PROPOSED MOTIONS
The deadline was Thursday 23rd October. The motions below were those proposed by members to go to referendum. At the Union Council meeting, these motions were discussed, debated and voted on, by Union Council, whether they will be rejected or go to the referendum vote. The motions that were passed are online at www.luuonline.com/referendum/motionstoreferendum and these are the ones you can vote 'YES' or 'NO' for from Friday 28th November.
Motion 1: Should the University avoid academic teaching sessions on Wednesday, so that students are able to play University sport without jeopardising their academic success?
Motion 2: Should Leeds University Union take action against military recruitment on campus?
Motion 3: Should the Leeds Student be banned from having paid advertisements for military recruitment?
Motion 5: Should LUU adopt the EUMC definition of anti-Semitism?
Motion 6: Should Leeds University Union oppose Gazan rocket attacks on civilians in Southern Israel?
Motion 7: Should Wednesday afternoons be kept free for extra-curricular activities?
Motion 8: Should LUU adopt a No Platform policy?
Motion 9: Should the Union replace bottled water in Union shops with free drinking water facilities?
Motion 10: Do we want LSR to be heard in the Union cafes and LSTV seen on the digital screens?
Motion 12: Sponsorship for Sports Clubs
Motion 13: Should a funding scheme to replace old equipment for sports clubs and outdoor activities be developed?
Motion 14: Should the union sell pill testing kits?
Motion 15: Should the union support the decriminalisation of drugs use?
Motion 1
Motion Title: Should the University avoid academic teaching sessions on Wednesday, so that students are able to play University sport without jeopardising their academic success?
Motion Category: Education
Motion:
This Union Notes:
1. That academic study and sporting fixtures often clash on a Wednesday leaving many students with a difficult decision between high level sports and academic study.
This Union Believes:
1. That students should have the opportunity to become a well-rounded individual, and should be given the opportunity to become involved in both sport at a high level and achieve academic success and not have to choose between them.
This Union Resolves:
1. That students on all courses should finish teaching at the very latest by mid-morning on a Wednesday so that they are able to play in sports matches whether they are home or away.
Proposed by: Stephanie Lett
Seconded by: Sam Polkey
Word count = 105
Motion 2
Motion Title: Should Leeds University Union take action against military recruitment on campus?
Motion Category: Wider Society and Citizenship
Motion:
This Union Notes:
1. That while Officer Training Corps (OTC) is an external organization and not a club or society they have frequently been given special access to LUU Intro Week. This has included large stalls in prominent positions and representatives in military uniform, giving them greater exposure than Union societies.
2. That OTC is a branch of the Army and puts students under the command of full-time military officers.
3. That in a state of emergency members of OTC can be called up for active military service.
4. That a major function of OTC is military recruitment.
5. That Cambridge Students Union banned OTC from its Freshers events in 1999 and UCLU banned military recruitment throughout the Union earlier this year.
6. That LUU has already passed a motion stating its opposition to the war in Iraq.
This Union Believes:
1. That providing OTC stalls at Intro week, alongside official Union societies, amounts to an implied endorsement of the Army and their activities. It further provides OTC access to all Leeds University students interested in Union activities at the Intro week, aiding recruitment.
2. That the British Government is currently engaged in an aggressive war overseas. Therefore for the Union to use its resources to participate in or allow military recruitment activities at this time would give political and material support to the war.
3. That the Union, in light of its anti-war stance, should not endorse or promote the OTC or the military. To do so would be inconsistent with this position - not a penny or a person should be given to support the war.
4. That by banning military recruitment, the union is protecting people from being sent to war, with all the risks it entails, whilst at the same time helping to prevent these wars being carried out.
This Union Resolves:
1. To ban OTC and Territorial Army from Intro week, and all other LUU organised events.
2. To prohibit any military recruitment activity at LUU events and premises
3. To give no platform to military, paramilitary, military reserve, officer training, or other organizations whose primary mission is to conduct or glorify war.
4. To mandate the Student Executive and Union Council to lobby the University of Leeds to stop military recruitment at careers fairs and other University events.
5. To support the soldiers and families that have been negatively affected by British wars.
Proposed by: Joel Harrison
Seconded by: Max Lansmsn
Word count = 399
Motion 3
Motion Title: Should the Leeds Student be banned from having paid advertisements for military recruitment?
