requirements

Policy Level: One,
Date of Meeting: 9th November 2009
Expires: 9th November 2012

This Union Notes:

1. That statistically at least:
   • 125 members of LUU are vegans ?;
   • 900 members of LUU are vegetarians ?;
   • 300 members of LUU are celiacs ?;
   • 150 members of LUU have a tree nut allergy 4
   • 300 members of LUU have a peanut allergy 4
   • 1500 members of LUU will have a problem digesting dairy products (lactose intolerance). ?;
   • LUU's food outlets currently don’t provide information about whether a dish/item is suitable for a certain diet (except for vegetarian diets).
   • Whilst some people chose a specific diet for health or ethical reasons, some people have no choice about their diet due to an intolerance/allergy.
   • LUU has a large population of students who are vegetarian by personal preference, due to faith, while others abide by Halall Kosher Food Laws.

This Union Believes:

1. In respecting the fact many students have a specific diet and that they should have a number of different choices when purchasing food.
2. LUU should try to cater for all its members different type of diet, even if they are a minority.
3. Having to ask staff about the suitability of a item for your particular diet is inconvenient and can be embarrassing, especially if its seen to be different from the norm.
4. Providing information about what items are suitable for particular diets could encourage more people to buy food from union outlets, because people with specific dietary requirements feel confident about what to buy, with out having to ask.

This Union Resolves:

1. To provide easy to understand labelling for food sold in The Old Bar, The Terrace and for sandwiches/wraps/pasties sold in Extras and Essentials for diets mentions in ‘this union notes’.
2. To engage constructively with private food retailers in the union and with the university about implementing a labelling system as above in their food outlets.
3. To aim to offer more items/dishes where possible which are suitable for those who have specific diets, in union outlets and to encourage to university to do the same.
4. That all LUU shops ‘Pick ‘n Mix' sweets will be clearly labelled as suitable for vegetarians and vegans.




Proposer: Adam Harper
Seconder: Madeleine Harris-Smith

 

1. The Vegan society, www.vegansociety.com/society
2. The Vegetarian society, www.vegsoc.org
3. The NHS, www.nhs.uk
4. Patient UK, www.patient.co.uk


• Pro-Choice Motion

Policy Level: One,
Date of Meeting: 9th November 2009
Expires: 9th November 2012

This Union Notes:

1. That three years ago, union council passed a motion to protect the union’s pro choice policy.
2. That a pro-choice stance is not a pro-abortion stance, but instead affirms abortion as a morally and medically acceptable choice. Pro choice supporters believe that the final decision about pregnancy and abortion should always rest with the female and that her informed choice should always be respected.
3. That Leeds University Union has an Abortion Fund and a New Born Baby Fund and dedicates equal resources to both.
4. That an LSE study in 2005 showed reproductive rights and choices have improved women’s social, economic and political position to a greater degree than equal pay and equal opportunities legislation (Abortion Rights UK).
5. That in Northern Ireland, abortion is almost completely criminalized, and that since 1967, over 54,000 women have been forced to travel to Britain or Europe to have an abortion, and have funded the entire cost of this trip themselves (Abortion Rights UK).
6. That unsafe abortion kills 70,000 women a year globally (Abortion Rights UK).

This Union Believes:

1. That women have the right to choose what they do with their own bodies, and having received proper information, should be trusted to make a final decision.
2. That reaffirming our pro choice stance means that students who do seek advice from the union are presented with information and facts and subsequently supported whatever their decision.
3. That the pro choice movement and a woman’s right to choose is threatened every day by the anti choice movement. ‘Abortion Rights’ is the national pro choice campaign and work to defend and extend women's rights and access to safe, legal abortion.

This Union Resolves:

1. To reaffirm the union’s pro choice policy with regard to pregnancy and abortion.
2. To protect both the Abortion Fund and the New Born Baby Fund.
3. To mandate the Women’s Assembly Chair to, within one month of the passing of this motion, write to the ministers listed below to ask that the government takes steps to end the policy of the criminalization of abortion in Northern Ireland:
   1. Secretary of State for Health
   2. Secretary of State for Northern Ireland
   3. Minister for Women and Equality
   4. Northern Irish Minister for Health, Social Services and Public Safety,
   5. The appropriate shadow ministers in the two major opposition parties in the UK parliament
4. To affiliate to ‘Abortion Rights’ so as to receive vital campaigning resources and advice.




