Prime Minister David Cameron has responded to an open letter from 21 local organizations urging him not to expand Campsfield House Immigration Removal Centre in Kidlington.

Calling for the immediate release of all Campsfield detainees and the withdrawal of plans to expand the detention centre, the letter highlighted cases such as the death of one 84 year old detainee who was held despite suffering from dementia and other health problems. Another letter, signed by members of Oxford University’s Amnesty International (OUAI), as well as by nine heads of Oxford colleges, has received no reply as yet. That letter argued, “Not only does the UK not need to be expanding its detention estate, but Campsfield House, which was opened over 20 years ago as a small, 180-bed centre, is an inappropriate site for such major expansion. Instead we call for a reversal of this proposed expansion.”

On behalf of the prime minister, The Head of Detention Operations, Immigration Enforcement at the Home Office, Karen Abel-Hady, answered the Stop Campsfield Expansion letter. Having first stated the reasons for the use of detention, the reply then addressed the plans to expand Campsfield, commenting, “The capacity of the immigration detention estate is kept under rolling review. The Home Office has submitted a planning application to expand Campsfield House which, if approved, will provide modern accommodation and facilities for detainees at a location that is owned by the Home Office and meets the strategic objectives of immigration enforcement.”

Abdel-Hady’s response went on to defend the Immigration Removal Centre, arguing, “Detention and removal are essential and effective parts of immigration control but it’s vital it’s done with humanity and dignity.”

This response has been met with disappointment from those involved in the writing the open letter. Dr Melanie Griffiths, an Oxford researcher working on deportation, immigration detention and the asylum system, tweeted about the letter.

Hmmmm. Suffice to say that I’m not entirely persuaded by the #StopCampsfieldExpansion reply. Is basically recap of detention policy.

— Melanie BE Griffiths (@MBEGriffiths) December 8, 2014

She also commented to Cherwell, “It is disappointing that David Cameron did not reply directly, given the seriousness and importance of these issues.

“The reply is short and does little more than set out detention policy and make an unsupported assertion that expansion is required in order to meet the ‘strategic objectives of immigration enforcement.’ It is disappointing not to be given more information as to what is meant by ‘strategic objectives’ and how more detention bed space will meet these, given that we have more bed space than ever before, and yet remove fewer people than previously. Instead, the UK appears to be detaining more people unnecessarily, with about half of those detained then being released back into British society. Their detention serves no purpose but is to the therefore serious detriment of the individuals, their friends and family, wider society and the public purse. 

“Those of us who research, work or volunteer in this sector and who speak with people in detention, know that policy and practice are often two different things in the world of detention. The letter states that detention is always “a last resort” and used where a person has failed to leave voluntarily. However, we routinely speak with people who are detained, often for long periods of time, when they are not at the end of the immigration process or cannot be removed from the UK, often through no fault of their own. I cannot see how creating extra bed space will improve matters. The risk is that it will simply allow people to be ‘warehoused’ in administrative detention for ever longer periods of time.”

The Detention Forum, a network of organisations working together to challenge the UK’s use of detention, is also calling for a moratorium on the expansion of the centre, urging others to contact their MPs about stopping what they believe is an ‘ill-advised move by the Home Office’, that will see the detention centre’s capacity more than double from 276 to 566.

The Planning Committee for the Campsfield expansion proposals have confirmed the date for considering the expansion of the centre, to be held in Banbury, as 22 January 2015. 

Somerville College has set up a purpose built Skype room for the use of students and staff.

According to Mr. Chris Bamber, the IT Systems Manager at Somerville College, “the Skype room is a meeting room with the addition of a fixed LDC monitor on one wall, with a computer, HD camera, conference desktop microphone, wireless mouse and keyboard, desks, chairs and a [VOIP] phone.” The phone has hands free facilities.

As Mr. Bamber informed Cherwell, “any member of the College may book the room. [To book the room], they email the Bursary as per any other room booking”.

During the admissions period, from the December 5th to December 19th, the Skype room is being used for interviewing applicants, and so is completely booked. Whether an international applicant has a Skype interview or not depends on their subject choice and country of origin.

