OUSU celebrated a significant budget increase yesterday, as it secured a 66% funding rise from the University.

The grant will be paid in three increases, with £200,000 per annum awarded immediately from 2014-15, a further £15,000 for 2015-2016 and a final £15,000 awarded for 2016-17 onwards.

This will see the budget increase to £707k from 2016-17 onwards, a significant increase from the £397k awarded in 2012-13. OUSU President Tom Rutland and the rest of the sabbatical officers began negotiations in August 2013, with OUSU lobbying the University to retain the £100k increase secured for 2013-14 and push for a further £165k.

The use of the increased budget has already been decided by OUSU’s Trustee Board. The money will go towards a new manager for OUSU’s Student Advice Service, to allow for a ‘professionalization’ of the service. The service is independent from the University and colleges and is designed to give information and support to students.

The increase will also be used for the expansion of Academic Representation, website improvement and development, the creation of a digital alternative prospectus, permanent funding for the OUSU Community Wards Scheme and feasibility research into proposals to develop OUSU support for student non-sport clubs and societies.

Rutland expressed his hapiness at the increase, saying, “I am delighted to have successfully negotiated a massive increase in OUSU’s funding which will have a major impact on OUSU’s ability to serve and represent Oxford students. When I ran for OUSU President, I spoke about how years of underfunding for OUSU prevented it from being the Student Union that Oxford students deserved. This much needed funding uplift will propel OUSU on its journey from being a surviving student union to a thriving one. I am extremely grateful to previous Presidents, as well as OUSU’s outgoing CEO, Brona O’Toole, for their hard work towards that goal.”

Rutland was also keen to stress that he would continue to work closely with the student body to ensure it delivers reform with a direct impact on students. “OUSU has achieved a lot for students in Oxford, be it the ability to resit Prelims, Sunday opening hours for the Radcliffe Camera or the right for students who suspend study to access University facilities. In the past, it has not been properly able to communicate these wins, as well as the services it offers to students like the Student Advice Service.

“This appointment will allow us to continue to develop our website, and to reach out to students who don’t currently engage with OUSU.”

Aside from grants from the University, OUSU is funded through Oxford Student Services Limited (OSSL), which raised £250k in 2012-2013, accounting for 38% of OUSU’s budget.

The Oxford University Living Wage Campaign has seen two major developments this week, with St. Anne’s launching a petition and a protest being held in Wellington square.

Yesterday, the University’s Personnel Committee hosted a public meeting in Wellington Square to discuss the issue, and to demonstrate in support of a living wage for Oxford University staff. The event was convened by Dan Tomlinson, OUSU Vice-President for Charities and Communities, and Andrew Grey, chair of the University’s Living Wage Campaign.

Tomlinson said, “An important university committee was meeting yesterday to discuss whether or not the central university should take more action on the Living Wage. We held an event outside the building as the committee members were arriving to celebrate the Living Wage and show our thanks to University staff for working hard for us.

“More than 30 students attended our action and the Chair of the University committee came out and spoke with members of the campaign. We have been in constructive dialogue with the University for a number of months now and it was the University that pro-actively decided to discuss the Living Wage at the meeting yesterday. I look forward to more productive meetings with them in the future.”

The national Living Wage is currently set at £7.65 an hour for workers outside London. The figure takes into account the costs of living, including rent, food bills, child-care, and utility costs.

Currently, only five Oxford colleges pay its staff the Living Wage. However, this week also saw St Anne’s student launch a campaign petitioning college authorities to engage in discussions about the its introduction. George Gillett, the OUSU rep for St Anne’s, told Cherwell, “At St Anne’s, we’ve been campaigning for the past year to encourage the college to become a Living Wage employer. Unfortunately, despite numerous meetings with the College Treasurer, as well as passing a JCR motion with unanimous support, the College authorities are still denying our request to even start communicating with staff about their pay and working conditions.

“We felt that a petition would be a good way to show how important paying the Living Wage is to students, tutors and staff alike. The petition has received over 330 signatures in less than a week, clearly showing that a large proportion of the College community actively support the Living Wage.”

St Anne’s JCR president, Christina Toenshoff, pointed out “the fact that not only students, but also staff and even Governing Body fellows have signed it shows very clearly that this is not just a movement from within the student body, but something that has support on all levels within college.”

