Democratic Procedures Committee

You are here: Home >

Democratic Procedures Committee

20th February 2020

There is a significant interest in the motions at this meeting.  However, due to an administrative delay owing to staff shortage, we are making the motion sheets available for the 20th February 2020 meeting so that all motions discussed can be seen in lieu of the immediate availability of minutes.  The minutes will be published in due course - we apologise once again.  If you have any concerns, please get in touch with suelections@nottingham.ac.uk

The motions can be found here: Agendas, Minutes and Reports - DPC


The Democratic Procedures Committee, consisting of nine students and three officers, is responsible for discussing and voting on motions submitted by students which seek to change, clarify or update the governing documents of the Students' Union.

These documents are anything from the bye-laws (a document which explains how the Students' Union should run) to approving the constitutions of societies and student groups.

Their work focuses on ensuring that the wording of these documents which outline processes and procedures are very clear and unambiguous, and also ensuring that any decisions to change these have the will of students either through consultation, or within student groups their own democratic processes.


Democratic Procedures Committee Members

Jacob Collier

 

Zia Rehman

Holly Rigby

Athena Potsos

Valeriya Bukharova

Aaron Osher

James Pheasey

Sam Hawkins

Charlie Gill

 


Democratic Procedures Committee Meeting Dates 2019/20

Meetings for this academic year will be held as follows (dates to be confirmed):

  • 1st Meeting - 15th October 2019 - 5:30 - 7:30pm - D08 Teaching & Learning Building, University Park.
  • 2nd Meeting - 20th February 2020 - 5:30 - 7:30pm - A45 Sir Clive Granger, University Park.
  • 3rd Meeting - 26th March 2020 - 5:30 - 7:30pm - D08 Teaching & Learning, University Park.
Please note that this is a provisional timetable for the year 2019/20 and maybe subject to change.

Please note that the 2nd and 3rd meeting are reserved for motions regarding the democratic review. No other new business will be presented.

Any questions about the dates please contact a member of the Representation Development Team.


What would a motion to the Democratic Procedures Committee need to cover?

Any student can submit a motion to the Democratic Procedures Committee.

Like a motion to Union Council the motion should cover the following:

  • 1. A motion coversheet explaining what the motion is proposing, a summary of key changes, and why the motion is being put forward.  For good examples of previous motions, take a look at the minutes from previous meetings of the Democratic Procedures Committee.
  • 2. A document must be submitted that shows an edited version of the bye-laws or constitution you are submitting complete with strike throughs and clearly marked additions, if appropriate.

If you need any guidance and support on any of the above, including how to submit your motion, get in touch with a member of the Representation Development Team.

Once you have submitted your motion, the committee will either invite you to discuss your motion in the public meeting, or hold a virtual vote for minor changes. You can see a summary of how this year's committee has decided to work with different motions here

See DPC Minutes, Agendas and Reports


Testimonies from DPC Members

At the end of the day I joined DPC to get out of my comfort zone and learn new analytical ways of thinking. Beforehand I knew nothing about DPC but the experience has been only positive. If you’re on the fence, trust me, you should get involved. The workload really isn’t much, and plenty of time/support is given for necessary reading to be fitted around your studies. The DPC experience will only bring you positives!Elliott Denham, Postgraduate Officer (2015/16)
I felt that scrutinising the referendum quorum reform was an interesting moment. It made me realise how important some of the changes to these bye-laws are in influencing SU policy. I didn't particularly agree with the rationale behind implementing the new policy so I challenged the proposer a few times, and in the end we came to an agreement that we'd give it a conditional trial run. It felt good to have that influential input.Alfie Cranmer, Year 3, Law