Motion Category: Activities, Strong and Active Union
Motion:
This Union Notes:
1. LUU's current advertising policy bans recruitment and products of Arms Companies on ethical grounds.
2. There is no current ban on military organisations such as the Territorial Army advertising in the Union.
3. The Leeds Student has so far accepted paid advertisements from the Territorial Army for three issues.
4. There are active union societies that believe it is inappropriate to use the Leeds Student as a platform for military recruitment.
This Union Believes:
1. The Leeds Student risks alienating students who disagree with army recruitment advertisements.
2. All members of the student body should feel that they can read and be involved in the Leeds Student.
3. By participating in the Leeds Student, students should not be forced into making an ethical or political choice on divisive issues such as army recruitment.
4. The Leeds Student should attempt to keep political debate within its written content and not its advertisements.
This Union Resolves:
1. LUU should amend its advertising policy for the Leeds Student to include a ban on advertisements for the Territorial Army and other military organisations.
2. In cases where the Leeds Student is approached by a possibly contentious advertiser, the sub-editors should be made fully aware of the decisions made.
Proposed by: Madeleine McGarrie
Seconded by: Eva Georgiou
Word count = 208
Motion 4
Motion Title: Ethical meat only
Motion Category: Wider Society and Citizenship
Motion:
This Union Notes:
1. The practice of slaughtering animals without prestunning has been outlawed in the United Kingdom.
2. Religious communities are currently granted exemption for the purposes of Halal slaughter.
3. The government's independent advisory board, the Farm Animal Welfare Council, has concluded Halal slaughter causes "severe suffering to animals" and that such practices "must end".
4. Halal slaughter has already been outlawed in Norway, Sweden and New Zealand.
5. There is no imperative for members of religious communities to eat meat produced in this manner
# The union already restricts the sales of products which are considered unethical such as Nestle and plastic carrier bags.
This Union Believes:
1. As a body we should promote ethical treatment of animals and social responsibility for the products we consume.
2. Halal slaughter is unethical and causes unnecessary suffering to animals.
This Union Resolves:
To remove all Halal slaughtered meat and items containing Halal slaughtered meat currently sold throughout the union.
1. To ensure there is sufficient vegetarian provision for those who do not wish to eat meat slaughtered in a humane way.
2. To campaign to the National Union of Students to implement this ban throughout its member unions
Proposed by: Norman Ralph
Seconded by: Sophie Stringfellow
Word count = 200
Motion 5
Motion Title: Should LUU adopt the EUMC definition of anti-Semitism?
Motion Category: Welfare
Motion:
This Union Notes:
1. The University of Leeds has one of the largest Jewish student communities in the country, numbering over one thousand students.
2. In May 2008 a progress report one year after the government’s response to the All-Party Inquiry in Anti-semitism stated that both universities and the Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills have failed to do enough to tackle anti-semitism on campus
3. 59 instances of anti-semitism were recorded on UK campuses in 2007, compared to 18 in 2006 and 11 in 2005.
4. Out of the 25 anti-semitic instances recorded in Leeds, 21 were concerning the student population. This is the highest level of anti-Semitic instances out of any university in the UK.
5. That in April 2007 the National Union of Students Annual Conference voted to adopt the EUMC definition of anti-semitism.
6. This policy was used to swiftly eject an anti-semitic group from the following conference in 2008.
7. That the Macpherson report of the Lawrence Inquiry’s final report stated that “"A racist incident is any incident which is perceived to be racist by the victim or any other person."
This Union Believes:
1. That the University of Leeds and Leeds University Union have failed to speak out against this rising tide of anti-semitism.
2. That LUU’s failures in dealing with anti-semitism has caused many Jewish students to become alienated from their Union.
3. Many Jewish students do not feel comfortable expressing their Jewish identity on campus because of the hostile atmosphere towards the Jewish student population.
4. Anti-semitism is increasing significantly both across the country and within universities and student unions.
5. That LUU needs to do more to ensure the safety and welfare of their minority student populations.
This Union Resolves:
1. To adopt the EUMC’s working definition of Anti-semitism.
2. To write letters in conjunction with Leeds Jewish Society to the Vice Chancellor, the Pro Vice Chancellor for Students and Staff, the University Secretary, and to the the Secretary of State for Innovation, Universities and Skills expressing LUU’s new policy on anti-semitism - and urging them to take a greater stance against this rising problem.
