Tuesday 16-06-2020 - 14:00

The Students’ Union is a democratic organisation with students at the heart of what we do. We are confident that our election process is democratic however we also acknowledge and respect the principle that all students should be able to question and seek reassurance on the democratic processes that exist to serve them. 

We announced the Election Results on our website and full details can be found here: https://lancastersu.co.uk/articles/election-results-announced-8a4d.  

We hope this Q&A will answer some of your questions...

 

What is a Returning Officer?

The Returning Officer has overall responsibility for overseeing the process of elections within the Students’ Union. They are a suitably qualified individual who is external and independent to the University. This ensures that the elections are conducted in a fair and democratic manner. 

They have the power to investigate complaints about the election process and about candidates or campaigns and can issue sanctions accordingly. They have the final say over decisions relating to the election. Complaints about a decision made by the Returning Officer should be submitted to the University in line with their duties under the Section 22 (2) (e) of the Education Act 1994.

The Returning Officer is appointed annually by the Trustee Board. The Returning Officer for this election was the National Union of Students. The Returning Officer who ruled on these complaints from NUS was the Director of the NUS Charity. The Trustee Board was not involved in making any decisions relating to complaints about the election or candidates.

In addition to the Returning Officer, there is also a Deputy Returning Officer, who is a suitably qualified member of staff in the Students’ Union. They are responsible for the day-to-day planning of the elections process, producing guidance/information, briefing and training candidates, administering elections, fielding questions, and referring issues to the Returning Officer for decisions to be made. They also have the delegated powers from the Returning Officer to issue rulings and warning to those taking part in the election in relation to the election rules.

The Deputy Returning Officer is appointed annually by the Trustee Board. 

 

What is RON?

RON stands for Re-Open Nominations. RON is a candidate in all elections and allows voters an opportunity to say if they don’t feel any of the candidates are suitable for the position. The election rules of the Students’ Union do not require an individual to come forward to run the RON campaign. As a result, there is no person(s) accredited as the RON campaign.

If RON is the most popular candidate for a position, it means no candidate is elected into that role and the Union will open nominations again when the election can be reasonably be re-run.

 

Why was the RON candidate disqualified?

This was a decision taken by the external Returning Officer – who is totally independent of Lancaster University Students’ Union including the Trustee Board. 

The Union received complaints about the RON campaign from student members. They included allegations of breaches of the election rules by RON. 

In accordance with our election procedures these complaints and the evidence provided were submitted to our independent and external Returning Officer for consideration.

When dealing with complaints against RON, where there is no identifiable individual(s) who have identified themselves running the campaign, as the NUS Returning Officer, feel it is important that any evidence reaches a certain threshold. This is necessary as there is no ability to give advice, apply sanctions or for a candidate to submit an appeal.

It was the determination of the Returning Officer, on considering all the evidence provided, that the evidence met that threshold.

 

Who made the complaints?

The Students’ Union has never published information that could identify the complainants.

In the interest of transparency, we have provided as much information as possible about the nature of the complaints and the violations of election rules. As with any other candidate, a complaint against a campaigner for a candidate is considered to be a complaint against the candidate.

 

What were the complaints about?

The Returning Officer determined there were breaches of the rules and the spirit of the regulations by RON. These included campaign expenditure, campaign postings, and imagery used and the reproduction and editing without permission of copyright materials, including a Q&A from LA1TV.

Evidence was also presented of postings and imagery that were identified as needing to be referred to other disciplinary processes to be investigated as they do not meet the equality, diversity and inclusion standards and behaviours which are set by the Students’ Union and the University. This post was at best an ill-conceived, unthinking microaggression and at worst overtly racist. 

There were also concerns raised by students with the anonymity of those creating and posting content, with no method of determining if they are current student members at the University, and therefore should be involved in the elections at all.

Based on the weight of evidence presented in the complaints received, the external Returning Officer determined that RON should be disqualified from the elections and the count conducted with the remaining candidates.

We understand that not being able to announce the results while these investigations were ongoing has caused distress, especially for candidates, but given the nature and complexity of the complaints, it was necessary that the complaint be resolved before the election could be counted.

 

How many votes did RON receive? 

The Students’ Union is required to make sure that all complaints received about alleged breaches of election rules, and any challenges made about the process or integrity of the election are fully considered and actioned before the count is able to be undertaken.

In this instance, RON was disqualified from the elections and the count conducted with the remaining candidates. The results from the first round of elections show that 181 votes were unable to be transferred to continuing candidates. This indicates that 181 students voted for RON as their first preference and did not include a second preference on their ballot. Three candidates had more votes in the first round than these non-transferable votes. This information is included in the count sheet that was released with the election results.

 

Even though the RON candidate was disqualified, it clearly had support among students – do their votes count for nothing now?

No, absolutely not. The RON campaign was not about the other candidates, it was about the Union itself and we want to listen to the students who made their feelings known by voting for RON.

The RON campaign raised issues of representation of the student body and with the powers and role of the President.

We have already announced a far-reaching Governance and Democracy review at Lancaster University Students’ Union. Though this election has highlighted students’ concerns, it was already something we were tackling. We acknowledge the RON campaign and those who supported it and we want to hear their voices in the review. Student consultation and engagement will be at the heart of this review and we have engaged an external, independent organisation – Counterculture to help us with this process.

 

Will there be any investigation into this?

The Students’ Union has voluntarily written to the University confirming that we will co-operate fully with any action they may wish to take under the powers afforded to the University under the Education Act 1994 to satisfy that the Students’ Unions elections are fairly and properly conducted. The Returning Officer and Deputy Returning Officer always produce a report at the conclusion of each election. 

 

I still have a question and further query, where can I send this to?

Team Elections are always happy to answer any questions you may have about the elections process or the roles, please email elections@lancastersu.co.uk.