UPDATE: Participants in LSE Occupation defy management's ultimatum. Please see pictures attached for management's statement dated 31/3/2015 and our response.
Dear Stuart,
We welcome and fully reciprocate your enthusiastic reception of the negotiations and discussions held with delegates from the occupation so far. In particular, we were very pleased to see this enthusiasm matched by actions, in the form of your proposal for formal tripartite discussions at the start of the summer term.
However, we would like to clarify how we feel our contribution to the democratic environment at LSE has worked and can continue to work, and how this relates to our occupation of university space.
To be clear, it goes without saying that the productive and encouraging dialogue that has come out of our occupation so far is an immediate consequence of our bringing direct action and direct democracy to the heart of the university. In the democratic and inclusive environment at LSE, and specifically in any formal discussion prompted by our demands, we believe it is essential that we continue to bring these key elements - direct democracy and direct action - to the table.
We have reached a consensus after extensive discussion that the assurances provided in your letter dated 31st March do not constitute a satisfactory response to our demands. To this end, full consensus has also been reached in the group that the assurances and clarifications listed represent the bare minimum of what the university should already be doing regardless of our ongoing occupation.
We understand that those delegated to negotiate with us have been limited in their capacity to to act more fully on our demands, and we would welcome a broadening of the participation from management at the proposed tripartite meetings, so that those who are able to make the relevant decisions are present.
Finally, we feel that it is important to acknowledge that the demands, concerns, and critiques which have emerged from our current occupation do not and cannot find their resolution in a discussion process alone. To this end, we wish to particularly redirect your attention to our demand for a permanent space for the pursuit of the aims of the Free University of London.
The process which has been initiated in the occupied space has been one of creating, on a prefigurative and propositional basis, a liberated and safe university space, run democratically by students and staff, and independent of the pressures of the market. We hope it is obvious that we cannot continue this process without access to a space along the lines of point 2) of the Liberation section of our demands document.
In this respect we believe it would be a dereliction of duty for us not to maintain an open space, providing opportunities for democratic discussion in the time leading up to the tripartite meeting, as well as opening up additional space for studying and alternative educational workshops, until the proposed discussions take place.
Yours sincerely,
Occupy LSE