3. To work closely with LUU’s Jewish Society and the Union of Jewish Students to ensure that the concerns of Jewish students are taken seriously and that Jewish students feel as comfortable as possible on campus.
Proposed by: Jak Codd
Seconded by: Ben Angell
Word count = 390
Motion 6
Motion Title: Should Leeds University Union oppose Gazan rocket attacks on civilians in Southern Israel?
Motion Category: Wider Society and Citizenship
Motion:
This Union Notes:
1. Southern Israel has suffered constant rocket and mortar attacks, originating from the Palestinian territory of Gaza, since 2001.
2. From April 2001 until May 2008 over 3,050 rockets have been fired into Israel, along with more than 2,500 mortar attacks.
3. Over 25 Israeli citizens have been killed as a result of these attacks, with over five hundred injuries.
4. These attacks have accelerated since the Hamas takeover of the Gaza Strip.
5. The city of Sderot has been at the brunt of these attacks.
6. Over 33% of children in Sderot suffer from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder as a result of the constant attacks.
7. On 27th February 2008 a student at Sapir College in Sderot was killed when a rocket from Gaza landed in the middle of campus.
8. The right to education for Sapir College’s students has been severely curtailed by constant attacks from the Palestinian territory of Gaza.
This Union Believes:
1. Rocket attacks from Gaza are illegal acts of terrorism.
2. That the right to education is of fundamental importance, and that this right is currently being denied to the students at Sapir College.
3. That a two state solution with a stable Palestine and a secure Israel living side by side in peace is the best solution to the current conflict in the Middle East.
4. That the illegal rocket attacks from Gaza into Israel are a significant barrier to peace.
This Union Resolves:
1. To twin Leeds University Union with Sapir College Students’ Union.
2. To officially support a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
3. To send a letter to the Palestinian General Delegation in the UK expressing LUU’s opposition to the illegal attacks on Israel.
4. To support Leeds Jewish Society in its efforts to raise money towards a bomb shelter for the Sapir College campus.
5. To officially support Leeds Jewish Society’s campaign to raise awareness around the situation in Sderot and southern Israel.
Proposed by: Samantha Lishak
Seconded by: Elliott Jebreel
Word count = 328
Motion 7
Motion Title: Should Wednesday afternoons be kept free for extra-curricular activities?
Motion Category: Activities, Strong and Active Union
Motion:
This Union Notes:
1. That over 9,000 hours were scheduled into Wednesday afternoons during the 2007-08 academic year; an increase of over 500 hours from the previous academic year.
2. That the University of Leeds timetabling team was unaware of this.
3. That the University of Leeds Partnership Agreement states, “Wednesday afternoons will normally be kept free for extra curricular activities. The professional requirements for a significant number of vocational programmes and Masters level programmes may require students to attend timetabled commitments on a Wednesday afternoon.”
4. That both University statistics and a survey taken by over six hundred students, showed all faculties have scheduled teaching into Wednesday afternoons at an undergraduate and postgraduate level in the last two years.
5. That the same student survey also reported 52.5 per cent of students have had teaching scheduled into Wednesday afternoons during their time at the University of Leeds.
6. That the University of Leeds initiative, Leeds for Life, advocates the value of involvement in Student Activities as a means of cultivating skills and knowledge outside of teaching.
7. That a wide range of activities, as well as sports, are pursued on a Wednesday afternoon.
This Union Believes:
1. That it is important for Wednesday afternoons to be kept free from teaching and learning activities.
2. That students must have a time when they can collectively pursue their chosen activity.
3. That having over 9,000 hours scheduled into Wednesday afternoons is unacceptable.
4. That the University needs to more closely monitor how many hours are being scheduled into Wednesday afternoons.
This Union Resolves:
1. To oppose teaching and learning activities taking place after midday on a Wednesday afternoon.
2. To campaign against the use of Wednesday afternoons for teaching activities.
3. To mandate the Activities Officer to monitor teaching on a Wednesday afternoon for the next five years.
4. To mandate the Student Executive to lobby the University to keep Wednesday afternoons free of teaching and learning activities.
Proposed by: Jessica Parker
Seconded by: Danial Adilypour
Word count = 327
Motion 8
Motion Title: Should LUU adopt a No Platform policy?
Motion Category: Education
Motion:
This Union Notes:
1. A number of societies and groups affiliated to Leeds University Union host speakers, events and debates on campus, with many open to all members of the University of Leeds and Leeds University Union.