Jo Hynes, a St Anne’s geography student, stressed the importance of the student-led campaign. “College so far have been very much against the introduction of a Living Wage at St Anne’s, consistently suggesting that staff are paid a living wage when bonuses and other benefits are accounted for – despite the fact that these have been decreasing in recent years and not all staff on the lowest pay receive them. In spite of its purported image as a more forward-thinking college, St Anne’s does not seem to value paying all its employees a wage suitable to live off.”

Oxford colleges which pay the Living Wage to all of their staff include Green Templeton, All Soul’s, Brasenose, New, and Mansfield. OUSU Vice-President Dan Tomlinson argued, given that Mansfield is one of the poorer colleges, other colleges could also follow suit, commenting, “The University is making good progress towards paying a Living Wage and is actively considering it for central university buildings and departments, so some colleges really need to catch up.”

Not all Oxford students have seen the St Anne’s campaign in a positive light, however. Several students have questioned the economic efficiency of implementing the Living Wage. Duncan Heagan, an undergraduate at New College, said, “The Living Wage is one of those things that we do to try and assuage our guilt at being privileged. It seems like a good idea on paper, but in practice, less so. I am by no means aware of the full impact which adopting the Living Wage has had on the staff of New College, but I understand that it resulted in many being laid off and the College cutting back in other areas as well, e.g. students now have to provide their own bedding. Granted, if providing my own bedclothes means someone else can enjoy a higher standard of living, than I’m okay with it I suppose, but I’m not sure to what extent this is the case.”

Despite this, Kath Nicholls, JCR President at New College, affirms that a recent Living Wage Campaign similar to St Anne’s current petition was passed “with overwhelming support last year” in her college’s JCR.

Last year, the University committed to paying all of its direct employees the Living Wage.

A talk at Oxford University featuring Graham Binns, the CEO of controversial private military company Aegis Defence Services, has been cancelled after student opposition.

Aegis Defence Services is a British private military contractor similar to the US mercenary company Blackwater. Aegis, founded in 2002 and often described as Britain’s “second largest military force”, has deployed private troops to Iraq, Afghanistan and other conflict zones.

Aegis has been criticised by students who have linked the company to the alleged abuse of human rights. In 2006, an ex-Aegis employee posted clips described as “trophy videos” of private contract soldiers killing Iraqi civilians online. Oxford students cited this as a reason to protest a talk to which Binns was invited.

The invitation was issued by the international affairs graduate publication St Antony’s International Review (STAIR).

Puneet Dhaliwal, a Politics DPhil student and former military reform activist for the group War on Want, was among those who organised a protest against the talk. Dhaliwal told Cherwell he objected to STAIR’s lack of transparency about the event. He said, “The organisers of STAIR have not adequately responded to concerns raised about the event. They have instead disingenuously invoked notions of ‘academic freedom’ and ‘freedom of expression’, while remaining oblivious to the dearth of academic content in this event, the lack of balance provided with respect to theoretical and political perspectives on [private military security contractors], and the fact that companies like Aegis already enjoy a privileged platform in British politics.”

On Thursday, STAIR organisers abruptly cancelled the eighth week talk that featured Binns and deleted the Facebook event without public explanation.
Speaking to Cherwell, organisers expressed their disappointment that it had “become necessary” to cancel the event, citing a lack of “organisational or financial means to ensure the event could run as planned”.

“We wish to emphasise that we believe this event would have given Oxford students a platform to engage in a critical discussion with important stakeholders in the debate on private military and security companies,” the STAIR organising committee stated.

“STAIR wanted to provide an open forum for this discussion. Unfortunately, we can no longer guarantee that a free, fair and open discussion will be possible.”
The invitation had been heavily criticised on the event’s Facebook group. One student called it “deplorable”.

Another pointed out that only Binns and a Foreign and Commonwealth Office official would feature in a open-ended discussion examining private military contractors. They said, “This is not a topic for debate with ‘two sides’ unless we consider arguing for the collapse of democratic and humane oversight of warfare as a legitimate position.

“I urge a boycott of this event and public condemnation of all those participating in it.”

Another joked about getting a job with Aegis, writing on the event group, “I share your academic concern with grappling with the hard issues surrounding security in a twenty-first century geopolitical context…

“As Oxford graduate students, we enjoy a privileged position to make a real difference to securing the world’s resources.”

