The findings of the consultant and solicitors were:

1. The current system does not encourage services for students. It is very process-driven and self-perpetuating, e.g. it spends considerable time on internal Constitutional issues.
2. The Constitution is not followed in reality. KCLSU has comprehensive written arrangements for its governance, but this is really just pretence and does not reflect what actually happens.
3. The system is regarded as primarily acceptable to the people who have devoted the time to understand it. The structures were described by an involved student as 'scary' and as a barrier to student involvement.
4. Students are regarded as 'time-poor' and require a system that pursues them rather than them having to pursue the system.
5. The responsibilities and decision-making powers of committees as specified by the Constitution bear little or no resemblance to actuality. Many major decisions are effectively taken outside the system and then presented through the democratic process as nothing more than a rubber-stamping' exercise.
6. There is evidence of informal systems working well within the system, providing empowerment and involvement, but this is not in line with the Constitution.
7. SRC never really holds elected officers to account although they have the constitutional powers to do so. Reports on activity are presented, but there is no scrutiny.
8. Elected officers have both power and responsibility. They usually understand the power they have but not the responsibility that goes with it. They should provide the bridge between the structure and the membership. They should continually ensure that their prime aim is to establish and then promote the views of students. At present, there is the view that they 'raise the drawbridge' and protect themselves and the status quo through the structure.
9. Elected officers are in a unique position to influence the College, and the College not only accepts this but would welcome increased involvement. Concentration on this area of work would continue to improve the lives of members whilst they are at College.
10. Within the rigidity of the current elected officer positions, there is little flexibility to reflect the differing priorities of the membership and the annual objective of KCLSU as a whole.
11. The elected officers should reflect on how much time is spent on engagement with the membership and actually making a difference to the lives of their members while they are at the College. They are elected primarily as their representatives and should represent the membership's interests and views. The simple fact that elected officers have been elected on a mandate does not automatically mean that they are representative of the membership.
12. A recent survey amongst SRC members indicated the following top four reasons for their standing for positions on the SRC...
    • to get more involved with KCLSU
    • to engage in the democratic process
    • to represent other student views
    • to facilitate change
    There is no evidence that the Union spends much time on motivating SRC members through satisfying their needs.
13. The SRC does not regularly formulate policy even though this is its Constitutional duty. When the SRC is asked to take decisions, these are usually on matters on which they have no prior knowledge and for which they are presented with fairly little information and not enough time to gain a proper understanding.
14. It is argued that the SRC does not debate the things that matter to students, and that it does not provide proportionate representation to expanding student groups such as postgraduates and nursing students. It does, however, provide a sounding board for new ideas and a fairly early test of student opinion amongst a small group of students.
15. SRC is very large and members don't know each other. They therefore do not have the opportunity to build relationships that would be useful if they wished to lobby for an issue they wanted to promote. The elected officers have the main links and are at the heart of the system, therefore their influence increases further. There is a further problem of insufficient training of SRC members.
16. The Chairperson of SRC is a difficult role because of the size of membership and the complexity of its procedures. It is a pivotal role in ensuring participation and involvement in meetings, and therefore, appropriate levels of induction, training and staff support should be given.
17. The Executive Committee is perceived as being the primary committee of KCLSU, in that it is this Committee that takes the most important decisions concerning KCLSU and its activities. It is recognised as being the most democratically representative.
18. There is a perception amongst students that if the Executive Committee is operating well then KCLSU performs well, politically and managerially. The problem is that if it isn't working well as a whole, or there are specific problems with individuals, effective remedial action is not taken. There is no real accountability for the effectiveness of the Executive Committee as a team or as individuals.
19. Committees do not take most of the decisions on the services and activities of KCLSU. Individuals or groups of individuals who may be student Officers, staff members or a mix of the two, make the decisions.
20. There is a Constitutional lack of clarity regarding which committee bears ultimate responsibility for KCLSUs activities - is it the Executive or the SRC?
21. Standing Committees are seen as the 'jewels in the crown' of democratic involvement because they actually perform functions or arrange activities that directly affect students.
22. Staff are often held accountable for certain services and activities but are not necessarily given commensurate responsibility - they often have to refer decisions to individuals or Committees.
23. A great deal of staff time is spent managing relationships with elected officers. The annual change of most of them provides particular problems. There is no consistency about what elected officers wish to be informed about or get involved in. The goalposts change every year.
24. The effective appraisal of the General Manager is one of the key annual processes and should be treated as such.

Top