The results of the local elections held for Oxford City Council have been announced. Labour have retained control of the Council, taking a total of 17 seats, whilst the Liberal Democrats won five, and the Greens won three. 

The elections for the City Council and the European Parliament were held yesterday, with polls open from 7am to 10pm. However, the results of the European elections will not be announced until Sunday.

In Carfax ward, which encompasses several central colleges, Ruthi Brandt won the seat for the Green Party with 483 votes, beating Labour and Co-op candidate Alex Hollingsworth into second with 448 votes. DPhil student Maryam Ahmed, running for the Conservatives took 315 votes. The incumbent Tony Brett trailed in with 276 votes for the Liberal Democrats, while the Mad Hatter – known for his walking tours  – took 45 votes for the Monster Raving Loony Party.

This result was something of an upset, with Lib Dem Brett having served as Deputy Lord Mayor for the last year, and Hollingsworth being a former City Council Leader.

In Holywell, former OULC Co-Chair Aled Jones came second, with 369 votes, to the Green Party’s David Thomas who polled  675 votes to steal the seat from the Liberal Democrats – whose candidate trailed in last. 

Jones told Cherwell, “Overall it’s been a great day for Labour, with three seats gained and a brilliant result in Iffley Fields. Though I’m disappointed (but my tutor’s probably aren’t!) it’s good to see Labour clearly ahead of the Lib Dems and Tories in Holywell, and that UKIP have done poorly in the local elections.”

The Liberal Democrats did however hold both of their seats in Summertown. 

The first result was announced at 1.24pm today, with Rae Humberstone holding the Blackbird Leys ward for Labour.

Labour also managed to take the Iffley Fields ward from the Greens, with Richard Tarver  taking 986 votes to Steve Dawe’s 904.

James Johnson, a student at Brasenose who ran unsuccessfully representing the Conservatives in Barton, told Cherwell, “Despite not making the breakthrough we would have liked to see, these elections have been a step in the right direction for Oxford Conservatives. We’ve seen increases in our vote across the board and that’s a testimony to the great work on the ground by all members of the Association. We now need to continue connecting with voters and telling them about the long term economic plan the Conservative Party continues to offer them.”

In Churchill ward, Labour’s Susan Brown has retained her seat comfortably. 

Overall, turn out in Oxford City was 37% for the City Council and 38% for the European elections.

The new make-up of the City Council now looks like this: 

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%9763%%[/mm-hide-text] 

Prominent philosopher and academic A.C. Grayling has written to OUSU Vice-President for Women Sarah Pine defending his decision to speak at the Oxford Union following the arrest of President Ben Sullivan. Grayling’s letter is in response to the open letter written by Pine and Helena Dollimore of St. Hilda’s, which urged Sullivan to resign and speakers to cancel planned visits to the Union.

Grayling’s letter stated, “I simply cannot, in all conscience, allow myself to act only on the basis of allegations and suspicions, or of conviction by the kangaroo court of opinion, or trial by press.”

This statement comes after Julie Meyer, Eric Whitacre, and the Secretary General of Interpol all pulled out of scheduled speaking engagements at the Union, citing concerns about the society’s leadership after reading the open letter which argued that “Mr Sullivan should step aside while still under investigation.”

Grayling wrote, “Because I am very much in sympathy with the motivations behind your call, it puts me in a difficult position! While wishing to support to the full the underlying concerns you have in view, there is the consideration that we have to take seriously that fundamental principle of the rule of law and the rights of individuals, namely, that all those accused of crimes are innocent until proved guilty.”

He continued, “These words seem such a cliché, but they really are the bedrock of a system of protection of the innocent against the power of the state or mightier individuals; and when someone is found to be guilty of crimes it is most often, in our system, on the basis of sound evidence and good argument. I think it is a duty to respect these principles.“ The letter goes on to discuss what Grayling calls “trial by press”. 

He states, “I simply cannot, in all conscience, allow myself to act only on the basis of allegations and suspicions, or of conviction by the kangaroo court of opinion, or trial by press – the means too often employed even in our own society to condemn before the evidence and the arguments have been properly examined.”

Grayling urged OUSU to reconsider their stance on the matter too, writing, “Indeed I very much wish that OUSU would be serious about this principle too – asking people to convict and punish someone before due process of law has taken its course is a bad direction to go in, and with great respect I urge you to reflect on that. You may of course know things about what lies behind the allegations in this current case, suggesting that there is real fire below the smoke – but even this would lie in the terrain of report and accusation until the matter has come to court.”

