The National Union of Students (NUS) has agreed to review the governance arrangements of its charitable arm after a report highlighting antisemitism in the union was published.
Barrister Rebecca Tuck’s investigation into the NUS, published yesterday, found that the NUS had failed to “sufficiently, robustly or proactively” challenge antisemitism and hostility towards Jews in “numerous instances”.
Her report makes several recommendations including that the NUS should review “whether the NUS president should continue to be the sole chair and also line manager of the directors of NUS UK and NUS Charity, given the likely relative experience of those individuals”.
It says the review should consider “alternative models for how those directors could be managed, assessed and supported”.
The report also recommends that NUS Charity, which is currently being assessed by the Charity Commission on allegations of antisemitism, and the union itself should “jointly appoint an advisory panel” to ensure Tuck’s recommendations are implemented.
An NUS spokesperson said the organisation has committed to all of Tuck’s recommendations and was consulting on a draft action plan for their implementation.
“Our priority now is to take forward the recommendations from Rebecca Tuck KC’s independent report to tackle antisemitism in all its forms across the breadth and depth of NUS,” they said.
“We have developed an action plan which will help us achieve this, but it is vital that we listen and learn from others, which is why we are setting up an advisory panel to scrutinise this plan and oversee its implementation.
“We must shine a light on the realities of antisemitism and be transparent in our reporting of progress.”
The Charity Commission opened a compliance case into NUS Charity after former education select committee chair Robert Halfon raised concerns about antisemitism within the organisation.
“We are aware of the findings and recommendations of the report and are assessing these to determine whether it raises specific issues for us as regulator of the charity,” a spokesperson for the regulator said.
“In the meantime, we continue to engage with the trustees of the charity, also around the impact of this report on the charity.”
Related Articles