Proposer: Madeleine Harris Smith
Seconder: Rosy Dorfman



• Gender Neutral Toilets Motion

Policy Level: One,
Date of Meeting: 25th January 2010
Expires: 25th January 2014

This Union Notes:

1. There are students at Leeds University, as well as visitors to the University, who may not feel comfortable using a gendered toilet.
2. The NUS LGBT liberation campaign is encouraging Unions to install gender neutral toilets.
3. Other Universities throughout the country have successfully installed or introduced gender neutral toilets.
4. LUU is at the forefront of Equality and Diversity.

This Union Believes:

1. Those students who do not feel comfortable using a gendered toilet should not have to do so.
2. There should be a gender neutral toilet available in the Union should anyone want to use it.
3. Promotion of the reasons for the existence of the gender neutral toilet should occur and their position in the Union advertised.
4. That the toilet should be accessible at all times whilst the Union is open.

This Union Resolves:

1. To change the sign on the door of the designated toilet to read (Access Toilet/WC/Toilet/GNT).
2. To have information regarding the whereabouts of the gender neutral toilet in all toilets in the Union.
3. Have information regarding the whereabouts of the nearest gendered toilets in the gender neutral toilet.
4. To display information as to the reason for the gender neutral toilet in the designated toilet.
5. Ensure that the toilet is always open without the need to ask for a key.


• A breakthrough stance on Islamophobia through art and culture.

Policy Level: One,
Date of Meeting: 15th March 2010
Expires: March 2013

This Union Notes:

1. There has been a rise to Islamophobia on UK Campuses.
2. Muslim students have recently received much negative press from the media.
3. People have poor knowledge of Islamic cultures (and art) often not differentiating between religion and culture.
4. Exhibitions enable people to understand other peoples’ points of view.
5. LUU has a commitment to equality.
6. The Exhibition will cost approximately £200 to fund.

This Union Believes:

1. That students should find positive methods to promote cultural diversity.
2. Art is a method used to celebrate cultural differences.
3. Islam is more than just a religion and has thrived development of culture.
4. We should support attempts to campaign against prejudice and discrimination.

This Union Resolves:

1. To support and advocate the activities exec to support the Islamic Art and Culture Campaign.
2. To facilitate advertisement of the project.
3. Have information regarding the whereabouts of the nearest gendered toilets in the gender neutral toilet.
4. 3. To continue to work with the Muslim community to combat Islamophobia.
5. Ensure that the toilet is always open without the need to ask for a key.

Proposer: Mohammad Mozaffari, 200314634
Seconder: Sophia James, 200242570



• Should LUU increase visibility and inclusion of autonomous DIY student-run spaces in the union?

Policy Level: One,
Expires: November 2013

What LUU Should Do:

1. To add The music library, the green action co-op and the peanut gallery to all the new sign-age in the union.
2. To replace the advertising space near the union entrance with a new display made with the proper involvement students active in these DIY spaces, that contain creative maps to their locations, short blurbs, and a showcase of photography at the locations so people have an idea of what it's actually like.
3. To include any similar spaces in this effort, now an in the future.

Why LUU Should Do It:

1. I feel incredibly proud of these parts of the union, which are really special to Leeds... it seems a great shame that they take so long to discover, and are so hard to find.
2. There are very few other university unions that seem to have as many brilliant unique spaces such as these, we should be incredibly proud of them and make them a visible part of new union entrance.
3. They are used by a huge number of societies and students who would really appreciate these improvements.
4. I recently designed and distributed my own map to the peanut gallery, which made me realise how absent any such resources are.
5. The biggest hurdle to running events there really is trying to describe to people where it is.
6. Many students I've met have heard things about the music library and wanted to visit it but have spent years at university without ever being able to find it. The floor that it resides on isn't even included in the new "-2, -1, 0, 1, 2" floor numbering scheme. I'm sure this could be turned around in a positive way it could be labelled as existing on the "secret floor 3" or the chamber of secrets or level 2 and a half, or something.
7. The current design makes such spaces very inaccessible and lends to a lack of both visibility of the people who are involved in the union through them and the feeling of ownership of these spaces that the average student should feel.
8. To be known, to be found, and to be celebrated are vital components to being a part of the better union we all want.

Proposer: Jacob Mirzaian



• Should the Union introduce a loyalty scheme to help students save money?

Policy Level: One,
Expires: November 2013

What LUU Should Do:

1. I would like to see the Union introduce some kind of universal loyalty scheme for students who spend their money in the union shops, bars and food outlets. I would like to see this scheme apply to food, stationery, and any other essential purchases which students have to make on a daily basis.