The academic billed to participate in the discussion, Dr Janina Dill, was unavailable for comment.

AEGIS did not respond to Cherwell’s request for comment.

OUSU Council has voted to support an open letter in which 135 students and alumni expressed “concern and dismay” at the University’s handling of a student’s death.

An inquest into the death of Charlotte Coursier heard that she had been harassed by Pembroke Philosophy tutor Dr Jeffrey Ketland. A coroner told the inquest that Coursier had receive “crazy and rambling emails” from Ketland before she took her own life. Dr Ketland remained an employee of the university while an internal review was conducted, and he continues to be employed at Pembroke.

The open letter states, “We worry about the lack of information communicated to students. We further worry about the decision to keep Dr Ketland in institutionally mediated contact with students after the review began.”

The 135 signatories includes 39 of Coursier’s fellow Philosophy BPhil students, and 24 Philosophy DPhil students. Sarah Pine, OUSU VP Women, Lucy Delaney, OUSU Women’s Campaign Officer, Rebekka Hammelsbeck, former OUSU Women’s Campaign Officer, and several organisers of the It Happens Here campaign also signed the letter.

The letter criticises the University for failing to keep students informed about the review. It says, “The lack of comment has created a difficult atmosphere in the Philosophy Faculty. Some students now fear that harassment charges are not taken seriously. Others were upset to only learn of the situation in the national press.”

Secondly, the letter suggests the University should have limited student contact with Ketland after the police issued a warning under the Harassment Act. It reads, “It is strongly in the interests of students not to be placed at undue risk of harassment. It seems to us that when harassment allegations are made against a member of staff, the University should limit their institutionally mediated contact with students whilst a review occurs.”

As the letter notes, Ketland continued to have contact with students as the University conducted its review, urging “the swift adoption of such a suspension policy.”

Elena Cagnoli, Graduate Students Women Representative, said, “I signed the letter to urge the University to handle cases of alleged harassment more openly and carefully. The University’s duty of care towards its members, I think, demands such openness and attention toward the students’ welfare.The lack of information communicated to present and incoming students and the decision to keep the alleged harasser in institutionally mediated contact with students after the review began created a bad atmosphere amongst the student community.”

At OUSU Council on Wednesday night, an emergency motion passed that was proposed by Sarah Pine, OUSU VP Women. It noted the “lack of information communicated to directly affected students is concerning” and that the decision to keep Ketland in contact with students “did not have to occur.” The motion resolved “to add OUSU Council to the list of signatures” of the open letter.

Pine commented, “I share in the concern and dismay directed towards the information denied towards students at Oxford, as well as the decision to keep Ketland in contact with students while an investigation was ongoing.Women, even Oxford women, experience harassment and relationship abuse so frequently, it is saddening that they cannot be sure that others will respond in the ways that will best support them.”

An Oxford University spokesperson responded to the letter, saying, “The University can confirm it has received the open letter and has noted its contents. All University policies are kept actively under review.”

On the question of communication with students, a spokesperson told Cherwell, “The Department of Philosophy has held a meeting with graduate students to inform of the outcome of the inquest into Charlotte’s death and to discuss any questions arising.

“A University review concluded in October. Its purpose was to inform senior members of the University of the circumstances of Charlotte’s death and to advise on any future steps. The findings of the review remain confidential but University is continuing to consider the most appropriate action as a consequence.”

Several signatories responded negatively to these University comments. Rachel Fraser and Jacob Williamson, who attended the meeting held by the Department of Philosophy, said, “The University’s statement is potentially misleading. The meeting referred to did take place, but students were given no details not already in the public domain concerning any review or investigation undertaken by the University. Details of the coroner’s inquest were given to students during the meeting. The results of the coroner’s inquest were, at the time of the meeting, a matter of public record. No one representing the Department or University attended the inquest. All questions concerning particular cases were met with an insistence that no comment could be made.”

Cambridge has beaten Oxford once again in the ‘QS Top Universities’ ranking.

A study found that Cambridge is the best university in the country at which to study fourteen subjects, with Oxford best for only ten. Behind these two comes LSE with three and Reading, the Institute of Education and Edinburgh with one each.

