CUSU extra-ordinary council voted 24 for and 24 against a motion put forward on Tuesday by the representatives of Queens college JCR to formally condemn the occupation by the Cambridge Defend Education group (CDE) of the Lady Mitchell lecture hall at the Sidgwick site.

Prior to this, a motion proposing that CUSU support the stated aims of the occupiers and to engage with them was passed. This motion was proposed by CDE members and its sympathizers. Following a lively debate and a series of ‘friendly’ amendments, a compromise was agreed upon and the motion carried through. 

CDE members/sympathizers made it clear that there was division amongst themselves regarding the appropriateness of the Willets talk ambush, and that they wished to engage with CUSU on common future aims, such as  in the opposition to the government’s white paper on higher education.

They explained that the Willets talk obstruction was conducted by a group of CDE members without the knowledge of other CDE members, and that precautions shall be taken in the future to prevent similar unilateral actions.

The motion proposed by Queens JCR members to condemn the occupation was discussed. Queens JCR representatives informed CUSU that a college-wide referendum in Queens mandated them to distance themselves from CDE, and the occupation. Other JCRs had conducted similar referenda and had similar mandates.

The proposition argued that the occupation was a symbolic continuation of the CDE's attack on the Willets talk at the Lady Mitchell lecture hall. CUSU has already condemned the Willets talk disruption by CDE. The proposition also emphasised that they disgreed with the methods and actions of the CDE but not necessarily with the aims of the organisation.

Opposition argued that the occupation currently was no longer in connection with the Willets talk disruption, but rather a protest mainly against the government’s white paper on higher education. Speakers emphasised the need for CUSU and CDE to work together in pursuit of common aims.

After a serious of ‘friendly’ amendments to the original wording of the motion, a vote was undertaken. Several re-counts of the vote was conducted by the chairs to ensure the votes were counted properly.

Meanwhile quick shuffling, including the quick assignment of a proxy vote to a CDE sympathizer, ensured the vote was a tie of 24 for and 24 against. The votes of a few JCR representatives who had voted in favour of the motion on their ballot sheets but left early weren’t considered in accordance to CUSU council rules as interpreted by the chairs. With a tie, the motion fell.

However the council members who voted can change their votes within a week of the meeting. This means that the stance of CUSU on the now ended Occupation remains uncertain.