The Otago University Students’ Association (OUSA) Executive has requested the resignation of Political Representative, Jett Groshinski, following an internal review of conduct and responsibilities at this week’s Executive meeting on the 28th of August. The OUSA Executive told Critic in a statement that the decision to request Jett’s resignation “was not made lightly.” The motion stems from consistent coverage over the past couple of months regarding concerns about Jett's ability to meet the requirements of his role as Politics Representative and manage conflicts of interest after he announced he would be running for Local Body Elections.
“Over the course of the year, several concerns have arisen that have impacted the trust, transparency, and effectiveness required of [Jett],” the Executive continues in their statement. According to the Exec, such concerns included difficulties in fulfilling the general duties of the Political Rep role, challenges in working collaboratively within the Executive, and breaches of the Executive Code of Conduct.
The Executive Code of Conduct is an OUSA policy that outlines the expectations for Executive officers within their terms. It is a requirement for all Officers to abide by this Code of Conduct if elected. The Executive believes that Jett has breached this code of conduct, in particular sections 2.1.3, 2.1.4, 2.1.6 and 2.3. These sections require officers to act in the best interests of OUSA and its members, demonstrate transparency, honesty, and good faith, to uphold the highest professional standards and to disclose conflicts of interest. “The Executive believes these obligations have not been met [by Jett]”, the Executive statement reads.
While the Executive statement did not mention the recent BDS SGM at all, Jett told Critic in respect to the request for resignation that an attempt is being made to “silence” him, for “standing up for student voice.” He told Critic that he was ultimately in the Executive meeting that came to the decision, and believes that “this push [for resignation] is about the SGM and my insistence that decisions belong to students.”
“I called a Student General Meeting so students could debate and decide important matters in the open,” Jett continued. “That is what our Constitution provides for. I acted in good faith and I will not apologise for giving students their say.”
According to the Executive, conflicts of interest relating to Jett’s position as a Labour-endorsed candidate have “not been effectively managed.” As reported earlier this year, Jett hadn’t actually told the Exec (other than President Liam White) of his intentions to run for council. The Exec instead found out his potential conflict from an ODT article, which led to them entering a confidential committee to discuss the potential ramifications and conflicts of interest between running for council and being Political Rep.
Critic also reported earlier this year that one student, Fergus, had taken to postering around Campus to express their discomfort with Jett’s conflict of interest management, at the time calling it a “band-aid solution”. Don’t say ‘I told you so’, Fergus. The Executive statement continues, explaining that the Council conflict has “directly affected Jett’s ability within the role to oversee essential activities in his role, including local body elections and Politics Week, requiring these responsibilities to be reassigned to other Executive Members.” In order to manage his conflict, Jett has delegated much work to either Liam or Finance and Strategy Officer Daniel “to ensure a clear and accountable separation between my candidacy and OUSA’s electoral engagement.” However, the delegation of work has meant that Jett may be under the pump to find things to do in order to meet his hours as Political Rep while attending to his Local Council campaign work.
“The conflict [of interest] claim does not stand,” Jett told Critic. “Earlier in the year, by agreement, responsibilities for Politics Week and the local body elections campaign were reassigned to other Executive members to manage any perceived conflict. That agreed mitigation cannot be used now as grounds to remove me.”
If a breach of the Code of Conduct has been made out (as the Executive seems to believe Jett has done), that Officer (the Exec member in question) can be found to have committed misconduct under section 4.2.5 and will be subject to disciplinary action. Under the Executive Discipline Procedure, disciplinary actions passed at an Executive meeting may include a written warning or a motion to request resignation. This motion needs two thirds of the Exec to pass – which it did. Only Liam (President), Jett (Political Rep), Buki (International Rep) and Misrica Talia’uli (Stand-in for UOPISA Rep Seluvaia) abstained, with Amy Whyman (Welfare and Equity), Amy Martin (Vice Pres), Stella (Academic Rep), Daniel (Finance and Strategy), Deborah (Clubs and Societies Rep), Josh (Post-grad Rep) and Pou (Te Rōpū Māori) all voting in favour of Jett’s resignation. Callum (Residential Rep) was absent from the meeting.
With the motion successfully passed, Jett will be given two weeks’ notice in writing from President Liam White to resign. However – the ultimate decision of whether to resign still pretty much rests with Jett. The only time where Jett’s term could cease would happen upon expiry of his term, resignation, or a successful motion of no confidence at an SGM. Given the overwhelming success of Jett’s last BDS motion at an SGM, this may be a gamble the Executive is unwilling to take. Jett appears to stand by his success, calling himself “proud” of the decision to call the SGM. “Students showed up, spoke, and voted. If the price of defending student democracy is being asked to resign, the problem is not with me. The problem is with an Executive that has forgotten who it serves.”
As it stands, it doesn’t seem Jett is keen to voluntarily give up his role, telling Critic that he will continue to do the work he was elected to carry out, as well as “engage constructively, uphold our Constitution, and advocate for strong student participation in civic life.”
“The OUSA Exec remains committed to ensuring the Executive operates transparently and accountably”, the Executive’s statement finishes.
Critic Te Ārohi is currently on break and will report on the rest of this hui next week alongside next week’s Executive Meeting. Ngā mihi.