Changes to the graduate accommodation policy, which deny them the right to have guests staying in their rooms, was overwhelmingly condemned by the OUSU Council this week through a motion which challenged the policy as “not a workable solution to any problem”.
The new policy greatly limited the freedom of students to have either guests to stay overnight, or even to have someone in their room in the middle of the day. It states that all tenants must sign a lease agreeing ‘‘not to take in guests or invitees’’, meaning that no guests are allowed at any time of day ‘‘with no exceptions.’’
The OUSU motion, proposed by Rob Noble and seconded by Jim O’Connell, stated that the rule ‘‘has the potential to cause, and already has caused, unnecessary tension between student tenants and the Accommodation Office’’, and that it is ‘‘an overreaction’’ as well as being “largely unenforceable.”
The motion suggests removing the new ‘‘no guests, no exceptions’’ rule and implementing a trial Head Residents system within this graduate accommodation. This would involve a certain number of students being appointed head residents, and having responsibility for reinforcing the old rules. This scheme would, according to the motion, ‘‘save time and money for the Accommodation Office because head residents would deal with most minor complaints’ and ‘‘have proven capable of resolving most issues by communicating with the students involved.’’ It added that head residents ‘‘can also improve social cohesion between tenants and organize rotors for recycling and other shared duties.’’
This motion had already been overwhelmingly passed by the MCR ‘Prescom’, and it has been noted that this is a system which works well in other universities and colleges in the UK.
Although the motion was passed overwhelmingly, there was a degree of skepticism. Alex Mayall, a student at St Catz, said that, ‘‘I don’t feel like someone in the house should be my babysitter, and I shouldn’t have to police them like I’m their mother.’’
However the point was made that these students would have volunteered for the position of head resident, and would receive a subsidy on their room. The motion stated that any loss of income to the university as a result of this subsidy would ‘‘be more than compensated for by improved tenant satisfaction and reduced workload for the Accommodation Office.’’
The reactions from students university-wide seem to be almost entirely in agreement with OUSU. Ben Hudson, at Regents College, doubted the effectiveness of the policy at all, ‘‘what a strange policy – I really can’t see it being followed at all.’’ He mentioned that ‘‘we have good relationships with the college authorities (the Principal lives at the end of our quad) so as long as people act with respect, which they do as a rule in the absence of these rather adversarial decrees, there are no problems.’’
However, there were some reservations from students who’d had difficult experiences with their accommodation. One St Anne’s student said, ‘‘I agree that this probably isn’t an entirely realistic policy, but I do know of people who push the limits. One girl on my corridor had her 38 year old French boyfriend around for a week and, from the sound of things, it seemed like he’d brought the Eurostar with him. Even worse his toddler stayed with them. He’d wake up every night screaming until they lullabied him to sleep. The system definitely needs tightening; I don’t think I’ll ever be able to listen to frere Jacques in the same way again.’’
He added, ‘‘rumour has it that one student even managed to hide Bin Laden in his en-suite for two days – it wasn’t until he took a girl back to see his weapon of mass destruction that he got found out. If that doesn’t motivate the need for reform I don’t know what does.’’ Cherwell has been unable to verify this statement.
Rob Noble, who proposed the motion, described the Acommodations Office as, ‘‘unusual for the extent to which it doesn’t communicate with students’’ and said that people who live in this graduate accommodation often feel, ‘‘no sense of community’’. Jim O’Connell said of the change in accommodations policy, ‘‘It’s patronizing…Graduates are often people who need to have overnight guests, for many different reasons. The Accommodation Office will only agree to [get rid of this rule] if there is some mechanism for making sure that in future people having overnight guests do not abuse that privilege, and head residents is the way to do that.’’ It was also stressed at the meeting that this is a trial scheme, to take place ‘‘in at least one large building before the end of Hilary Term 2012.’’
Geoff Nelson, the Hertford MCR Welfare Officer, said that, ‘‘Students should be allowed to bring guests into College rooms. It is what Oxford is mainly about – the collegial atmosphere, which includes hosting friends in College rooms for chats, the odd party, or a personal encounter. In return for this liberty, students should accept a measure of responsibility for their guests and their rooms. An outright ban is both unenforceable and an over-reaction to a very common problem.’’