Why LUU Should Do It:

1. Because I believe that shopping in the Union can be quite expensive - prices are not always competitive with other retailers and this is off putting to many less well off students. By introducing a loyalty scheme, like for example the Sainsburys 'nectar points' scheme, the Union will be giving students an additional means of saving money whilst offering an incentive to shop within the Union.

Proposer:Amy Butler



• Should the Union promote the new democratic system more widely?

Policy Level: One,
Expires: November 2013

What LUU Should Do:

1. Advertise the new process of decision making more clearly.

Why LUU Should Do It:

1. Send an email to each student explaining what the new system is and how to get involved, i.e. when the deadlines are, rather than just embedding a little bit of information in the fortnightly newsletter.

Proposer:Hannah Martinson Hughes



• Should LUU campaign to let members how they should report sexual harassment?

Policy Level: One,
Expires: November 2013

What LUU Should Do:

1. All members of LUU should be free from: - Unwanted sexual comments (including comments about your body or private life) - Unwelcome sexual invitations, innuendos, and offensive gestures - Wolf whistling, catcalling or offensive sexual noises - Groping, pinching or smacking of your body, such as your bottom - Having your top or skirt lifted without agreeing
2. LUU has a responsibility towards it members to make them feel as safe as possible when they partake in any union activity. All members should feel confident that LUU considers this sort of behaviour unacceptable. All members should feel confident that if they complaint about this sort of behaviour it will be taken seriously and the complaints procedure in the bye-laws is used to ensure this behaviour is stopped.

Why LUU Should Do It:

1. Between August 2009 and March 2010 NUS carried out research called ‘Hidden Marks,’ which conducted an online survey of 2058 women students’ experiences of harassment, stalking, violence, and sexual assault.
2. The research reported that one in seven survey respondents has experienced a serious physical or sexual assault during their time as a student. Over two thirds of women students (68 per cent) have experienced some kind of verbal or non-verbal harassment in and around their institution.
3. Every member of LUU has the right to enjoy their time at university free from sexual harassment. As a membership organisation LUU has the responsibility to ensure the safety of our students and that includes taking a zero-tolerance approach to harassing behaviour, with the intention of changing attitudes towards this behaviour.

Proposer:Rachel Wenstone



• Should the union extend the composting facilities already available in the union?

Policy Level: One,
Expires: November 2013

What LUU Should Do:

1. Have more composting bins placed around the union and make them more prominent so that people know that they are there.

Why LUU Should Do It:

1. To decrease the amount of waste sent to landfill and to create a greener union.

Proposer:Charlotte Ball



• Should the union provide more vegan options in the Essentials store and improve labeling of Vegan food?

Policy Level: One,
Expires: November 2013

What LUU Should Do:

1. Introduce more vegan food in Essentials e.g. sandwiches. I am currently trying to turn vegan and I find the choice limited. Currently there is a good snack called 'clives soya roll' however this contains palm oil and so is not ethical (vegans are generally vegan on the basis of ethics).

Why LUU Should Do It:

1. As there is a large vegan population at the University of Leeds and there is not much choice in the way of vegan food in Essentials. Everyone can eat vegan food but not everyone can eat meat and vegetarian food.

Proposer:Charlotte Ball



• Should the Union celebrate it's Clubs & Societies achievements by building a trophy cabinet?

Policy Level: One,
Expires: November 2013

What LUU Should Do:

1. I would like the Union to display all of their Clubs & Societies trophies and shields in a display cabinet somewhere prominent in the Union.

Why LUU Should Do It:

1. All of the atheltes know of their own achievements but there are thousands of students who do not realise how successful our sporting teams are. By having a cabinet we can proudly display how many successes we have achieved not only to current students, but more importantly to prospective students to the University. This should raise the profile of sports at the University and also help the Leeds Gryphons programme by displaying how successful our teams are somewhere other than the Edge or Weetwood pitches. Currently the trophies are located in the Union and weetwood offices and I feel this does not do our sports teams justice by keeping their hard earned trophies locked away instead of being proudly displayed.

Proposer:Lydia Carroll



• Should the Union Promote fundamental Human rights by supporting 'Human Rights Day 2010?

Policy Level: One,
Expires: November 2013

What LUU Should Do:

1. I would like to see the Union support the promotion of fundamental Human Rights through the celebration of "Human Rights Day on December 10th 2010". This would be in collaboration with the LUU Societies, working together to promote awareness about human rights abuses the world over, as well as to celebrate the importance of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The role of the union would be to help facilitate the marketing of campaigns and events linked to the day, fundamentally providing a larger platform in order to raise awareness about human rights abuses to a larger audience.

