Liberation Autonomy
GUILD COUNCIL MEETING
DATE OF MEETING – 15.11.12
Author Name: Kelly Rogers
Purpose:
Amend Existing Policy/Bye-Law
Mandate Officers
Summary To respect the autonomy and power of the Liberation groups by instigating
mechanisms where they are trusted to lead and manage their
own campaigns, Officers and Associations.
Section One: Amend Existing Policy/Bye-Law
1.1. Title of Belief and Commitment or Bye-Law
Bye Law 7.2.1
Bye Law 9.4
Bye Law 11.1.2
1.2. Proposed Amended Text (normally no more than 200 words in case of Belief and
Commitment)
Bye Law 7
2.1 All officers shall be fully accountable to Guild Council for their activities, except for the
Liberation Officers which shall be fully accountable to their Associations.
Bye Law 9
Add
4.4 Liberation Officers
4.4.2 In cases of Officers being removed of resigning, Associations can elect temporary
‘Acting Office’ but Alternative Transferrable Vote – in an EGM, called by the Associations
with standard EGM quoracy. This Officer shall hold Office until a bye-election is held, or in
cases where bye-elections are infeasible.
Bye Law 11
If you have any queries, please e-mail council@guild.bham.ac.uk
Liberation Autonomy
1.2 In accordance with paragraph 9.10(b) of the Discipline and Appeals Policy, any
Guild Officer (who is not a Trustee), except for the Liberation Officers, may be removed
from office by a motion of no confidence passed by a two thirds majority vote of Guild
Council provided that the motion is triggered by a petition of no confidence signed by a
two thirds majority of the Scrutiny Committee.
* Please refer to Discipline and Appeals Policy which will be amended accordingly, and
ratified by Guild Council.
Section Three: Mandate A Guild Officer(s) or Committee
3.1. Person(s) Responsible For Delivering Mandate
Ollie Cosentino – VPAD
Leander Jones – VPDR
David Franklin - President
3.2. Completion Date for Mandate
Next Guild Council
3.3. Mandate Text (shall normally be no more than 200 words)
Ollie Cosentino (VPAD) is mandated to find a way for Liberation Association to have a
reserved page on the Guild of Students website, which they have total control over, and
for them to be placed prominently on the home-page.
Leander Jones (VPDR) is mandated to liaise with the Finance Committee to establish the
possibility of ring-fencing an annual budget for the Liberation Associations to have
freedom to spend as they choose, within reason, according to their own needs.
David Franklin (President) and Leander Jones (VPDR), are mandated to amend the
Officer Disciplinary Policy which outlines and makes clear the following:

Liberation Officers shall be removed only by a two-thirds majority vote in a super
EGM called by their association, with a quoracy of 30 members.

If 25 members of the Association present a petition calling for a ‘super EGM’ then
the Committee is obliged to do so. In the case of the Committee thinking there is
sufficient interest, they should also call one.

Liberation Officers are subject to the ODP alongside other Officers.
David Franklin and Leander Jones are mandated to take this amended ODP to the
Trustee Board and request its implementation. – To be completed by the 1st Guild Council
If you have any queries, please e-mail council@guild.bham.ac.uk
Liberation Autonomy
of 2nd term.
Section Four: Written Statement in Support of Motion:
Liberation Associations are crucial to the representation of political minorities on campus,
and they are part of a much larger set of political movements and struggles that take
place locally, nationally and globally. They derive their strength, in all of these forums,
from their belief in freedom from oppression and a strong sense of independence and
community.
Autonomy from institutions that are fundamentally unequal, such as the Guild of
Students, is a intuitively necessary step towards the empowerment of these groups. As
long as these groups are accountable to the political majority, which Guild Council and
the Sabbatical Officer team are both dominated by – as opposed to the minorities they
are supposed to represent – there is an incoherance that is wrong in principle, and
harmful in practice.
As such, the Liberation Associations are collectively submitting this motion to request that
they are granted the autonomy that they both deserve and need.
The different components of this motion can be justified as follows:
 Removal of Liberation Officers by Associations rather than Guild Council:
Firstly, as outlined above it is obvious that Liberation Officers should be held
accountable primarily to their constituents, rather than Council – that has always
been dominated by individuals that do not define as belonging to the
Associatons. This does not preclude, in extreme cases, Officers being removed via
a disciplinary process.
 The election of Liberation Officers via EGM, in the case of resignation or removal:
In the past, there has been no procedure in place where, in the case of
resignation or removal of a Liberation Officer after the bye-election period, a new
Officer can be elected. This meant that there has been cases where Liberation
Associations have not been represented adequately, for example, not having a
place in Guild Officer Group. This motion corrects this deficiency in procedure, in
a manner that is feasible in terms of time and resources and fair.
 Section of the website devoted to Liberation Associatons:
While the Liberation Associations should be granted the freedom to determine
their own campaigns, lead their own groups and hold their own Officers
accountable – the Guild of Students should remain a mechanism by which the
Associations reach out to their members. The website is an obvious medium
through which this can be achieved.
 Ring-fenced budget: If we are to truly value the fight for equality and
empowerment, it is necessary that the Liberation Associations should no longer
have to compete for limited money with student groups. We do not see this as a
blank cheque – because in the much the same way as now – Associations would
have to justify their expenditure and ensure that all expenses are reasonable and
as low as possible. All this would mean, if feasible, is that Associations are not
limited by the success or needs of other student groups and are given
precedence due to the fundamentally important nature of their work.
If you have any queries, please e-mail council@guild.bham.ac.uk