This week saw considerable controversy for both the Union and the CUSU
Women’s campaign, after it was announced that Julian Assange was going to be participating in a Q&A session at the Union on November 27th. Mr Assange currently faces questioning on allegations of rape and sexual assault in Sweden, and has been granted asylum in the Ecuadorian Embassy after a ruling from the UK Supreme Court declared that he should be extradited to Sweden. Mr Assange last spoke at the Union 18 months ago, in March 2011, less than a month before the decision regarding his extradition was made.

The Union released a statement on Monday evening about their decision to offer the Wikileaks founder a platform to speak, calling him “one of the most recognisable figures in recent years.” The CUSU Women’s Campaign was quick to respond, however, launching a petition against the event. The petition, which was open to anyone to sign, received over 900 signatures, and criticised the Union for “riding on a tide of publicity created from the traumatic experiences of rape survivors to raise the profile of their own name.” One commentator on the petition page said: “the Union think they are being clever & edgy. They are not. They are shameful.” The Women’s Campaign also planned to protest the event if it went ahead.

Mid-week it became clear that the Union’s own members were also deeply unhappy with the situation, with over 150 members petitioning the Union to cancel the event, resulting in plans for a Special Business Meeting to be held. Had such a meeting taken place, a vote would have been taken on whether Assange should have been allowed to speak, with a minimum of a 75% majority needed for the motion to pass.

Even the process of calling this meeting was complicated, however, with a “Presidential Interpretation of the Constitution”, necessary to allow
electronic signatures for the petition to be accepted. The Standing Committee had initially decided that the petition had to be hand-signed, upsetting some disabled students who felt this would have limited their ability to sign the petition.

Laura Wetherly, a student at King’s commented that “as a disabled student, I have limited physical mobility so going to the Union building is difficult and tiring. For students who use wheelchairs the building is not accessible. To expect us to enter the building to physically sign is not reasonable. I am disappointed by the Union’s failure to support me as one of their members.”

The Union has robustly defended its decision to invite Assange to speak, stating they had “decided to host this interview on condition that no questions will be forbidden”, and arguing that “the Union feels that free speech is not just about being heard – it is everyone’s right to hear, question, and challenge individuals and their ideas in the public sphere”.

But, in a surprise move, the event was cancelled on Tuesday. Union President Austin Mahler confirmed the cancellation to Varsity, saying that: “Julian Assange has cancelled the Q&A scheduled for 27th November due to technical issues with the video link equipment in the Ecuadorian Embassy.”

Those who had protested against the invitation were relieved. CUSU Women’s Officer, Susy Langsdale, said: “The CUSU Women’s Campaign is delighted that the Union has cancelled Julian Assange coming to speak. We are, however, particularly amused by their suggestion that the founder of Wikileaks had to cancel a week in advance for technical reasons.” She also criticised the Union’s behaviour, saying: “We are disappointed that the Union has not had the intellectual honesty to admit the real reasons for this disinvitation nor to respond directly to the 178 of their members who expressed concern at the Union’s failure to address the wider issues of rape culture.”

Despite the CUSU Women’s Campaign claiming victory, the Union remained adamant that: “Mr Assange’s cancellation comes in light of the broadcaster cancelling, and is unrelated to the petition.” Despite this reaffirmation, students posting on Facebook and Twitter were unconvinced by the proposition that the “technical difficulties” couldn’t be overcome with over a week still to go before the event.

Their suspicions were proved correct when, in an embarrassing turn of events for the Union, it was revealed the next day that Assange would in fact be speaking via videolink to the ConventionCamp conference in Hanover, Germany, on 27th November, instead of speaking at the Union.

Responding to this snub from Assange, the Union said they were: “disappointed in Mr Assange’s apparent dishonesty. We would have hoped that any individual or institution claiming to represent the interests of free speech and openness would be more straightforward in their dealings.”

