The National Union of Students has been urged to rethink its relationship with its charitable arm as it responds to antisemitism claims.
An independent inquiry into allegations about antisemitism at the NUS, published today, said the organisation should explore “alternative models” for managing its subsidiary, the NUS Charity.
This could include stripping the NUS chair of their role managing the charity’s director and letting the charity advise on changes to the structure of the NUS as a whole.
The report, by barrister Rebecca Tuck, identified “numerous incidents of antisemitism within the NUS” and said that “for at least the last decade, Jewish students have not felt welcome or included in NUS spaces or elected roles”.
The Charity Commission opened a compliance case into the NUS Charity in May last year after the concerns about the NUS were first raised.
The report said a review of governance at the NUS in response to its findings should consider whether the union president should continue as “line manager of the directors of NUS UK [a private subsidiary] and NUS Charity, given the likely relative experience of those individuals, and alternative models for how those directors could be managed, assessed and supported”.
There should also be a review of whether the NUS’ 2019 restructure had been effective in “involving members of both NUS UK and NUS Charity boards”, the report says.
It also recommended that both subsidiaries should have a role in choosing a panel to ensure the reforms were implemented.
A spokesperson for the NUS said: “NUS Charity is committed to working shoulder to shoulder with NUS UK in taking on board the learnings from [Tuck’s] report and in delivering the action plan in full.
“The charity has an important role to play in supporting the student union’s response and learning.”
The Charity Commission told Third Sector: “We are aware of the findings and recommendations of the report and are assessing these to determine whether it raises specific issues for us as regulator of the charity.
“In the meantime, we continue to engage with the trustees of the charity, also around the impact of this report on the charity.”