2. According to the Ministry of Justice, 41,000 racially and religiously motivated attacks occurred in the UK in 2005-6, a rise of 12% on the previous year.
3. The All Parliamentary Report into Anti-Semitism heard evidence that the Young BNP is active on around 15 campuses.
4. The National Union of Students adopted a 'No Platform' policy in the early 1990s.
5. Two of the organisations banned under the NUS No Platform Policy are the BNP and Hizb ut Tahir.
6. Leeds University Union adopted a No Platform policy through Union Council on the 11th February 2008.
This Union Believes:
1. The a No Platform Policy works to ensure that all students have the right to feel comfortable, safe and secure on campus regardless of ethnicity, religious affiliation or sexual persuasion.
2. That racial and religious hate crimes increase when speakers with extremely racist or fascist views are actively given a high-profile platform and this presents a very real risk to students.
3. That freedom of speech is an important right.
4. That there is a difference between preventing freedom of speech, and avoiding the promotion of speakers who are very likely to incite hatred.
5. That if LUU or a society affiliated to LUU were to provide a platform to speakers or groups of this nature, then this could be seen by some as an endorsement of their views
This Union Resolves:
1. To ratify and formally adopt through this referendum the No Platform Policy which was passed by Union Council on 11th February 2008.
Proposed by: Richard Allen
Seconded by: Suzy Tobias
Word count = 293
Motion 9
Motion Title: Should the Union replace bottled water in Union shops with free drinking water facilities?
Motion Category: Wider Society and Citizenship
Motion:
This Union Notes:
1. 40% of bottled water comes from taps.
2. Bottled water costs an estimated 500 times more than tap water.
3. Producing a bottle uses up to seven times the amount of water it will eventually contain, as well as quarter of the bottle of oil.
4. In the academic year of 2007-08 the Union sold 180,698 bottles of water.
5. Plastic bags were successfully replaced by paper bags in a past referendum.
6. 16 universities in the Americas have banned bottled water in areas of their campuses.
This Union Believes:
1. Many students spend a lot of money on water which should be more freely obtainable through the provision of water fountains and the sale of reusable bottles.
2. The University of Leeds, as a leading university, should lead the way in environmental sustainability.
3. The Union should be active in assisting the global reduction of consumption necessary to avoid irreversible climate change. This is also in accordance with the March 2007 referendum passed ‘Calling the Union to take action on climate change’.
This Union Resolves:
1. To install a minimum of 5 free drinking water fountains in convenient locations in the Union building.
2. To replace bottled water sold in the Union shops with long-lasting, affordable, re-usable bottles.
3. To clearly advertise new and existing drinking water sources
4. To make students aware of the environmental and economic disadvantages of bottled water.
5. To lobby the university to install free water fountains throughout campus.
Proposed by: Alison Vernon
Seconded by: Hannah Greenslade
Word count = 249
Motion 10
Motion Title: Do we want LSR to be heard in the Union cafes and LSTV seen on the digital screens?
Motion Category: Activities, Strong and Active Union
Motion:
This Union Notes:
1. LSR is the voice of Leeds Uni, thus should be listened to in many places in the Union. LSR would widely increase its number of listeners. Students would not only have to resort to their computer to hear LSR.
This Union Believes:
1. LSTV deserves to be broadcasted across the union.
2. They run great shows and need to be seen by more students everyday.
3. There are numerous television screens inside the union that need to be better utilized.
This Union Resolves:
1. To make LSR radio heard in the Terrace and other venues and have LSTV be seen on the screens in the Union
Proposed by: Rosalee Dorfman
Seconded by: Rachael Holt
Word count = 110
Motion 11
Motion Title: Body Beautiful
Motion Category: Welfare
Motion:
This Union Notes:
1. The number of people receiving treatment for eating disorders is estimated at 90,000, and many have not been diagnosed, particularly sufferers of bulimia nervosa.
2. The prevalence total for people diagnosed and undiagnosed with an eating disorder in the UK is 1.15 million. (Beat 2000)
3. Gender and sexuality are significant factors. Approximately 10% of people with eating disorders are men and approximately 20% of these men identify as gay. (Beat 2000)
4. Young people in the age group 14 – 25 are most at risk of developing this type of illness. This includes a large proportion of the student population. (UK Eating Disorder Statistics 2004 provided by Disordered Eating)
5. That, in April 2008, The French National Assembly passed a groundbreaking bill seeking to criminalise the promotion of extreme thinness in the media, clamping down on websites, fashion houses, magazines and advertisers.