Why LUU Should Do It:

1. It is important for the Union to support Human rights day, in order to allow students access to information about basic human rights, and more importantly, access to information about groups or individuals suffering grave human rights abuses the world over. Although basic human rights are something that we have enjoyed in this country for many years, it is still important to understand that there are places where access to such rights do not exist. Working with the Union would therefore allow a broad platform to which students would have easy access, in order to gain information about the importance of human rights and further enrich their own personal knowledge.
2. That the student executive investigate the possibility of supporting similar international days

Proposer:Mathew Milner



• Should the Union Reniew it's Nestle Boycott?

Policy Level: One,
Expires: November 2013

What LUU Should Do:

1. To continue the boycott of all Nestlé products in all LUU retail outlets. To place advertisement in these outlets explaining why there is a boycott of Nestlé products. To write a letter to Nestlé detailing why we are maintaining a boycott of their products, and stating that the boycott will remain in place until they cease these practices and abide by the International Code of Marketing Breastmilk Substitutes.

Why LUU Should Do It:

1. There has been a Nestlé boycott in place in LUU for more than 12 years. This Nestlé Boycott Policy will lapse if not renewed at this referendum. According to UNICEF, more than 4,000 babies die everyday because they are not breastfed. Nestlé promotes artificial infant feeding around the world, breaking the World Health Organization code of marketing. The promotion of artificial feeding, particularly in developing countries where their may not be access to safe drinking water, is unacceptable and causes the deaths of many children. Nestlé, while frequently denying that it has done anything wrong, has lost a number of court battles against various governments and lobbying organisations By boycotting Nestlé products we are sending a message to Nestlé that LUU strongly disagree with their practices.

Proposer:Molly Hopkinshaw



• Should the union introduce a juice carton recycling facility (i.e. tetra pak etc)?

Policy Level: One,
Expires: November 2013

What LUU Should Do:

1. Introduce facilities where people can recycle tetra cartons.

Why LUU Should Do It:

1. This service isn't provided by the council and it is difficult otherwise to recycle them and so they just get sent to landfill. If there was a place in the union to recycle them then people would be able to bring them in

Proposer:Charlotte Ball



• Should the Union create an accessible computer space in the Union building?

Policy Level: One,
Expires: November 2013

What LUU Should Do:

1. I want the union to create a computer space as we had before the refurbishment. It would need to consider the needs of all students including disabled students who find it harder to access some computer areas on campus.

Why LUU Should Do It:

1. Quite often I will be in the Union building, attending events, shopping, eating or passing time till I need to be elsewhere. I used to check my emails before the refurbishment as it was the most convenient place to do so - who wants to go out of their way to go find a desk in a cluster when you just want the computer for 5 minutes? The only computers nearby are those on the mezzanine floor of the Refectory but I am unable to get onto the high seats or move them out of the way.

Proposer:Robyn Brockie



• Should the Union sell sustainable Tuna products?

Policy Level: One,
Expires: November 2013

What LUU Should Do:

1. The Union must provide an alternative to the very cheap and unsustainable tuna products in shops and bars.

Why LUU Should Do It:

1. After the concern for the environment concerning bottled water and recycling, I feel that the union should turn it's attention to problems with responsible food sources. Already large sandwich companies (E.G Pret A Manger) have started to stop the use of tuna in their products due to the risk of making tuna extinct by the current over use of unsustainable methods. Tuna is a very popular food and sold so cheaply in the union (e.g., 99p a sandwich) and I think it would be good to provide students with a sustainable choice and raise awareness of such issues, further than simply recycling.

Proposer:Lucy Davies

What we have to bear in mind...

• Stop the Royal Bank of Scotand/Natwest funding Climate Change

Policy Level: Two,
Expires: 21st February 2011

This Union Notes:

1. The Royal Bank of Scotland aggressively invests in the oil and gas industry and has described itself as “the oil and gas bank”.
2. Many members of LUU hold accounts with Natwest, which is owned by the Royal Bank of Scotland.
3. The CO2 emissions resulting from the Royal Bank of Scotland’s financing of oil and gas projects are equivalent to one quarter of all UK household emissions1.
4. LUU has a bank account with Natwest.
5. The National Union of Students has recently threatened to switch from banking with Natwest due to concerns about the impact on climate change of these emissions.

