IN THE EARLY HOURS of Monday 16th May, two Oxford colleges had their coaching launch engines stolen from Godstow. The thieves made away with around £5,000 worth of engines which belonged to St Hugh’s and Trinity.

The theft was discovered by the St Hugh’s and Trinity Men’s First Team upon their arrival at Godstow for training at 6.30am on Monday. Three launches were found drifting by the weir. A member of the Trinity Men’s team and Helen Popescu, St Hugh’s M1 coach, headed out on other launches to recover them, where the engines had been hacked off two of them.

Both of the stolen engines had been locked to the launches. A senior member of Trinity’s team said “It’s just a complete nightmare, having this happen in the week be-
fore Summer VIIIs”. One crew member did recognize one silver lining: “We thought our engine was on its way out anyway”.

Godstow has suffered from similar thefts a number of times before. One source, who would prefer to remain anonymous, said “This is the third or fourth theft they’ve had this year. Another engine was nicked a few weeks ago,” despite the fact the security is “the same as any boat yard, if not better.” He did note, however, that “it borders Port Meadow so is not exactly an inpenetrable compound.” The source added “basically, if the boat clubs had gotten better locks we’d have been fine.”

The thieves used a wooden boat, stolen from the St Edward’s School site, to access the launch moorings. The thieves then stole a launch to reach the other side of the bank so as to be able to lever the outboard motors from the targeted boats, as the ground on the Godstow side of the river would not have been sufficiently solid.

The theft comes at a crucial time for the two colleges with a week to go before the Summer VIIIs campaign. Trinity M1 are currently seventh on the river. St Hugh’s M1 are second in division 3, following a very successful Torpids campaign, earning their M1 crew blades.

The Police are currently searching for information concerning the crime. Connie Primmer, speaking on behalf of Thames Valley Police, confirmed that “between around 10pm on 15 May and 6am on 16 May, outboard motors were stolen from two boats which were moored near St Edwards School Boat Club” and requests that “anyone with information about these incidents is asked to call Thames Valley Police via the 101 number or Crimestoppers via 0800555111.”

CLARE COLLEGE’S MAY Ball committee will maintain its ‘Orient Express’ theme despite criticism from students of cultural appropriation. This follows Trinity Hall College’s decision to drop the ‘Tokyo to Koto’ theme for ‘Metropolis’.

In a statement to Varsity, Posey Mehta, Clare May Ball PR Officer, said, “Both our main committee and our design sub-committee are ethnically diverse; and the members of the design committee working on culturally sensitive aspects of the ball are ethnically representative.

“Since the Ball’s conception, we have made every decision regarding the Ball’s theme with a proactive stance against cultural appropriation.

“We aim, through our May Ball, to celebrate – not denigrate – the cultural richness of the amazing cities that are the stops of The Orient Express; we are using the title ‘Orient Express’ solely as a reference to the famed train and as a way of representing the theme of travel, and in no way intend for our Ball to focus on ‘the Orient’ as a cultural concept.”

“We made all decisions with a proactive stance against cultural appropriation”

Posey Mehta

The recent controversy at Cambridge follows similar controversy around Oxford Ball themes. Lincoln Ball, which took place in 2nd week, attracted criticism for its New Orleans Jazz Age theme.

Queen’s College Ball has the same ‘Orient Express’ theme as Clare College, but it is unclear whether they have considered changing their theme.

Trinity Hall’s committee said, in an email to ticket-holders, that they are “pleased to announced a change of theme…in making this change the Committee are mindful that the June Event should not be divisive and we hope that this change will enable all students to enjoy the event.”

Trinity Hall’s decision to change came after criticism, and a formal complaint, from Japanese students.

Ploy Kingchatchaval, a third-year English student, told the Sunday Times, “The vibe they are going for with the Orient Express is white people travelling in first class on a train, visiting ‘exotic’ places with the inherent sense of privilege that comes from ent sense of privilege that comes from being a rich tourist . . . it’s going to be a white presentation of these places they’re trying to represent, full of stereotypes, which is erasing and gross.”

