The activist left has won the elections for the leadership of University of London Union - the federation of student unions at the old London universities.
Until a few years ago, ULU functioned almost purely as a building with bars and other facilities, with zero political campaigning. This has begun to change more recently, with the revival of student activism from 2010, and this result should consolidate that shift.
The winning candidates are all members of left-wing organisations. Sean Rillo Raczka, previously Vice President and a member of Socialist Workers' Party split Counterfire, was elected President unopposed (but with a strikingly large number of Re-Open Nominations votes). SWP member Jen Izaakson won a heavily contested election for Editor of the London Student newspaper, fairly narrowly. Stef Newton, also a Counterfire member, and Craig Gent, of the Anarchist Federation, were elected as Trustees. Most significantly, Workers' Liberty member Daniel Lemberger Cooper (who is currently president of Royal Holloway students' union) was elected Vice President.
Most significantly, because Daniel's main opponent was an SWP member, Ross Speer. Speer nominated at the last minute, after a number of SWP student activists offered support to Daniel's campaign, obviously causing the SWP student organisers to take fright. Their campaign focused heavily on the issues of Israel-Palestine and Islamophobia; this emphasis was, sadly but predictably, supplemented by a torrent of accusations that the AWL is anti-Palestinian, Islamophobic and so on.
The smears didn't stick. Daniel won support from large numbers of independent left activists and SU officers across London, including many who disagree with Workers' Liberty on, for instance, Palestine - but who rejected the slur that we are anti-Palestinian, and supported the general thrust of the campaign. (Many of these activists are involved in the National Campaign Against Fees and Cuts.) He was also backed by an extremely wide range of activists at Royal Holloway - from the Anti-Cuts Alliance, Feminist Society, Afro-Caribbean Society, Islamic Society and many others.
The result reflected that wide base of support. In a three-way election, Daniel received 49.5 percent of the vote in the first round, and 61 percent in the second round. He won more votes than any other ULU candidate, including the uncontested Presidential candidate. (For the full results, see here.)
The fact the smear campaign failed is why this was a good result for political honesty, non-sectarianism and more generally reasonable behaviour on the left, as well as for a radical, campaigning student movement.
One reason so few students vote in the ULU elections, or have anything to do with ULU, is its historical lack of activity. Another, however, is that the left has focused narrowly on a few favoured left-wing (in some cases "left-wing") causes to the exclusion of serious campaigning on the many issues facing students in London. Even international solidarity has been reduced pretty much to the single issue of Palestine! Ross Speer's campaign was a clear example of this. This is not an argument against supporting the Palestinians - we disagree with much of the left on how to do it, but we are in favour of making solidarity. At the same time, we are also in favour of developing ULU as a union that mobilises students to win on issues such as fees, cuts, privatisation, housing, liberation and rights at work (as well as international solidarity).
One of the key planks of Daniel's campaign was opening up ULU membership to student unions in universities and colleges across London - so it is no longer an exclusive club for the posh universities. That will be essential if ULU is to fulfil its potential as an organising centre for the student movement in London.
Comments
Statement from AWL Students on NUS executive elections
For the last two months Workers' Liberty students have participated, along with others from the National Campaign Against Fees and Cuts, in negotiations about a united left slate for the leading positions on NUS national executive (to be elected at NUS conference in Sheffield, 24-26 April), promoting the candidacy of Daniel Cooper.
Now that Dan has been elected ULU Vice President we are withdrawing that candidacy. We announced this at the NCAFC National Committee on 12 February.
Last year, the SWP and its allies excluded Workers' Liberty from the NUS left slate in a deeply sectarian fashion (see here and here). This year, however, these groups have been forced to negotiate seriously (and openly) by the strength of the NCAFC. This is a real step forward. Whatever the outcome of the negotiations, it should be a much stronger slate than last year.
Workers' Liberty will continue pushing for the strongest and most politically principled and developed left slate possible, to build a fighting challenge to the NUS leadership.
Second statement from AWL Students on NUS exec elections
On Monday 13 February we issued a statement welcoming progress in negotiations for a united left slate for the leadership positions on NUS NEC, and withdrawing the candidacy of our comrade Daniel Lemberger Cooper (because he has just been elected ULU Vice President).
In terms of welcoming progress, we spoke too soon. On Monday evening, at a meeting in London, a coalition of the same left groups who dominated this process last year (SWP, Counterfire, Socialist Action/Student Broad Left) agreed a list once again dominated by themselves.
This slate only included one person, Michael Chessum, who has been seriously involved in the National Campaign Against Fees and Cuts. As a result, Michael walked out of the meeting and is standing for Vice President Higher Education outside the so-called "united left slate" (which is nothing of the sort).
We would make four points:
1. The NCAFC, the only democratic organisation involving large numbers of independent activists on the student left, and which has been central to the fightback against fees and cuts, has once again been treated with contempt.
2. The groups involved denounced our attempt to involve large numbers of NCAFC activists in this process through a debate at NCAFC conference. It is now clear that what we said at the time was right: that they did so in order to clear the way for themselves to dominate. (This also explains their over-the-top behaviour at NCAFC conference: they are obsessed with NUS elections.)
3. The proposed candidates are weak, representing primarily factional convenience.
4. For all their (incorrect) accusations that NCAFC and/or AWL do not take liberation seriously, the SWP, Countefire and Socialist Action have agreed a list which is 5/6 male.
Workers' Liberty students are supporting Michael Chessum's campaign for Vice President Higher Education, and will enter discussions with other NCAFC and left-wing activists about the way forward. We still want a united left slate - but not at any cost. And Monday's meeting was a step away from unity.