Writing about web page http://www.johncrossisinnocent.tk
I've resigned my position as a Union Officer. Even at the low points last year I stuck it out. I think it says an awful lot about the patently ridiculous situation that I've decided to give up now.
Here's the text (more or less) or my letter to Simon Lucas, President of the Students' Union
I am writing to inform you that I am resigning the post of Democracy Committee Chair 2004/2005, effective Midnight tonight.
This year has seen a marked shift in the engagement of the Studentsí Union with its members. We have had more students involved in the democratic process than at any time in recent history, and this is in no small part due to the commitment of the entire Executive Committee, and in particular of yourself. You have done more than any of your predecessors in my time to tell students what the Union is for, and to involve them in elections, referenda, meetings and every aspect of the democratic structure.
You have not only been an excellent President and leader, but you have also been a good friend. Throughout last year, whether I was one of the few fighting to save AWS or simply trying to get people to vote in the secondaries, I seriously considered giving up on the Union; but your election gave us all some hope that this year would be better. And, in almost every conceivable way, it has been. I am very proud to have worked with you in bringing our Constitution and rules up to speed with the realities of todayís Union, and I have great hope that the momentum for engagement and reform will only gather speed in the future. I have thoroughly enjoyed the sense of achievement that our work has given me this year, and it is with a very heavy heart that I take the decision not to see the year out.
Throughout my time as a Union activist, I have sought to increase the participation of our members in our processes. I see increasing democracy and accountability as both my objective and my substantive achievement over these past 4 years. It is a fact that we are a membership organisation, and as such should be driven not by our leadership, but by the involvement and decisions of our members. We should aim to be as open, and as welcoming to scrutiny, as possible. I cannot reconcile this principle with the current disciplinary procedures against John Cross. If any other member had said the few things he said in a Union meeting, I firmly believe that they would not be facing the same measures.
To use the Unionís disciplinary regulations against a member who has not broken any of our Constitution, Appendices, Regulations or the Student-Staff protocol simply cannot be right. If it is the case that a member has committed an actionable slander or libel, then that is of course a serious matter; but it is a fact that no court would even hear this case, let alone entertain finding against John. As a matter of law, in never referring, either directly or otherwise, to an individual John could not be guilty of the offences that have been suggested.
The principle at stake is fundamental to the Unionís core value of democracy. It cannot be the case that members are not free to question the activities of their Union in a forum designed to do just that. The claim that the way in which a member votes or the supposed inferences of anonymous questions can be used as evidence against them is both alarming and deeply indicative of the unjust foundation of these charges. I see it as my role to promote Union democracy; I cannot reconcile this with the punishment that seemingly awaits a member who accepts this invitation of participation.
I know this situation is not of your doing and I have no intention of using it to undermine you or bring measures against you, yet I cannot remain as part of an Executive Committee that allows such obvious abuses of due process. Nor can I support the prolonged and indefensible pressure that has been applied to one of the Unionís most hard-working and selfless members. It is of noticeable irony that we are currently discussing improving the quality of decision-making whilst treating a member who tried to do that in this manner. It is to our great discredit that the Union is seen to be withholding information and silencing any scrutiny when I believe there is, in fact, nothing to hide. We will never gain the confidence and enthusiasm of our members by behaving in such a reactionary manner to examination by them. Ultimately, if we do not have the faith and confidence of our members, this Union will have failed. It is therefore with a great deal of sadness that I must resign my position.