Megan presented this paper. There were no formal complaints made during this year's elections and so there was no need for the working group to meet. However, as the paper outlines, there are some issues with having an elections working group as there is often low interest in them and, as in the case of this year, lack of work for them to do. Megan asked the group to discuss what the function of the working group or elections committee should ideally be.
There was debate over how much decision making power the working group should have. Frazer explained that the group should be involved in the promotion of elections e.g. going out into halls and speaking to students. Jade suggested that they should be involved in the setting of the dates of the elections, setting word limits for manifestos, what type of campaigning is allowed as well as setting budgets for candidates. Ben suggested having a similar process that is in place for the disciplinary pool; ask people to opt out at the beginning of the year and draw random groups of people when needed. Megan explained that this may not be possible as most issues that arise during elections need answering within 12 hours, meetings held at short notice may not be well attended or productive.
The general consensus of the Committee was that a standing committee was a good idea, and better than the current system. The meetings of the committee could be open and publicised to begin with, and then become closed closer to the elections. Megan will write up a paper with more detail, outlining the functions of this group and the timeline that it would work to. The Committee were happy to wait until the start of the new academic year and bring a paper to the first Union Council in October.
Megan then presented the second half of the paper to the group. The rule amendments clarify the roles of the Returning Officer and Deputy Returning Officer. Guy noted that there was a mistake in the paper; the reference to the Democracy Zone Committee in section 3.3 should be removed and instead it should say 'the appointing body'.
The Committee moved to a vote on the amended rule amendments; 4 voted for. The amendments were approved.