The hard left (or Trots as they are known) have been slagging off the NUS leadership for decades. The current attacks from trotty NEC members, and hard left unions such as SOAS and Birkbeck, are simply the latest in a long line of annoyances that have been endured by delegates to NUS conference.
The hard left groups have this tendency to say they represent the broader student movement or the majority of student activists. If they really believe this then they're deluded, but if they don't then they are simply trying to legitimise their press releases which, until now, have been largely ignored by the mainstream press and social media alike.
The paradox of this whole situation is that onlookers from the right who have also called for the NUS President's resignation, do so with the rationale that he was responsible for the rioting within the student protests over tuition fees. The left, however, want rid of Porter for entirely the opposite reason; that he was "spinelessly dithering" over supporting the days of action.
One member of the hard left has said today,
"the students pushing for a no confidence vote are the students who orchestrated 130,000 strong student protests"Bollocks. If they're talking about the peaceful protests in towns and cities outside of London (which totalled around 100,000 participants), then those events were organised by local student union officers, the vast majority of which support Aaron and NUS. If they're talking about the protests in London that turned violent, then they probably are talking about themselves but the total participants over these three days of action were less than 30,000. Attendance numbers have never been the trots' strong point!
I suspect that if and when the motion of no confidence (actually a motion of censure) is presented to conference, the support for Aaron will be in the area of 80 to 90 percent.
A hurricane in a teacup that is the hard left are a constant distraction in NUS. The mainstream press should be reminded of that.