6. Leeds University Union currently sells and endorses media which could be said to promote distorted views of beauty to our members.
7. LUU’s Union Council endorsed a “Body Beautiful” motion on the 2nd June 2008 and as a result the Women’s Assembly will be running a “Body Beautiful” campaign during Eating Disorders Awareness Week (w/c 25th February) in cooperation with the Welfare Officer, Welfare Assembly and LGBT Assembly.
This Union Believes:
1. All students have the right to feel beautiful on campus, and not discriminated against due to their appearance.
2. Eating disorders are a vicious disease and LUU should take every step possible to protect their members.
3. The government has an ethical responsibility to combat the promotion of mental illnesses, particularly eating disorders, through the media and LUU should take initiative and encourage the government to do this.
This Union Resolves:
1. To write a petition to the PM asking for a similar bill to that of France to be passed.
2. To lobby MPs to support more funding and awareness about eating disorders.
3. To ensure that all fashion shows, displays and events within the Union take into consideration our diverse range of beautiful students and do not discriminate against those of larger build, different skin colour, or disability. This should have notably visible results within said events.
4. To amend the Equality and Diversity Policy prior to the three year review date, taking into consideration the severity of current issues surrounding body image.
Proposed by: Suzy Tobias
Seconded by: Madeline Harris-Smith
Word count = 394
Motion 12
Motion Title: Sponsorship for Sports Clubs
Motion Category: Activities, Strong and Active Union
Motion:
This Union Notes:
1. LUU has 35 sports clubs.
2. The University has a stated aim to be in the top 10 of the BUCS league (it currently lies 13th)
3. Sports clubs bid for £84 575 in grants from the Union this year and were allocated £67,475, a shortfall of £17,100
This Union Believes:
1. Many sports clubs are struggling for adequate funding.
2. Sports clubs would be more competitive and have better results with if they were able to pay for more coaching and better equipment.
3. Given the shortfall of Union funding, sports clubs should apply for external sponsorship to boost finances.
4. Existing rules on advertising within the union severely restrict a sport club’s potential sponsors.
5. If sports clubs were able to find more lucrative sponsors amongst those companies currently prohibited from sponsoring, it is possible that Union funding could be freed up for other societies and activities.
This Union Resolves:
1. To make sponsorship of sports clubs exempt from the current union advertising policy and draw up a separate policy covering sponsorship
2. To only ban companies from sponsoring sports clubs when this has been voted for in a Union referendum
3. To list individual companies banned from sponsorship, with full and detailed reasoning.
4. To remove blanket bans such as the current “all companies listed on the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry website”: individual companies should be held accountable and not an entire industry.
Proposed by: Adam Young
Seconded by: Laurence Pearmain
Word count = 237
Motion 13
Motion Title: Should a funding scheme to replace old equipment for sports clubs and outdoor activities be developed?
Motion Category: Activities, Strong and Active Union
Motion:
This Union Notes:
1. LUU has 55 sports clubs and outdoor activities
2. Many of these clubs (e.g. hiking, rowing, trampolining) require expensive equipment to function
3. Union grants do not match budget bids for many clubs
4. Until several years ago the union had a Capital Development Program whereby money was set aside each year to fund purchase of essential equipment when it needed replacing.
This Union Believes:
1. As Union grants frequently do not match budget bids by clubs obsolete equipment cannot be replaced
2. Sports clubs are having to operate with substandard and inadequate equipment as they cannot afford to replace it without saving for many years
3. Long-term saving plans are exceedingly difficult to devise and maintain, due to the constant and inevitable turnover of personnel in student sports clubs
4. That the health and safety of students is being put at risk, whilst performances and results are suffering, due to the poor equipment.
This Union Resolves:
1. To work with the Activities Officer, the ARC and any sports clubs that wish to be a part to form a new Capital Development Program.
2. That sports clubs in this program will set aside money each year, in a separate fund, overseen by the Sports Development Coordinator in cooperation with the Director of Sport at the University of Leeds.
3. To pay money into this fund each year that will be saved up to purchase essential equipment for the clubs
Proposed by: Adam Young
Seconded by: Laurence Pearmain
Word count = 243
Motion 14
Motion Title: Should the union sell pill testing kits?