University regulations stipulate that any applicant applying for Medicine must be in Oxford for a face to face interview. If the candidate short-listed for an interview is a passport-holder from the European Economic Area (an EU country, Norway, Iceland or Liechtenstein) or from Switzerland, then they too must be present in Oxford for their interview. However, potential students from other parts of the world who cannot be in Oxford will be given a Skype interview, with no impact on the consideration their application is given.

On this subject Mr. Bamber said, “The College identified a need for a room with fixed equipment capable of hosting a Skype (or other video or audio conference) interview or meeting to provide a better experience during online interviews. It enables up to six people to see and be seen during an interview, which is important for formal interview panels. Having the dedicated space means that minimal IT support is needed to conduct a video meeting. Prior to this, IT services would provide and set up a laptop and projector for any such requests. The room has been in use since the start of this term and has been used for group meetings, job interviews by students and now in use for Admission interviews.”

Hannah Sharpe, a second year undergraduate from Somerville College, told Cherwell, “Personally, I know of the Skype room’s existence, but I’ve never used it myself, as the only Skyping I’ve ever really done is to family. I also don’t know anyone else who’s used it, but I can see that it could be useful for undergrads or grad students who are using Skype for an interview and want somewhere more formal and quiet to go than their rooms or the library. I think it’s a good idea to have a Skype room, although it could be a bit more advertised by the college to the students.”

Anyone in Oxford can use Skype on the University Network, so Somerville students are still able to use Skype outside of the Skype room.

The Skype room is located on the second floor of Maitland, in Somerville College. 

An anonymous second year undergraduate at Somerville commented, “Honestly I had no idea this room existed.” 

Outgoing Union President Mayank Banerjee’s controversial rules changes have been declared null by a tribunal, whilst Returning Officer Thomas Reynolds was cleared of interfering with Union elections.

Banerjee, whose term ends at midnight on Saturday, fought for the rules changes, which involved the legalising of campaigning, including slates, and the introduction of a Re-Open Nominations (RON) option. In a poll he conducted in 5th week, over 90 per cent of voters approved the rule changes. 

However, Returning Officer Thomas Reynolds, who ran the Union elections in a 7th week which saw Roberto Weeden-Sanz elected as President for Trinity 2015 after he ran unopposed, issued an interpretation which declared the rule changes invalid during the election. 

At the time, Reynolds stated that in changing the rules via poll, Banerjee’s own interpretation of the rules was “wrong”, adding that under the conditions of the President’s poll, “It is insupportable for me to run these Elections in a transparent and correct manner.” 

Reynolds issued the ballot papers for the election without a RON option on them, despite Banerjee insisting that the rule changes would be in place for the election.

Banerjee had originally claimed that if his rule changes were not in place for the election, he would resign. However, he told Cherwell that despite the tribunal’s decision that his rule changes were invalid, he would not be resigning in the few hours he had left of his tenure, also refusing to comment on the decision until after the tribunal’s report had been published.

Furthermore, candidates who campaigned in the 7th week elections will not face a tribunal, Cherwell understands, as the deadline has passed for this term — despite the fact that the tribunal’s decision suggests that candidates who campaigned broke Union rules. 

Although Reynolds was cleared of interfering with the election, the tribunal’s statement does not specifically state that his interpretation of the rules was correct. It is understood that they will release a new interpretation of the rules in due course.

Reynolds also refused to comment on the decision.

It remains to be seen whether incoming president Lisa Wehden, who could also not be reached, will attempt to push through the rule changes in her tenure next term.

Students at Baby Love on Tuesday 2 December witnessed a disturbance outside the club when two individuals were denied entry and allegedly verbally abused revellers.

An Oxford undergraduate who was at Baby Love during the incident said, “I saw a crowd of people outside and went to see what was going on. There were two police cars, and one man was handcuffed outside a car and speaking to a police officer. People who’d been outside told me that some men had come from nowhere, started calling everyone in the smoking area ‘faggots’ and lunging at people. With hindsight, it sounds mildly terrifying – at the time most of us were far too smashed to appreciate quite how risky the situation was.”

David Mark Dunning, a student at St Benet’s, commented, “I did witness a little of what went on at Baby Love on Tuesday evening/Wednesday morning. I didn’t witness anything in the club but I did hear that there was an incident inside. However, as I was leaving the club I was redirected from the steps at the front of the club and told to leave down the disabled access ramp as just at the bottom of the steps there was parked a police car. The bouncers blocked the way, but I could see two police officers were there, and I watched as they arrested two homophobic people, at least one of which, I was told, had a knife. After having watched the police handcuff the homophobes, I then proceeded to leave with my boyfriend, via the ramp, because I wanted to avoid any possibility of danger.”

