SRC holds Extraordinary General Meeting to discuss next steps on University divestment from arms companies

Students express frustration over delays and bureaucratic hurdles in divestment efforts and call on the SRC to “put more pressure” on University leadership.

On 13 November, the Students’ Representative Council (SRC) held an Extraordinary General Meeting (EGM) to discuss a student motion urging immediate divestment of University funds from defence and arms companies. Though the exact figure representing the University’s holdings in the sector is currently unavailable, Glasgow Against Arms and Fossil Fuels (GAAF) estimates the stake to be around £5.5 million. SRC President Pablo Morán chaired the meeting.

Attendees filled the entirety of Room 201 in the McIntyre Building and included representatives from Glasgow Against Arms and Fossil Fuels (GAAF), Glasgow University Muslim Association (GUMSA), Glasgow University Middle East and North African Society (GUMENA), and several SRC Council Members. The meeting was held to provide an opportunity for students to voice their perspectives on the “Divestment Cannot Wait” motion proposed by the members of the student body. 

According to the SRC constitution, an EGM must be called after the submission of a valid written request, signed by at least 2% (approximately 800 students) of the student body. Once this threshold is met, the SRC President is required to schedule the meeting within two weeks.

The proposed motion asserts that the student body believes the Israeli government is committing genocide in Gaza and calls the University’s delay in divestment from arms companies “intolerable” for students and staff. The motion also suggests the university’s delays in divestment “detrimentally harm” its reputation. It calls for students to pursue every available avenue which furthers divestment, and to organise a significant student demonstration before the University Court’s next meeting on November 20.

The EGM centred on student perspectives, with an SRC employee circulating the room and handing a microphone to speakers. A first-year speaker voiced their difficulty of reconciling the university’s investment into arms companies with studying at the university, saying “we want to be able to be in an environment where we can contribute … without feeling as if we have blood on our hands.” 

Another student expressed a similar sentiment, “in seeing .. the results of our money, it’s hard to justify myself coming here [to university] every day.”

Students spoke of “a massive gulf” between the student body and university management on the issue and called on the SRC to pursue every possible avenue for divestment, as well as to formally endorse a rally on November 20, the day of the University Court meeting. Speakers also urged the SRC to implement a student activism support policy to protect activists from disciplinary action allegedly threatened by University management. There was speculation that the upcoming University Court meeting would result in yet another delay in divestment and urged the SRC to release a formal statement of disapproval should that be the case.

One student voiced frustration with the “undemocratic nature” of the University management’s approach to divestment, saying, “Our voices are systematically ignored. We are denied any sort of stake in this university and how it operates.” A representative of the Glasgow University Muslim Society (GUMSA) shared a perspective of the Muslim students at the University: “There is a part in our religion which states that the Muslim world is like one body. When one part of the body aches, the rest of the body cries out in pain. I think this is something that many Muslims feel very helpless with and many of our members who are underrepresented. We would like to feel proud to be studying at the University of Glasgow but the investment which the University holds in arms certainly acts [as a] barrier to that.”

Another speaker emphasised the need for the SRC to be more responsible in choosing the companies it collaborates with, urging the SRC to cut ties with companies like Domino’s and Amazon. She expressed, “We can’t really just talk about divestment and push for divesment when we ourselves are complicit in the genocide.” Domino’s has a heavy presence at the Welcome Fair every year during Freshers Week, handing out free pizza to students.

An aeronautical engineering student expressed concern about the university’s connections to defence companies like BAE Systems and Thales, sharing that in his experience the people in his course had no enthusiasm in working for these companies, “We’re interested in companies that we actually align with morally as well, and we want to work with them.”

He continued: “I hope this [partnerships with arms companies] is not a reason for the divestment to not happen. Because even from the perspective that it [working at defence companies] might benefit us, we don’t want it. “

One student also alleged that the University management is attempting to cover up its failure to divest by citing scholarships funded by defence companies. They urged the SRC to ensure that these scholarships come from “sustainable and ethical sources.”

Another GUMSA representative expressed frustration with the slow progress in addressing the ongoing situation in Palestine as a student body: “It’s a real shame that it’s taken over a year for this meeting. It should’ve happened straight away.” 

They also highlighted the limitations of student societies in affecting the situation at the university: “As societies, we can only campaign, protest, fundraise for the people of Palestine. But, you [the SRC] have the power to make proper change.”

A major theme at the meeting was the students’ frustration with the bureaucracy hurdles they felt were slowing down divestment. One student expressed, “We need to keep speaking up. We can’t let them [University management] keep drafting and redrafting policies. We don’t have time for that.”

Frustration over bureaucracy was directed not only at University management but also at the SRC. Students urged the SRC to reschedule its Council meeting, which was set for the day after the University Court meeting, to an earlier time. Students argued that the SRC’s continued adherence to regular procedures was inappropriate given the urgency of the issue stating, “There’s a genocide going on, and we are limited by bureaucracy.” Morán emphasised that the two-week timeline for calling a Council meeting was necessary to provide adequate notice to all Council members. This was to ensure the meeting was quorate.

The speakers called on the SRC to “go beyond the formalities of engaging in meetings” with University leadership and pointed out that while the SRC has had a divestment stance for 10 years. 

At several points during the meeting, Morán emphasised that the SRC is actively working on divestment. He mentioned a recent meeting with Gregor Caldow, the Executive Director of Finance, and David Duncan, the University CEO and Secretary, to discuss the University’s Socially Responsible Investment (SRI) policy. 

Morán pointed out that the University’s representations section of the SRI policy states that following a representation, the Court would not normally revisit the same issue for at least three years, a gap he acknowledged as problematic, and noted that the SRC was exploring ways to make the policy more agile. He assured students that the concerns raised would be taken to the SRC Council for further discussion.

An earlier version of this article incorrectly stated that the EGM was the first since the founding of the SRC.