This Union Believes:

1. By funding new extraction projects that will run for decades, the Royal Bank of Scotland is ensuring high CO2 emissions long into our future and limiting the impact of all other efforts to combat climate change.
2. The Royal Bank of Scotland’s investments in renewable energy are irrelevant in tackling climate change if they are alongside heavy oil extraction.
3. We have a responsibility to demand that our money does not fund destructive climate change.

This Union Resolves:

1. To add the Royal Bank of Scotland/Natwest to our list of banned companies in the advertising policy, unless they cease investing in new fossil fuel exploration and extraction projects by their 2009 AGM.
2. To close our account with Natwest and explain our reasons for doing so, unless the Royal Bank of Scotland cease investing in new fossil fuel exploration and extraction projects by their 2009 AGM.
3. To mandate the Communications and Internal Affairs officer to communicate the above to the Royal Bank of Scotland.



1. Platform, Bankrack, Friends of the Earth Scotland, New Economics Foundation, People and Planet. The Oil and Gas Bank: RBS and the financing of Climate Change March 2007. Available here: http://peopleandplanet.org/dl/ddd/rbs_report.pdf.

Proposer: Stephen Halpin
Seconder: Eleanor Hadshar



• ID Cards

Policy Level: Two,
Expires: 21st February 2011

This Union Notes:

1. David Blunkett, has admitted that ID cards will not stop a determined Terrorist.
2. The men responsible for the Madrid bombings all carried valid ID cards.
3. Those who murdered fifty-two innocent people in London on the 7th July 2005 made no attempt to hide their identities; they wanted to hide their intent.
4. Fraud involving identity theft is mostly carried out over the internet or telephone line where ID cards are irrelevant.
5. The effect of ID cards on street crime would be minimal.
6. Crime levels are just as high in France, Germany, Italy and Spain as they are here and they all have ID card schemes.
7. They are planned to become compulsory in the future.
8. The leader of the Lib Dems, Nick Clegg has refused to carry an ID card as well as 10,000 people in just four weeks in 2005. This could become a criminal offence in the future.
9. Research in Europe shows that in countries where ID cards exist, people from ethnic minorities are much more likely to be stopped by the police and asked to produce their card.
10. ID cards will be an unnecessary infringement on privacy with over fifty pieces of Information, including a DNA sample to be introduced at a later date, on a national identity register accessible to all government departments and private firms.
11. The government lost over 25million personal records in 2007 alone.
12. The London School of Economics Report states that I.D cards will cost £19 billion. If any details change, the owner of the I.D card is responsible for the cost of amendments. If one neglects to doi this they may be fined.

This Union Believes:

1. I.D cards will further diminish our Civil Liberties
2. I.D cards will not protect our country from terrorism
3. I.D cards will not cut crime
4. I.D cards will increase discrimination.
5. I.D cards will be overly costly, with money better spent elsewhere.
6. The government has not shown competency in the protection of personal information to be trusted with over 52 pieces of our intimate details, which will be available to private companies.

This Union Resolves:

1. To make the official stance of Leeds University as anti- ID cards.
2. To lobby the NUS to make the official stance of the NUS as anti-ID cards.



1Liberty, 2007, ‘ID Cards Fiction and Fact’ Available from the World Wide Web: http://www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk/issues/3-privacy/pdfs/id-cards-fact-and-fiction07.pdf [Accessed 24/1/2008

Proposer: Karlia Lykourgou
Seconder: Hind Hassan



• Iraq Motion

Policy Level: One,
Expires: 12th November 2010
Policy PASSED

This Union Notes:

1. We are approaching the four year anniversary of the invasion of Iraq.
2. George W. Bush stated that the objective of the invasion was "to disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction, to end Saddam Hussein's support for terrorism, and to free the Iraqi people.”
3. U.S. National Intelligence Estimate found “that the overall terrorist threat has grown since the Sept. 11 attacks.”
4. A Lancet report published in October 2006 estimated that “as a consequence of the coalition invasion of March 18, 2003, about 655 000 Iraqis have died above the number that would be expected in a non-conflict situation, which is equivalent to about 2•5% of the population.”
5. Since 2003 the Iraqi Medical Association research revealed up to 75 percent of doctors, pharmacists and nurses have left their jobs at universities, clinics and hospitals.
6. As a result of the invasion there are now over 2 million displaced Iraqis inside the country and around a further 1.5 million in Syria and Jordan.
7. Increased violence and threat of violence since the occupation is corroding standards of education in Iraq. The Ministry of Education statistics show that since the invasion:
   • The ratio of girls attending school has dropped to 1:4
   • 1 in 3 children do not attend primary school.
   • 30% at university are attending classes.

