KCL To Vote On ULU Role

King’s SU Motion Calls for ULU Withdrawal

Two Strand Poly students have submitted a motion to KCLSU calling for a dramatic rethink of the uni’s relationship with ULU in the wake of the Remembrance Sunday controversy.

3rd year War Studies student Bradley Willis and 2nd year History student Henrique Laitenberger submitted the motion as part of KCLSU’s referenda week from the 3rd-7th December.

The motion states: “That the unprecedented student reaction regarding remembrance Sunday represents just how out of touch the ULU leadership are with the student base they claim to represent.”, and also claims:

“That ULU in its current format is no longer relevant in representing the students of the University of London, a union president with 0.64% of the eligible vote should not have a mandate to represent 120,000 students.”

The news will come as yet another blow to ULU, after the recent controversy surrounding Vice President Dan Cooper’s refusal to represent ULU on Remembrance Sunday due to his political views and an extremely poor election turnout.

Mr Willis said, “December 3rd – 7th is referendum week at KCLSU and Henrqiue and I have submitted a motion that will severely pressure ULU to take a path towards deep reform if it is to remain viable as an institution…this has been (partly) in response to the Remembrance controversy but is much more deeply rooted in a long string of ULU related incidents and issues”

Michael Chessum, recently elected ULU president, said in response to the motion:

“I fully understand the frustration that informs the motion that is being proposed. ULU turnout is low, and basically always has been – and that’s a big issue…(the motion) is proposing a hostile campaign of sanctions against a fellow union. This is absolutely the least effective way of making ULU better: the problem with ULU isn’t that we have too much money – it’s that we’re drastically underfunded and understaffed, especially when it comes to democracy and representation.”

“As ULU president, I would welcome anyone in to have a discussion about the serious reform projects that I’ve got planned at ULU. If the proposers of this motion knock on my door and have ideas they want to put in, I’ll happily buy them a coffee.”

The real challenge for the proposers of the motion however might be finding enough support to back it. Ironically a motion which is a reaction against low turnout may itself struggle to attract backers in what seems to be an increasingly apathetic environment in student politics.