Members of OUSU’s Campaign for Racial Awareness and Equality (CRAE) are discussing plans to create a position of Tutor for Race in the University.

Wadham College already has its own Tutor for Race working as a member of the welfare team, but this project aims to guide all colleges towards more effective handling of BME students’ difficulties.

One of the problems frequently cited by students and staff of ethnic minorities in Oxford is the lack of a stable, trustworthy point of call, disabling them from communicating or reporting abuse. CRAE hopes that this will be changed by the creation of a university Tutor for Race. Yussef Robinson, who is BME Rep at St Hilda’s, told Cherwell, “Without these institutional roles exceptional and unrecognised levels of personal effort are required to combat racism. This places a huge burden on students and staff of colour. A Tutor for Race helps to alleviate this, that is why it’s so essential.”

Robinson added, “Racism is endemic within the University. Oxford has committed itself to diversity and yet has failed to enshrine anti-racist advocation at an institutional level.”

Dr Justine McConnell, currently occupying the position in Wadham, equally supports the idea of increasing the interaction between college and university student unions to respond to the problem of racism more directly. She mentioned Wadham’s Race Symposium held on 13th February this year as a successful example of collaboration between the two. She told Cherwell, “Colleges and the University working together seems to me likely to be the most effective approach. It seems to me that more interaction between groups concerned with racial equality is always a good thing.” She added,“That was one driving force behind the Wadham Race Symposium a couple of weeks ago. The event was organised primarily by three Wadham undergraduates.” As well as collaborating with the University Assessor Patricia Daley and the Chair of the Staff BME network, Nita Fisher, McConnell “also worked with those at other institutions, including SOAS, as collaboration and learning from each other is always a productive approach.”

CRAE told Cherwell, “As a wider student body, we are becoming more aware of racism being a serious problem at Oxford and that, as a result, many BME students report feeling uncomfortable and excluded, on account of their race or ethnicity. 

“It is equally clear that many BME students simply do not feel that there are sufficient effective channels through which they can report their experiences with racism (micro- and macro-aggressions alike) or raise concerns about race. 

“According to the CRAE 100 Voices report, 87.2 per cent of BME students would not feel comfortable discussing an issue of race with their college administration, and 60.9 per cent would be uncomfortable talking to their welfare team. 

“This is where the Tutor for Race comes in. At the moment, many BME students feel they have no point of contact with tutors, to address their concerns. 

“We envisage the Tutor for Race to act firstly as a contact and source of support for BME students – someone who can relate to these students. Secondly, they will act as a bridge between the student body and the college administration. This could include beginning conversations, with tutors and students at a college level, on decolonisation of the curriculum. 

“Equally important is the need for representation. The Tutor for Race does not need to be a person of colour (Wadham’s Tutor for Race, Justine McConnell, is white): after all, the fight for racial equality is one which we should all be part of. It does, however, need to be a person who will understand and represent BME students’ interests at Governing Body and push for race equality across the college, similar to the Tutor for Women role. 

“For racism to be countered, we need to be talking about race and other issues – a Tutor for Race, in collaboration with the student body, is a fantastic way for this to be achieved. Wadham is the only college with a Tutor for Race at the moment, but every college needs a Tutor for Race. Get in touch with us and help make that happen.”

University Chancellor Chris Patten has attracted controversy after writing an article in Project Syndicate entitled ‘The Closing of the Academic Mind,’ which criticises safe spaces and implicitly compares the actions of the Rhodes Must Fall movement with suppression of free speech by the Chinese government. 

Patten argues, “In the United States and the United Kingdom, some students and teachers now seek to constrain argument and debate. They contend that people should not be exposed to ideas with which they strongly disagree.” 

He adds, “Some people are being denied the chance to speak [by] so-called ‘no platforming’”, which he calls the “awful jargon of some clearly not very literate campuses.” He also identifies safe spaces for students as “an oxymoron in an academic setting.” 

He further comments, “Thomas Jefferson and Cecil Rhodes, among others, have been targeted” and that some activists think “history should be rewritten to expunge the names (through not the endowments) of those who fail to pass today’s test of political correctness. 