This Union Believes:

1. To date no evidence of WMD has been found thus the reason for the initial invasion has proven to be unfounded.
2. The war in Iraq has lead to the loss of innocent civilian and conscript lives, the further economic devastation of Iraq and the fuelling of a dangerous conflict throughout the Middle East.
3. That as a result of the invasion education and literacy levels have deteriorated due to the increase in violence, lack of educational amenities and threats made against academics.

This Union Resolves:

1. To affiliate to the national Stop the War Coalition until the date of the next referendum.
2. To support the ‘Books for Iraq’ program by encouraging students to donate unwanted academic books.
3. To contribute £75 to the Leeds Student Iraqi Appeal’s campaign.
4. To publicise to our members the annual, national, and regional Stop the War demonstrations to mark the anniversary of the invasion.



Proposer: Alia Mahdi
Seconder: Hind Hassan



• No Platform Policy

Policy Level: One,
Date of Meeting: 11th February 2008
Expires: 11th February 2011
Policy PASSED

This Union Notes:

1. A number of societies and groups affiliated to Leeds University Union host speakers, events and debates on campus, with many open to all members of the University of Leeds and Leeds University Union
2. According to the Ministry of Justice, 41,000 racially and religiously motivated attacks occurred in the UK in 2005-6, a rise of 12% on the previous year
3. The All Parliamentary Report into Anti-Semitism heard evidence that the Young BNP is active on around 15 campuses
4. The National Union of Students adopted a 'No Platform' policy in the early 1990s
5. Current organisations banned under the NUS No Platform Policy are the British National Party and Hizb ut Tahir

This Union Believes:

1. The NUS No Platform Policy works to ensure that all students have the right to feel comfortable, safe and secure on campus regardless of race or religious affiliation
2. That in the University of Leeds there are a large number of students from differing ethnic backgrounds, and that these students deserve the right to not feel intimidated or threatened on campus.
3. That there has been a number of Islamophobic and anti-Semitic incidents on campuses around the country, including at the University of Leeds.
4. That racial and religious hate crimes increase when speakers with extremely racist or fascist views are actively given a high-profile platform and this presents a very real risk to students.
5. That freedom of speech is an important right
6. That there is a difference between preventing freedom of speech, and avoiding the promotion of speakers who are very likely to incite hatred on the grounds of religion, race, sexuality or along other lines
7. That if LUU or a society affiliated to LUU were to provide a platform to speakers or groups of this nature, then this could be seen by some as an endorsement of their views
8. That a number of front groups have been set up on campuses around the country for racist and fascist organisations

This Union Resolves:

1. To adopt a No Platform Policy, which prevents members or groups mentioned in 'This Union Notes 5' from speaking, attending or playing a part in LUU events. This includes, but is not limited to: debates, society events, rallies and public meetings.
2. That no person who is a member of an organisation included under the No Platform policy will be eligible to stand for Student Executive, Union Council or NUS Elections within Leeds University Union.
3. To permanently exclude from the Union any member who is found to promoting racist or fascist views.
4. For Union Council to close down any LUU affiliated society that acts as a proxy for organisations listed under the 'No Platform' Policy.
5. That organisations can be added to and removed from this 'No Platform' Policy with the approval of the two-thirds of LUU's Union Council or a simple majority at referendum
6. To advertise to the membership the reasons why this Union is adopting a No Platform Policy.
7. To promote a strict No Platform Policy but one that does not affect the freedom of media societies to report objectively on racism and fascism’
8. To put this motion to the next possible referendum’.



Proposer: Jak Codd, 200241512
Seconder: Zac Esdaile, 200136371



• Twinning motion

Policy Level: Two,
Date of Meeting: 14th April 2008
Expires: 14th April 2011
Policy PASSED

This Union Notes:

1. That at referendum in November 2006, LUU voted to twin with Birzeit University Student Union, Palestine.
2. That this twinning was in order to affirm Palestinian students’ right to higher education, and acknowledge the difficulties that they face in studying under Israeli military occupation.
3. That one of the problems faced by Palestinian students is the threat of arbitrary arrest. At any time there are Birzeit students held by the Israeli military authorities; since November 2003, 339 Birzeit students have been arrested. Some of these are never given a trial, and others are held for belonging to political organisations, which puts members of the Student Council under particular threat.
4. That students make up a notable proportion of the current 11,000 Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli jails.
5. That the head of the Birzeit University Student Council, Fadi Hamad, was arrested in November 2007, and that the acting head of the Student Council, Abdullah Owais, was arrested in February 2008

This Union Believes:

1. That these arrests constitute an attack on the right of Palestinian students to be politically active, and a threat to Palestinian students’ right to education.
2. That it is the role of LUU, under our twinning agreement, to mount a strong campaign for the freedom of politically imprisoned students from Birzeit.

