Harland's Humiliation
Amy Harland broke the stalemate which was hardening between opposing camps in the row over David Irving on Wednesday when she made a dramatic eleventh hour u-turn, announcing that Thursday's entire debate on freedom of speech would be cancelled.
The move came after an extraordinary 24 hours of impasse and political wrangling at the Union, climaxing in a four hour Special Private Business Meeting on Tuesday night, which descended into a marathon of anarchy and confrontation between opposing sides in the Chamber.
Over one hundred Members attended the meeting, many of them there to support two specific items on the agenda, which called for Amy Harland to withdraw her invitation to David Irving.
Ms Harland came under fire after the speeches, when it was revealed that her interpretation of a specific Union rule over who can extend and rescind invitations to speakers would not necessarily take into account the wishes of members in the Chamber that evening, but would rest with the President alone. The Chamber voted by 95 votes to 15 that she should withdraw her invitation.
Amy Harland's tactic of interpretation of the rules, defended by the Oxford Union as legitimate, was called into question. Ms Harland expressed the view that since "the invitation of speakers is not 'general administration', it is therefore not subject to the direction of Standing Committee or the House." Kirsty McNeill, OUSU President, told the Oxford Student that, "to criticise the majority for being a majority shows utter contempt for members and for democracy".
There was obvious dissent and frustration among members of Standing Committee, the elected executive body at the Union, both towards Amy Harland and members in the Chamber. One senior elected officer asserted aggravation privately about how little control the President had over the whole proceedings. On two occasions Ms Harland had to cede her chair to allow proceedings to continue and she adjourned the meeting twice to consult on how she should proceed.
She attempted to reassure the Chamber, explaining: "I am making judgements as sensitively as I can". However Nick Mason, last term's Union President, admitted to the Chamber that he was "aware that lots of things have taken place tonight that seem to have shown that there was not transparency in the rules".
A Union press officer was livid at the night's proceedings, and expressed disgust at the way in which he felt filibustering techniques had been used by anti-Irving members to frustrate the debate. "The tactics used tonight," he said, "showed utter disregard for any concept of fairplay that the anti-Irving campaign may have claimed".
The President's promised decision on the invitation was released at 2pm on Wednesday, after an all day meeting in her office, and what is understood to have been a closed meeting of Standing Committee directly after the Union members left at 2am on Wednesday morning.
She claims that the debate will not go ahead because, although there is still no risk to student safety and this is a "valid and important" debate, the representation of members at the meeting on Tuesday left her with no other option. The Union believes, however, that if a "more representative" sample of students were taken, the majority would be behind the invitation and the debate.
She has informed the police of the cancellation, and the Union rejected claims that this move showed a fear that demonstrations would be too much for the police to contain. Members of the National Front posted messages on its website on Wednesday, calling for "support" for Irving in Oxford.
The Press Officer at the Union re-iterated that any decisions taken at Special Private Business Meetings were not binding for the President. He repeated that she could have proceeded with the debate, but felt that since the only representation of student feeling was at Tuesday night's meeting, she could not ignore the "small minority pressure group" which had created an "intimidating and hostile atmosphere" in the Chamber.
David Irving refused to comment but did leave a statement on his website, asserting that the Oxford Union had surrendered to the "traditional enemies of free speech". He has been encouraged by a television company, he says, to come to Oxford anyway to "state his case, invited or not."
David Mitchell, former President of the Jewish Society and submitter of the two motions at Tuesday's meeting, told the press that the Jewish students of Oxford stood by the fact that the invitation was a terrible mistake. "However," he said, "the President has listened to members and has finally made the brave decision to rescind, and for that we thank her."
OUSU President Kirsty McNeill also expressed "delight" at the decision and declared that, "The decision by Amy Harland shows that she has listened to her members". She hoped that Oxford Union would "learn its lesson and takes into account the feelings of its members in the future".
The Union's Press Officer offered praise for Amy Harland and said that, "under an exceptional and hostile position, she handled herself very well." He rejected claims that she had weakened her position both as President and with her Standing Committee over the affair, and he said, "We have a very good term remaining, with lots more exciting events."
17th May 2001