Motion Category: Welfare
Motion:
This Union Notes:
1. That Ecstasy/MDMA is currently a Class A drug.
2. The ACMD is reviewing the classification of ecstasy.
3. According to the British Crime Survey 2004/2005; 16-24 year olds are the biggest group of ecstasy users. 4.8% using that year.
4. There have been over 200 deaths in the UK related to ecstasy use over the last 15 years. This is less than the deaths related to Heroin, Cocaine and other drugs.
5. According to DrugScope, nobody has died directly from the toxic effects of the drug. Instead, deaths have fallen into three categories of heatstroke, too much fluid and heart failure.
6. One of the recent risks associated with Ecstasy is the possibility of obtaining adulterated drugs that may be more toxic than MDMA. Some of the reported deaths attributed to Ecstasy are likely caused by other, more dangerous drugs.
7. Pill testing kits will show the user if ecstasy and adulterants being looked for are present in their tablet. They will not show if any adulterants not being looked for are in the tablet.
8. On-site pill testing is illegal in the UK, however the sale of pill testing kits are not.
9. According to the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction; Pill testing interventions are important measures to enter into contact with hard-to-reach populations and to raise their interest in preventive and harm reduction measures?
This Union Believes:
1. Students who use illegal drugs like ecstasy are entitled to any available support and advice to end their drugs use as well as for harm reduction.
2. Raising awareness of the potential adulterants in illegal drugs could make people think twice about using the drugs.
3. Students who actually use illegal drugs are often the most hard to reach members of the student population.
4. As with the dissemination of harm reduction advice, the introduction of pill testing kits does not contravene the University’s “zero tolerance” policy on drugs.
This Union Resolves:
1. To look into purchasing testing kits for ecstasy and possibly other popular illegal recreational drugs in bulk to be sold at Leeds University Union.
2. To give out safer drugs use advice amongst the student population, especially concerning club drugs.
3. To write letters to all nightclubs in Leeds asking them to have free water readily available and to have locations where people can rest and relax.
Proposed by: Levent Akbulut
Seconded by: Guy Mitchell
Word count = 396
Motion 15
Motion Title: Should the union support the decriminalisation of drugs use?
Motion Category: Wider Society and Citizenship n
Motion:
This Union Notes:
1. The UN values the global illegal drug market to be worth £160billion a year, approximately 8% of international trade.
2. The UK spends £4billion on enforcement and £1bn on treatment in addiction compared to £16billion in acquisitive crime costs associated with heroin and cocaine alone.
3. It is estimated that drug-motivated crime resulting from prohibition is costing the UK £19billion per year (one third of the total cost of UK crime).
4. In the UN’s ten year drug strategy, 150 nations including the UK were officially committed to eradicating all coca, opium and cannabis from the planet by 2008.
5. The illegal drugs market opens up an opportunity for terrorist groups and organised crime to generate vast amounts of money.
6. The unregulated nature of the illegal drugs market has a major destabilising effect in production and transit countries, such as Afghanistan, Jamaica, Columbia and Mexico.
7. Students are often the victims of acquisitive crime such as burglary and muggings.
8. Students as young people make up a large proportion of those who are illegal drug users.
9. The university has a ‘zero tolerance’ policy towards illegal drugs. Many staff and students oppose this policy.
10. The union sells alcohol and tobacco, both of which are responsible for more deaths in the UK than all illegal drugs combined.
This Union Believes:
1. Drugs use should not be a criminal justice issue and should be dealt with as a public health issue.
2. Students and young people are often used as an excuse to keep fighting the drug war.
3. Treating drugs users like criminals is counterproductive.
4. The university’s zero-tolerance policy is legally unnecessary and only exacerbates the likelihood of students with drug problems to seek help.
This Union Resolves:
1. To call for the University to end the zero-tolerance policy and replace it with something more flexible yet legally acceptable.
2. To oppose the criminalisation of drug users calling on the government to spend more on drug education and look to alternatives to current drugs policy.
3. For any new policies to include the possibility of the control and regulation of some currently illegal drugs pending a review of the UN treaties.
Proposed by: Levent Akbulut
Seconded by: Barry McGuire
Word count = 367
Last year's referendum motions
See all the motions proposed in the February 2008 referendum at www.luuonline.com/referendum/referendum_feb08, or see those proposed in November 2007 referendum at www.luuonline.com/referendum/referendum_nov07.