This Union Resolves:

1. To join Birzeit Student Union’s campaign against political imprisonment.
2. To send a letter protesting the imprisonment of Fai and Abdullah to the Israeli embassy, and copy it to the Leeds MPs and MEPs and the Foreign Office.
3. To mark Palestinian Political Prisoner Day on 17th April, and call on Leeds students to sign model letters calling for the freedom of Fadi Hamad, Abdullah Owais, and other imprisoned students from Birzeit.
4. To put this motion to the next possible referendum’.




• Should Leeds University Union oppose Gazan rocket attacks on civilians in Southern Israel?

Policy Level: Two,
Expires: 4th December 2011

This Union Notes:

1. Southern Israel has suffered constant rocket and mortar attacks, originating from the Palestinian territory of Gaza, since 2001.
2. From April 2001 until May 2008 over 3,050 rockets have been fired into Israel, along with more than 2,500 mortar attacks.
3. Over 25 Israeli citizens have been killed as a result of these attacks, with over five hundred injuries.
4. These attacks have accelerated since the Hamas takeover of the Gaza Strip.
5. The city of Sderot has been at the brunt of these attacks.
6. Over 33% of children in Sderot suffer from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder as a result of the constant attacks.
7. On 27th February 2008 a student at Sapir College in Sderot was killed when a rocket from Gaza landed in the middle of campus.
8. The right to education for Sapir College’s students has been severely curtailed by constant attacks from the Palestinian territory of Gaza.

This Union Believes:

1. Rocket attacks from Gaza are illegal acts of terrorism.
2. That the right to education is of fundamental importance, and that this right is currently being denied to the students at Sapir College.
3. That a two state solution with a stable Palestine and a secure Israel living side by side in peace is the best solution to the current conflict in the Middle East.
4. That the illegal rocket attacks from Gaza into Israel are a significant barrier to peace.

This Union Resolves:

1. To twin Leeds University Union with Sapir College Students’ Union.
2. To officially support a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
3. To send a letter to the Palestinian General Delegation in the UK expressing LUU’s opposition to the illegal attacks on Israel.
4. To support Leeds Jewish Society in its efforts to raise money towards a bomb shelter for the Sapir College campus.
5. To officially support Leeds Jewish Society’s campaign to raise awareness around the situation in Sderot and southern Israel.



Proposed by: Samantha Lishak
Seconded by: Elliott Jebreel



• Leeds Student Motion

Policy Level: One,
Date of Meeting: 7th December 2009,
Expires: 7th December 2012

This Union Notes:

1. The LUU by-laws state that the position of Leeds Student editor is to be elected by a cross-campus ballot.
2. The policy stipulating that candidates must have “one year committee level experience” expires this year.
3. Steering Committee felt there were significant problems with last year’s election due to a lack of clarity of what was meant by the term “experience”.
4. Leeds Student is growing every year and therefore there are more potential candidates for the role.

This Union Believes:

1. Leeds Student has a responsibility to readers to maintain high standards of journalistic integrity.
2. The selection process can no longer just be cross-campus elected. There needs to be a greater weight on candidates’ experience.
3. The Leeds Student editor is legally responsible for the content of the newspaper and therefore needs to be appropriately equipped for this so as not to pose any threats to LUU as a whole.

This Union Resolves:

1. To create a vetting process for candidates who wish to stand for election. (See Appendix).
2. For it to be written into the job description of the Leeds Student editor to carry out the vetting process and then pass candidates onto the CDS team to carry out the cross-campus election. Any Candidate who fulfils the job specification and job description can go to election.
3. This process will be the responsibility of the Leeds Student editor and included in their duties.
4. A job description and job specification will be designed for the post by the development coordinator and Leeds Student editor. This will be approved by the Leeds Student sub editorial team.
5. That a representative of the panel should make a presentation to Union Council should a candidate be declined.



Appendix:
Candidates will be interviewed by a panel made up of a professional journalist, the Media Societies Development co-ordinator, the LUU Business Development Co-ordinator and the Activities Executive Officer. Any number of candidates with appropriate experience will be forwarded to the cross-campus ballot.

