A statement on the defunding of NUS trans campaign:
On January 16th it was formally confirmed that the NUS UK Board has proposed to defund the NUS Trans Officer and Committee for the 2019-2020 period at a minimum, alongside other changes to NUS’ democracy. The specific decision was to defund the NUS Trans Campaign (including it’s full time officer) in order to meet a 12 officer limit - preference a Vice President UD, leaving us without any resourced trans representation for the next year. Here is why we believe this was the wrong decision.
The secrecy with which NUS has chosen to conduct the process of deciding which officer position is worthy of funding suggests that this is a political rather than a financial choice. We believe it was wrong for the UK Board to make this decision, as the Trustee Board should not be setting the political direction of the organisation. There is simply nothing democratic or liberatory about this decision happening without a single conversation with a trans student or representative, especially as the VP Union Development is a member of the Turnaround Board. We believe that trans students deserve to know how and why this decision was made.
In the past ten years, there has been a ~2500% rise in the number of young trans people being referred to the Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS), based in London. Not all young people will be able to access GIDS due to parental transphobia and cost, so the actual number will be higher. Given that many of these young people will enter NUS-affiliated institutions, the trans student population is probably the fastest growing in NUS’ individual membership. These students have specific welfare and campaigning needs, including healthcare (transition-related or otherwise), administrative barriers, housing inequality, access to gendered spaces and outright institutional and interpersonal transphobia
SUs and education institutions are largely unequipped to support this large influx, meaning it is in this period that trans students will need more support from NUS, not less. So the decision that has been made by UK Turnaround Board with the explanation of “delivering most for members” makes no sense.
Another flawed argument made by Shakira Martin, Chair of the Board is that trans students will be represented by the NUS LGBT+ Campaign. It is surprising that this is a point raised without any conversation with the current LGBT+ officers. It was noted in the original campaign for an NUS Trans Officer that a dedicated officer is required for public policy, representation and organising reason. Moreover, a lack of campaigning on broader LGB issues can lead to transphobic backlash as trans people are seen as hogging the resources that should be for the broader community. This demonstrates the Boards’ clear lack of understanding of inter-community dynamics, trans issues as a whole as well as an unwillingness to acknowledge the expertise of trans activists in our field.
Developments in changes to trans healthcare are moving fast, and not having a resourced trans representative could be catastrophic for trans students being able to engage in this process. We know that access to trans healthcare is in crisis and it is killing trans people. Waiting times are multiples above the NHS's official targets, services are often difficult to reach (especially in Wales), discrimination is common (especially for disabled people, people of colour and intersex people), trans women are lacking essential services, and lack of fertility provisions are leaving trans people with unequal access to reproductive justice.
Trans students are the next generation of trans activists, and we need to be at the forefront of fighting for the lives of our communities, who are dying as a result of medical neglect. There is simply not the capacity for volunteers to do this work as it is highly specialised and requires public policy support which is only available in large NGOs like NUS. This is broadly the case for trans issues in education and wider society, such as campaigning on the Gender Recognition Act reform.
Defunding the NUS Trans Campaign forces volunteers to stand alone against the wave of transphobia in the public sphere. This year, one of NUS’ transgender officers had their home address made public by anti-trans activists. Another has been targeted individually on anti-trans forums.
This coming two years is the worst possible time to slash trans representation in NUS. We believe that the reasons for which the above decision has been taken and the way in which it has been taken shows a fundamental lack of respect for trans students. Cutting trans representation after consultation with trans leaders would have been bad enough, but the leadership of NUS failed even to do that, the bare minimum.
Signed,
Rob Noon, NUS LGBT+ Officer (Open place)
Eden Ladley, NUS LGBT+ Officer (Women’s place)
Ilyas Nagdee, NUS Black Students’ Officer
Rachel O’Brien, NUS Disabled Students’ Officer
Sarah Lasoye, NUS Womens’ Officer