A spokesperson for Baby Love told Cherwell, “We are aware that 2 residents of Simon House tried to enter the bar and were refused entry by the security on the door. At present we cannot confirm what, (or if anything at all was said), and / or to whom.

“Baby Love is sensitive to the fact that Simon House is a long established hostel for the Homeless and other vulnerable people in Oxford. The management is clear that they do not support any antisocial behaviour of any kind from its residents. They are in the process of investigating the incident and are following their strict protocol that governs the behaviour of its residents.

“Baby Love is working with the management of Simon House and the Police on this matter.”

Baby Love Bar relocated to its current site at the Castle Tavern on Paradise Street earler this year.

James Blythe, another Oxford student, commented, “Enjoying the final Baby Love of term fuelled by wonderful LGBTQSoc drinks, I was shocked to encounter homophobic abuse raining down from a neighbouring property. The staff of Babylove were amazing and reacted swiftly, as did the police, but it’s a grim reminder of how much violence LGBTQ people routinely experience in 2014 and from which my privilege generally protects me.”

In response to the incident, Chris Pike, OUSU VP for Welfare and Equal Opportunities, commented, “It is very unpleasant to hear that LGBTQ students and locals had to endure this deeply unpleasant behaviour. I am pleased that action was taken quickly to combat the problem, and I hope that Baby Love will continue to act to prevent this behaviour around their venue in future. OUSU will continue to work for LGBTQ students as a community of our university as a top priority, and any students who have had individual problems as a result of their sexuality or gender should feel able to get advice and support from our Student Advice Service.”

Thames Valley Police were unavailable for comment.

OUSU has conducted a recount of votes from this term’s elections, following the revelation that people who had already graduated were able to log in and vote. The results of the election were unaffected by the recount.

According to a statement made by OUSU, five students who were ineligible to vote in the elections and who should not have been able to vote logged into OUSU’s website and cast their votes.

The statement, which was published on OUSU’s website and sent to all candidates in the 2014 elections, reads, “For the current academic year, OUSU and the University have put in place a new and more secure system for ensuring OUSU has access to up to date and secure data about its student members. This involves the provision of data to OUSU by the university via a third-party IT support company. In this instance there was an error in the data transfer that left out information about students that should have allowed OUSU to automatically exclude graduated students from the elections.

“As a result, five students ineligible to vote in this year’s OUSU elections had their votes registered and cast. Having identified this issue, OUSU has re-counted the votes for each post and we are able to confirm that none of the results have changed as a result.  

“The University and OUSU have already taken steps to ensure that this problem (which is particular to the election process only) will not arise in the future.”

In addition to publishing a statement, OUSU has removed its list of results and voting numbers from OUSU.org.

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%10677%%[/mm-hide-text] 

Voting in this year’s elections was conducted on OUSU.org, after the original Mi-Voice system was abandoned. Mi-Voice was found to be unreliable after it was revealed that the result of last summer’s referendum on Oxford’s affiliation with NUS had been manipulated, and the referendum was declared void.

Earlier this term, a number of colleges were unhappy with OUSU’s handling of the situation, with one JCR Returning officer calling the fact that OUSU failed to keep JCRs up to date about the state of the voting system “chaotic and intolerable”.

Will Obeney, the first runner-up in the presidential election, tweeted his support for OUSU’s handling of the matter.

Delighted at fast response by @ousunews over issues with the statutory elections. http://t.co/UKV4NeAbbV

— Will Obeney (@WillObeney) December 5, 2014

Meanwhile, Becky Howe, the winning presidential candidate, commented, “It’s good to see that OUSU has responded very quickly to this unforeseeable problem, by conducting a recount, and investigating how to prevent such a situation from arising again.”

While most of the positions in this year’s race were unopposed, the election for Vice President (Access & Academic Affairs) was a close one. Greg Auger lost out to Cat Jones, despite winning almost 50 more first preference votes. In the end, the result was determined by second preference votes, though these numbers were not released.