“Western students should think occasionally about their counterparts in Hong Kong and China who must fight for freedoms that they take for granted – and too often abuse,” he adds.

Yussef Robinson, the BME officer for St Hilda’s College JCR and an active member of the Rhodes Must Fall in Oxford campaign, told Cherwell, “For Chris Patten to compare RMFO activists in Oxford to assaults on academic freedom and freedom of speech is disgusting.” 

Robinson added, “Patten joins a long line of people who have responded to our calls for interrogation of Oxford and Britain’s imperial heritage with smears. We perfectly reasonably state the statue should be in a museum, imperialism should be better taught, and the faculty should include more students of colour. 

“Patten shouts down that we are totalitarian. Yet he fails to target the British state’s ongoing assault on academic freedom. Prevent legislation for him appears conducive to debate, while our engagement in literal debate is a threat to freedom. Perhaps he is afraid to criticise anyone in Britain more influential than students. “I extend our [RMF’s] invitation for Patten to attend a general assembly, or participate in a debate against us. Yet I feel he would rather smear students at the University where he is Chancellor than actually have to speak to us.”

RMFO is holding a General Assembly today for the organisation of RMF’s next action, which will be a protest march on International Women’s Day, 8th March. 

Other students have taken issue with Patten’s statement that “I would wager that I have been Chancellor of more universities than anyone alive today” because he was Governor of Hong Kong from 1992-1997, which meant he was Chancellor of every University in the city. This, he argues, is why he has, “Strong views about what it means to be a university and to teach, do research, or study at one.” 

President of OUSU Becky Howe told Cherwell, “As a former governor of a territory of the British Empire, the Chancellor clearly has more experience of colonialism than I do. However, his repeated comments about Rhodes Must Fall suggest that he has completely ignored the seven campaigning priorities of the movement. This is not just about a statue; it’s about institutionalised racism and our response to it as an institution.” 

But Jacob Williams, founder of Facebook discussion group Open Oxford and a free speech campaigner, said, “Whilst the comparison is hyperbole, the Chancellor is right to point out worrying similarities. Chinese officials censor ideas in the name of Marxist ideology, because they don’t accept that people can legitimately disagree with it. British students are doing the same thing with their own ideal of liberation from structural oppression. What one person calls structural oppression another calls a just social order.” 

The University of Oxford Press Office declined Cherwell’s request for comment.

Corpus Christi and Exeter College JCRs have come out in support of remaining within the European Union following motions in JCR general meetings which received pro-EU majorities. The Oxford Students for Europe campaign is planning to bring motions of support to Mansfield, Hertford, University, St John’s, Worcester and New throughout Sixth Week. 

A motion was proposed to Corpus JCR resolving to donate £100 to Oxford Students for Europe. Following an amendment, the motion passed included a resolution to gauge support of the pro-EU cause within Corpus Christi JCR before donating the money. 

Subsequently, a referendum in Corpus JCR in support of remaining in the EU passed with 90 per cent support and a turnout of 90 people. 

Redha Rubaie, a member of Corpus JCR who seconded the motion, told Cherwell, “We ought to try to attain funding from JCRs because the EU referendum is something which transcends the traditional political divide between left and right. Through leaving the EU, it can be argued easily, the welfare of students at the University will be put at risk. 

“I am very happy with the result of the referendum, with 90 per cent of all students who voted arguing that we ought to stay within the European Union. This shows that Corpus wholeheartedly supports the internationalist and cooperative approach to multinational issues that is a defining feature of the EU.” 

The Oxford Students for Europe campaign indicated its support for Corpus Christi’s motion and the like in other JCRs, telling Cherwell, “We are very pleased by Corpus Christi JCR’s decision to support remaining in the EU, which reflects the strong support for the in campaign we have seen among Oxford students. It is great to see JCRs engaging in the issue of the referendum and we hope to see many more student organisations participating in the debate over the coming months.” 

