The financial future of the Oxford University Students’ Union (OUSU) has been plunged into uncertainty after plans to restructure its funding was roundly rejected.
University officials and student representatives had toiled for months on how to shore up the organisation’s shaky finances, but their proposals were dismissed at a meeting of Oxford bursars this week.
The Working Party on OUSU funding are headed back to the drawing board following the snub from the Estates Bursars Committee (EBC).
The group began their review into OUSU’s financial structure late last year, amid concerns that the institution’s sources of income were inherently unstable.
As things stand, OUSU revenue is generated via a combination of ad hoc University grants, common room affiliation fees and profits from its commercial wing, Oxford Student Services Limited (OSSL).
There are major doubts however over the stability of these funding sources, forcing OUSU to restructure or face cutbacks in key services.
In response to the ongoing financial struggles, the Working Party on OUSU funding was set up by the Joint Committee of Council with Student Members (JCC). They proposed a new funding model, which brought colleges in as a fourth contributor to the OUSU budget.
The proposal was scrutinised by bursars at the EBC last Thursday. Although official feedback has not yet been released, it is believed that the model was strongly condemned, with some bursars labeling the reforms little more than “a sticking plaster.”
While the EBC was asked only to advise upon rather than accept or reject the proposal, it is very unlikely the JCC will be able pass the changes without their support
Asked to reflect on the future of the model, Secretary to the JCCSM, Gary Crocker, refused to comment until a formal statement from the EBC had been released.
“Once comments have been received from the EBC and any other consultative bodies the report will be reviewed and further consultation will take place,” he said.
“Until the consultation and review process is complete it would be unwise to speculate about future funding options and the finances at OUSU.”
OUSU President Lewis Iwu added that the JCCSM had taken great care to absorb feedback from students throughout the process.
“Consultation is important and that is why I have had several meetings with common room representatives to get constructive feedback,” he said.
The row over funding comes at an increasingly uncertain time for the Students’ Union, which is also facing a dramatic reorganisation to comply with the 2006 Charities Act – which comes into effect later this year.
Jason Keen, JCR President of St John’s College, said, “How this funding issue is resolved will be fundamental to the future of OUSU.
“We really are at a crossroads at the moment in terms of what we want our students union be, what it should do and how we should pay for it.”
He added that many of his fellow JCR and MCR colleagues were worried that they would end up having to foot the bill for the suggested contribution from colleges.
“The major concern at the moment is that this additional college rate would be passed straight on to common rooms, which could prompt a wave of disaffiliations,” he said.
The current proposed changes have been strongly criticised, with many fearing it could result in an essential stealth tax on students.
Among its fiercest critics is Ben Britton, MCR co-President of St Catherine’s College, who has created his own proposal as an alternative funding model.
“I, and several others, am pleased that JCCSM WG proposal has been opposed by EBC and hope that Conference of Colleges will follow suit,” he said.
“I remain very critical of the manner in which this model was constructed and that necessary consultation was hastily avoided.”
In light of the episode, some have claimed that to justify its funding model, OUSU needs to rethink its scope, level and purpose.
The OUSU Rep for Magdalen college, Tom Meakin welcomed this re-examination. He said, “I think the one great thing that can come out of this is that OUSU will have to more overtly justify its existence to JCRs. This will force people to go back to the drawing board and think about what they want from their student union. It will enable everyone who has an active role within the organisation be they JCR presidents, sabbatical officers or OUSU reps to take an active role in redefining what should be and what can be an organisation that caters for the needs of Oxford students.”