Proposed by: Virginia Newman (current LS Editor)
Seconded by: Rob Heath (200279700)



• No Platform Policy

Policy Level: One,
Date of Meeting: 7th December 2009,
Expires: 7th December 2012

This Union Notes:

1. Following the Autumn referendum 2009, LUU has policy disallowing access to the union to groups and individuals with standing convictions under certain hate crime legislation.
2. LUU is currently reviewing how to set up a complaints procedure in relation to invited speakers not covered under this policy.
3. That members of the BNP have stood in student union elections on a platform of removing black student representation and/or introducing a white student officer.
4. That the Young BNP infiltrated political and campaigning societies at UMSU, leaking names and details of anti racist students, leading to some receiving death threats.
5. The All Parliamentary Report into anti-Semitism has been informed that the Young BNP is active on 15 campuses.
6. That NUS, NUS Liberation campaigns and all major trade unions have a no platform policy.

This Union Believes:

1. That current policy does not completely protect LUU against the possibility of those from fascist organiations exploiting our democratic structures or our activities provisions.
2. That LUU societies have been used in the past to push a racist agenda. In the same interview with the Guardian where former BNP youth Leader Mark Collett declared his preference for a 'racially pure Britain,' he also stated '"When I came to Leeds University I joined the Free Speech society to fight against political correctness.'
3. That it is unacceptable for LUU to put its membership and reputation at risk by not having measures in place to ensure its democracy and funding are not being used to push an agenda hostile to equality and diversity.

This Union Resolves:

1. To disallow members of proscribed fascist organisations from holding union positions or taking part in union elections.
2. For Union Council to suspend or close down societies found to be acting as a proxy for proscribed organisations.
3. Not to use this policy against those with whom the union disagrees but only those groups who stand in the tradition of fascism.
4. To include the following orgaisations in the No Platform policy: British National Party, British People's Party, National Front, English, Scottish and Welsh Defense Leagues.



Appendix:
Candidates will be interviewed by a panel made up of a professional journalist, the Media Societies Development co-ordinator, the LUU Business Development Co-ordinator and the Activities Executive Officer. Any number of candidates with appropriate experience will be forwarded to the cross-campus ballot.

Proposed by: Hanif Leylabi
Seconded by: Nick Jones



• Motion To Condemn Hate Speech

Policy Level: One,
Date of Meeting: 15th March 2010,
Expires: March 2013

This Union Notes:

1. The Forum Against Islamophobia and Racism report stating the rise in Islamophobia in the UK.
2. The 2005 Parliamentary Committee Report on Anti Semitism finding “a growing problem of anti-Semitism on university campuses.”
3. The ten per cent rise in four years in the numbers of people being convicted for homophobic and transphobic hate crimes.

This Union Believes:

1. There is a strong correlation between the rise in minority related attacks and the rise of hate speech on campus in recent years.
2. That the University’s ‘Freedom of Expression’ protocol must but entirely and unequivocally upheld.
3. That criticism of the below groups, even when undesired, provocative or offensive, can be crucial to academic debate, central to freedom of expression and must therefore be upheld and protected to the highest order.
4. Hate speech is the vocal support of or incitement to violence or active prejudice based upon the UK Home Office’s definition of victimhood:
   • Disability
   • Race
   • Religion or belief
   • Sexual orientation
   • Transgender

This Union Resolves:

1. To mandate the Appeals and Complaints Group to thoroughly investigate any speaker brought to their attention by way of a formal complaint from any student, and adjudicate whether a potential hate speaker should be extended an invitation or not. This decision must be based on the following:
   • The motion by which the ACG was created (mandated by Referendum November 2009, Motion 4).
   • The definition of Hate Speech in this motion
2. To mandate the Executive, primarily CIA, to lobby the University to add Hate Speech to the ‘Freedom of Expression Protocol’ under article five thereof, using the definition in this motion.
3. To accept the following amendments:
   • Under Clause 5 of the ACG UC Motion in the ‘decide by case’ section, the UC, or the equivalent body, which emerges from the democracy review, will now only override the ACG by a 2/3rds majority.
   • In conditions of the ACG UC Motion, to add “the ACG will suspend the activities of a society pending a refusal to follow the ruling of the ACG.” Once the society committee has accepted the ruling the Activities Executive will take the decision to reinstate the society (this does not include groups which fall into the ‘no platform’ policy).
   • To replace “JCR Presidents” in the membership section with “all Residence committees.”



Proposed by: Nat Abramov
Seconded by: Sophia James