Exeter College JCR followed suit on Tuesday, voting to “affirm its support for continued UK membership of the European Union” and to, “Provide the Oxford Students for Europe campaign with £100 to campaign to Remain in the EU,” with 38 in favour and 15 against. 

Sam Slater, a member of Oxford Students for Britain from Exeter College, made a speech during the committee meeting raising concerns with the EU motion. Explaining his concerns to Cherwell, he said, “I really don’t think that JCRs should be funding either campaign in the referendum. Exeter JCR, at least, is constitutionally banned from supporting political parties due to its charitable status. 

“Whilst it was argued that Oxford Students for Europe is not a political party, it is a political group, as is Oxford Students for Britain, and both of us will be doing many of the things a political party does: canvassing students, distributing leaflets, and asking for votes. If it looks like a turd and it smells like a turd, chances are it’s a turd.”

A Cherwell survey this week has revealed that 80 per cent of Oxford students think that Britain should remain in the European Union (EU). Of the 777 students surveyed, 13 per cent of respondents expressed the opinion that Britain should leave the EU, whilst only seven per cent remain undecided.

The results represent a significant divergence from national polls. The latest online poll by YouGov for The Times found that 38 per cent of adults surveyed wanted to leave the EU, 37 wished to remain, and 25 per cent remained undecided or were not planning to vote.

Cherwell’s EU survey comes after Prime Minister David Cameron announced last week that the EU referendum would be held on Thursday 23rd June. Following the announcement, five senior Cabinet ministers, including Michael Gove and Iain Duncan Smith declared their intention to campaign for Britain to leave the EU. A sixth member of the Cabinet, Boris Johnson, also announced his decision to join the Leave campaign on Sunday.

Aside from the national campaigns, a number of university-based campaigns have recently launched in Oxford. In response to the survey, the Co-Chairs of Oxford Students for Europe (OSFE,) Eilidh Macfarlane and David Klemperer, told Cherwell, “We are delighted with the results of Cherwell’s s urvey, w hich r eflects t he strong support for EU membership that Oxford students have shown in their reactions to our campaigning.

“We hope that many more of the hundreds expressing a desire to remain in the European Union will get involved in this incredibly important campaign over the coming months, and that Oxford students will vote to remain in the EU by such a strong margin in June.”

Meanwhile Oliver Shore, a member of Oxford Students for Britain (OSFB), the ‘Leave’ campaign in Oxford, told Cherwell, “It looks like we have a bit of a mountain to climb on campus! But I feel confident that, over the next four months, we will be able to win round students to our cause, as we campaign in advance of this referendum.”

Shore added, “Happily, a large proportion of the country is on our side, with good reason, and I look forward to laying out the reasons why students have little to fear and much to gain by voting to leave the European Union. I’m sure that the students of Oxford will be more receptive to our case than the EU was to David Cameron’s ‘renegotiation’.”

Despite the Europhilic sentiment expressed by the majority of Oxford students in Cherwell’s survey, many students appeared sceptical of the concessions negotiated by Cameron last week, with only 24 per cent of respondents agreeing that the concessions will help Britain’s relationship with the EU. 42 per cent thought that the concessions would not help, while a significant proportion of students, 34 per cent, remain undecided.

Cherwell’s survey also asked students to select which issues surrounding the EU referendum were most important to them.

For students expressing a desire for Britain to remain in the EU, the two most important issues highlighted were the free movement of people and the economic implications for Britain, with over three quarters of respondents selecting these issues as important.

In contrast, for students who think that Britain should leave the EU, British sovereignty was found to be by far the most significant issue, with nearly 80 per cent of respondents selecting this issue. EU regulations and the free movement of people also registered as important for many of those students who want Britain to leave the EU.

Altair Brandon-Salmon, a first-year student at Wadham, told Cherwell, “It is disappointing to see that so many Oxford students have already made up their mind to vote to stay in the European Union, without perhaps understanding the manifold issues surrounding this profoundly un-democratic, bureaucratic, elitist, top-down institution.”

He added that it is “striking that issues of democratic accountability are not amongst the highest of priorities for university students, which seems to show a lack of understanding as to how the EU works.”