He finished the letter by clarifying that his appearance at the Union “is in no way an expression of opinion either way about the current situation of the Union’s President, or of support or otherwise for the individual himself.”

In response, Sarah Pine told Cherwell, “‘Helena and I acted from our personal perspectives and sense of justice. This isn’t an OUSU project. However, I am sure that my colleagues will be heartened to know that A.C. Grayling wishes them well.

“In relation to his paragraphs on human rights, I think the International Police are right on this one, Secretary General Noble said earlier this week that, ‘I am the Secretary General of INTERPOL, a law professor and a former prosecutor who fiercely believes that a person is innocent until proven guilty. What should the head of a society like the Oxford Union do if he is under investigation for rape and attempted rape? In my view, he should be guided by the best interests of his organization. He should not be guided by his own interests. In this case my advice to Ben Sullivan would be either to resign or take a leave of absence.’ Noble’s a law professor and realises that innocent until proven guilty does not mean business as usual. I also believe it sends a strong message of disempowerment to women.”

Professor Grayling’s talk, entitled ‘Arguing with the Gods’ went ahead without reference to either letter, the President’s arrest, or the ongoing unrest at the Union.

Oxford University has come twenty-third in the second annual University Sex League.

The survey, conducted by Student Beans, ranked universities according to the average number of sexual partners students have had since starting their course. Student Beans interviewed 6,129 UK students from over 100 universities on their sex lives, relationships and sexual health.

The survey found that Oxford students have had an average of 5.89 sexual partners since starting university, well ahead of Cambridge, in fifty-fourth place with an average of 4.70 partners, but behind Oxford Brookes, who came seventh with an average of 7.42.

Nevertheless, Oxford University beat the national average of 4.88 sexual partners, and has climbed from thirty-third place in the 2013 league, where Oxonians reported an average of 4.17. In 2013, the national average was 3.68. Brighton University topped this year’s survey, with an average of 10.59 sexual partners, having climbed from twentieth place in the 2013 survey. Last year, Roehampton University came first place, with students there reporting an average of 6.32 sexual partners since starting university; a score which would not even qualify for the top ten in this year’s results.

Commenting on the statistics, second year linguist Erin Goldfinch told Cherwell, “seems about right to me!”

James Read, editor of Student Beans, said, “Sex remains a hot issue for Britain’s students, evidenced by the over 6000 responses to this survey. University is often about freedom and experimentation, and sex and relationships are a key part of this. We’ve seen that students are generally pretty adventurous, with spanking, anal and threesomes all on the up.”

He added, “They are also keen to use tech as a sex aid, with forty per cent having talked dirty online, and nearly two thirds sending explicit pics of themselves to a partner. This has mirrored the rise of dating apps, which three times as many students prefer over dating sites.”

Deputy Prime Minister and leader of the Liberal Democrats, Nick Clegg visited Oxford on Tuesday to speak at two public events.

He spoke first at Wesley Memorial Church on New Inn Hall Street, at a question and answer forum hosted by the Oxford Mail.  About 140 people attended the event, including several students.

Clegg also delivered the European Studies Centre Annual Lecture 2014 at St Antony’s College, speaking for approximately an hour. The subject of his talk was ‘Britain’s Place in the EU’. The talk was meant to begin at 3.30pm and last until 4.30pm, but the Deputy Prime Minister was running about ten minutes late.

Speaking to the Oxford Mail, Clegg denied that he was visting Oxford two days before an election, because he was concerned about his party’s potential performance.

The Oxford Activist Network organised a protest against the Deputy Prime Minister’s visit, dubbed ‘Clegg off campus’. The protestors assembled at 2.30pm outside of the Taylor Institution Library, with around thirty people participating in the protest. The protestors’ chants included “abolish fees now” and “shame on you for turning blue”.

The Oxford Activist Network also issued a clarification on the Facebook page for the event, “We are by no means trying to enforce a policy of ‘no platform’ on the Deputy Prime Minister. We’re quite sure he has lots of easily accessible platforms, and that tactic is reserved for fascists and the like. Instead, the aim is to demonstrate that, after betraying students, Clegg is not welcome on our campuses or in our universities. By protesting on Tuesday, we’re showing that the student movement has not forgotten this stab in the back, that we continue to oppose the marketisation of education, and that we will fight for free education.”