Speaking to Varsity, Sophie Birkin, President of the Trinity Hall June Event 2016 said, “We hope to show that appreciation need not be equated with fetishisation. We do not pretend to be able to perfectly represent Tokyo or Kyoto but we hope that our efforts will bring we hope that our eff orts will bring light to some amazing aspects of these light to some amazing aspects of these places that may otherwise be lost in generalisations about Japanese culture at large.”

BARONESS ROYALL’S INQUIRY into the alleged antisemitism in the Oxford University Labour Club (OULC) found no evidence of “institutional antisemitism”, leading instead to a series of recommendations being made to the party as a whole.

The reports were commissioned by Labour’s National Executive Committee (NEC) and will be published in their entirety in the Chakrabarti report before the summer.

Although Baroness Royall wrote that she does “not believe that there is institutional antisemitism within OULC” she did however report individual incidents and other cases related to cultural issues in the club. These she says, “Must be addressed to ensure a safe space for all Labour students to debate and campaign” as its main consequence is that “some Jews do not feel welcome.”

Baroness Royall also noted in the summary of the reports that in one instance a case of “serious false allegations of antisemitism” was reported to the police.

The details of these incidents are yet to be made available, as only an executive summary and the recommendations were published on the Party’s website. Regarding this, Jeremy Newmark tweeted that he was “frustrated” the content of the report had been “suppressed” by Labour’s NEC, though this fact remains unconfirmed.

According to Baroness Royall, an effective response to these cultural problems would involve training sessions being organised to enable all new officers of Labour Clubs to fight against antisemitism within their circle. The report also encourages OULC to establish a  clear system of reporting for incidents of anti-semitism and racism more generally.

“I’m glad that Baroness Royall with me that OULC has a cultural problem”.

Alex Chalmers

Increased support and better communication at all levels in the Party are made the central target points of the Baroness’ recommendations struggled with allegations of anti-against antisemitism and racism in general. Royall adds that this system of reporting should include the ability to make an appeal directly to the Labour Party NEC.

The exclusion of students and other supporters from membership of the Party as punishment for being found guilty of antisemitism is, however, not perceived as an appropriate measure by the report and no such decisions have been made following the investigations.

The reports presented to the NEC stated that considering antisemitism in OULC inevitably leads to the same considerations regarding the entire Party, which has recently struggled with allegations of anti-semitism against prominent members. “No form of antisemitism or racism is acceptable, including being used as a factional political tool,” Baroness Royall concludes in the executive summary.

In its response to the report, OULC qualified antisemitism as “abhorrent, repugnant and contrary to the values we as a Club hold dear.

“The Oxford University Labour Club condemns any prejudice, intolerance and discrimination of any form and we take these allegations with the utmost seriousness,” said new co-chairs David Parton and Eleanor Ormsby. “We look forward to collaborating with her and the national Labour Party in moving forward from these events.”

The statement from the OULC Co-Chairs continues, “We will enthusiastically work with all national Labour Party officers to deal with all the complaints made against the Club. We will move to affiliate to the Jewish Labour Movement as a gesture of our solidarity with Jewish people and vigorously support the eight point plan to eradicate anti-Semitism within the Labour Party.”

Concerns about antisemitism within the Club were initially raised following the resignation of OULC former co-Chair Alex Chalmers, who claimed that many members and Oxford students in general had “some kind of problem with Jews”. The Party later found itself in controversy over allegations of antisemitism from Labour MPs.

Chalmers told Cherwell, “I’m glad that Baroness Royall agrees with me that OULC has a cultural problem that makes the club unsafe for a number of Jewish students, although I am disappointed that the report has not been published in full.

“I hope that the publication in due course of the party’s wider inquiry into antisemitism will give a fuller into antisemitism will give a fuller picture and that robust action is taken  against any individuals found to have picture and that robust action is taken against any individuals found to have been involved in antisemitic incidents.”