Returning to the initial controversy around Assange’s invitation, however, the Union admitted that “It is clear that we need a more representative way of gauging what members want. We hope members will consider joining us next term to discuss No Platform policies and the Union’s invitation policy going forward. “Only when we know exactly what members joined to participate in can we be certain how to provide for their wishes.”

More recently, the Union Women’s Officer, Lauren Steele, has told Varsity she has felt “isolated and humiliated” in her role. She has also expressed her hopes of getting the Women’s and Diversity Officers a vote on the Union Standing Committee, in the hope of making the Union a more inclusive and self-critical organisation.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The week that was: CUSU and the Union get defensive in a never-ending series of statements...

CUSU Women’s Campaign - Responds to the prospect of Assange Q&A event

“The CUSU Women’s Campaign is deeply disappointed that the current committee of Cambridge Union Society have decided to re-invite Assange. Yet again, the Cambridge Union Society is enabling the rebuilding of the public personae of an alleged rapist. By inviting Assange, and Strauss-Kahn previously, the Cambridge Union Society are colluding in the horrific silence and shame around rape.”
The statement continued: “we want the Cambridge Union Society to understand that what they are doing is not only a Cambridge based issue but a national one. They are disregarding the voices of survivors of rape across the country through their continued offering of platform to alleged rapists. We expect our university to set a positive model for supporting survivors of rape.”

The Union (a bit embarrassed) - Assange not coming due to “technical difficulties”

“It is unfortunate that these issues were discovered before the Union Society had the opportunity to fairly gauge members’ views through a Special Business Meeting, which was scheduled to be held this weekend, however the Women’s Campaign has withdrawn the requisition that was necessary to call this meeting. At the next opportunity, the Committee will be considering the possibility of holding a Special Business Meeting this term or next as chance to discuss No Platform policies. The question of rescheduling the event will wait until after this discussion.We hope recent events will encourage more member involvement and discussion about the principles for which the Union exists. We also hope that they will act as a catalyst for more widespread awareness and education about rape culture.”

CUSU Women’s campaign are happy - although Union maintains original line

Susy Langsdale: “The CUSU Women’s Campaign is delighted that the Union has cancelled Julian Assange coming to speak. We are, however, particularly amused by their suggestion that the founder of Wikileaks had to cancel a week in advance for technical reasons. We are disappointed that the Union has not had the intellectual honesty to admit the real reasons for this disinvitation nor to respond directly to the 178 of their members who expressed concern at the Union’s failure to address the wider issues of rape culture.”

But the Union inists: “We note the claim that this cancellation is due to a campaign opposing the event, however we would like to re-iterate that Mr Assange’s cancellation comes in light of the broadcaster cancelling, and is unrelated to the petition.”

The Union Again (very embarrassed) - Assange, the two-timer

“It has recently been announced that Mr Assange will be delivering the keynote address via video link to the ConventionCamp conference in Hamburg, Germany, on 27th November. This announcement comes only one day after his spokesperson claimed that his Q&A at the Cambridge Union Society must be cancelled because his preferred broadcaster, Russia Today, was unable to arrange the technical aspects of the video link. The Union Society is disappointed in Mr Assange’s apparent dishonesty. We would have hoped that any individual or institution claiming to represent the interests of free speech and openness would be more straightforward in their dealings. We apologise to members for the confusion this has caused and the doubts that have arisen following Mr Assange’s misleading statement.”

Cambridge Union Women’s Officer - Is not at all happy

Lauren Steele: “From the very beginning of term when I started my time as Women’s Officer of the Union it has been clear that the role is tokenistic. I do not have a vote which means my voice can be easily dismissed and disrespected, as it has been. At the moment, from personal experience, I feel the Union does not provide a safe space for women members and by disregarding even a minority of members’ views, in my opinion, contradicts its notion of free speech entirely. The Union must consider the influences and power it has as an institution and how their decisions contradict many of society’s movements forward. From an inside perspective, the Union is a backward institution that urgently needs to re-evaluate its no platform policy and the need to listen to all members’ points of view, not just the groups that sit comfortably with their own.”