Xavier Cohen, who attended the protest, commented, “I protested against Nick Clegg because I don’t think someone who betrayed students by promising free education and then trebled tuition fees should be welcome in our university. We were forcefully kept out of our own university by police who were pushing us, whilst Nick Clegg was ushered onto campus.”

One first year Balliol PPE student, commenting on the protest, told Cherwell, “Nick Clegg may not have fulfilled his promises on tuition fees, but a spirit of compromise is essential to achieving other policy objectives that the Liberal Democrats have. The claim by the far left that they are representative of the student body is farcical, all they are doing is shutting down debate and free speech rather than engaging in constructive discussion – such as by questioning Clegg in a debate.”

The University of Oxford is one of seventy-two organisations to have signed a Concordat on Openness in Animal Research this week, pledging to provide greater transparency on how, why and when they use animals in research.

Signatories of the Concordat sign up to four commitments: “We will be clear about when, how and why we use animals in research; we will enhance our communications with the media and the public about our research using animals; we will be proactive in providing opportunities for the public to find out about research using animals; we will report on progress annually and share our experiences”.

At the same time, the University has launched a new programme studying the neurology of twenty macaque monkeys.

The project is funded by the Wellcome Trust, a co-signatory of the Concordat, and is one of the first to be conducted under the agreement. It will receive £4.95m over five years and it is a study of how the brain supports complex mental processes which will use MRI brain imaging in addition to more invasive procedures. In order to justify its use of primates, the University has committed itself to providing precise descriptions of the research and practical information about its potential benefits.

An article on the University website said, “The macaques will be housed in state-of-the-art facilities in the Biomedical Sciences Building, where they can express their natural behaviours – such as living in social groups, playing, climbing and foraging for food.”

Dr Paul Browne, a spokesperson from Speaking of Research, an organisation that aims to provide the public with accurate information about animal testing and its importance, told Cherwell, “The Concordat on Openness is a major step in encouraging institutions to be more open about the work they conduct, and builds on the substantial progress that institutions like Oxford University have already made towards this goal.

“Animal research is critical to many aspects of medical progress in the 21st century, and the research community must continue to work hard explaining what happens in animal facilities and why the public should support it.”

Some charities concerned with animal research are unhappy with the move. Michelle Thew, CEO of British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection said, “The BUAV has campaigned for greater transparency in animal research for many years so naturally welcomes any steps towards genuine openness. Effective scrutiny – parliamentary and public – of the way animal experiments are carried out and regulated is impossible under the current system.

“We are concerned, however, that genuine transparency is not what the recent Concordat on Animal Testing delivers. It is simply transparency on their terms with researchers having complete control over what the public gets to see.

“This is about human health as much as animal welfare and the public has a right to know. Apart from the terrible suffering of animals in laboratories, we all have a stake in ensuring that medical research is scientifically sound and that scarce research resources are wisely targeted.”

For most students, the news was a positive development. As one Classics undergraduate from Oriel remarked, “Greater transparency must be a good thing; it can only lead to better treatment and compassion towards animals. What I can’t understand is why it hasn’t been implemented before.”

Many remain unsatisfied with the developments, however. As a first-year at Trinity observed, “Yes, animal research undoubtedly leads to cures and developments in medicine and yes it’s true that I selfishly enjoy being a recipient of the improvements it has brought about.

“However such a justification still sits uncomfortably with me. It comes dangerously close to suggesting that all animals are merely instrumental for our own needs – what gives us the right to be the superior species? I know men who are definitely far less intelligent than monkeys.

“Research can only be conducted on animals where there is no other alternative. This is required by law and is strictly regulated by the Home Office. Where use of animals is essential, the University is committed to very high standards of animal welfare using the latest research methods. Almost all the animals used in Oxford research are mice.”

A spokesperson for the University commented, “Research on animals has contributed to almost every medical advance of the last century. Without animal research, medicine as we know it today wouldn’t exist.

The number of animals held by Oxford fluctuates regularly according to the studies taking place. As of January 2014, ninety-eight per cent of the animals kept at Oxford were mice or fish, with 52,886 and 23,165 specimens respectively. There were only twenty-three primates.