However, globally Oxford outperformed Cambridge. The university was found to be the best university in the world for the study of English Language and Literature, Geography and Modern Languages. Cambridge came top only in History and Archaeology. This places Oxford third, behind Harvard and MIT who dominate the global rankings, coming first in eleven and nine subjects respectively. Despite this, Oxford is ranked 6th globally.

The QS Study is published annually, and takes into account a range of factors in its assessment of each university. These include indicators such as citations per faculty, the faculty/student ratio and, most controversially, academic peer review – an opinion survey amongst 33,744 academics regarding which university is currently leading in each particular field.

A University spokesperson, commenting on the findings, explained, “There are always limits to how precise league tables can be. However, the latest QS tables confirm Oxford’s leading international status across all subjects, delivering some of the best research and education in the world.”

The reaction from the student body has been mixed. One Oxford student commented, ‘These league tables tend to be based on somewhat tenuous evidential findings and change dramatically year on year. I do not believe that the results of this report are of particular relevance to students of either university, other than those looking for some pointless one-upmanship. Besides, obviously Oxford’s better.”

One student noted, “Those wankers in Cambridge might get a slightly better education than us but we both know who would win in a fight. Besides we do better globally than them and we’re not as socially inept as those tossers.”

The reaction from Cambridge was more positive. One student commented, “I am overjoyed with the news. Our famous rivalry has finally taken a twist towards Cambridge and I could not be happier. I was rejected from Oxford but look at me now! They’re terrible and I’m pleased they’re slipping down the league tables”.

A first year lawyer at Jesus stated , “I went on a crew date with Jesus College, Cambridge and I can honestly say they were the biggest twats I’d ever met and I would be happy to never meet them again. All night they went on how Oxford weren’t in the top 3 universities in the world in an attempt to impress every girl in the entire restaurant. I guess it’s all they’ve got.”

In the run up to the Oxford Union elections today, the official photos and manifestos of multiple candidates have been defaced.

The photos, located on the Union’s noticeboard near the reception and library, were repeatedly vandalised, with pen marks seen on the candidates’ faces. The photos were replaced multiple times, only to be spoiled again. The identities of the perpetrators are presently unknown.

The persistence of the defacement led to Returning Officer Joshua Atkinson issuing a clarification of the rules regarding electoral conduct, confirming that the defacement was an offense.

The notice, posted alongside the manifestos, read, “Following a series of defacements of Officers’ photographs and manifestos displayed on the noticeboard throughout term, I hereby clarify that this is an offence under rule 33 (a) i) 8, due to it being electoral material posted by the Returning Officer, regardless of if this Officer is re-running in subsequent elections.”

Both presidential candidates, Mayank Banerjee and Crawford Jamieson, explicitly state in their manifestos their intention to tackle the controversial politics of the Union.

As per the rules of electoral conduct, no candidates running for positions at the Union may speak to the press about electoral matters unless mandated by the President.

Polls close at 8.30 tonight.

Goldman Sachs has made a donation of £1.1 million to Exeter College, under the condition that the college provides £30, 000 a year in financial support for students via the hardship fund.

The college’s rector Frances Cairncross said, “This very welcome gift from Goldman Sachs is tied specifically by the donor to relieving student hardship. It will be added to our endowment and will allow us, under our spending rules, to use just over £30,000 a year to help students in financial need.”

Former JCR President Ed Nickell criticised the way the college manages their hardship provision. “From what I’ve gleaned, Exeter, uniquely among Oxford colleges, operates on a principle of charging all students as much of their living costs as possible, then retrospectively subsiding less well off students with hardship grants. Regardless of what one thinks of the principle, it has failed in practice.

“Do we not have enough less well off students? Do they not apply? Either way, we should be worried. I tried tweaking the hardship grant system last year to include more anonymity and an eligibility criteria but it doesn’t seem to have made much of an impact.”

The gift has been made as part of the bank’s charitable arm ‘Goldman Sachs Gives’. The bank has a history of supporting educational institutions charitably and have previously endowed half a million pounds worth of scholarships at Eton, and have donated to Balliol and Christ Church in recent years.

Exeter students, who have just stopped a hall strike to protest the college’s £840 annual catering charge, welcomed the grant. Rowan Lennox commented, a PPE second year, “Great to see the much maligned finance sector making a serious contribution to social mobility.”

However, some students noted flaws in the way the fund has been administered in the past. Second year Kat Farmer told Cherwell, “As someone who applies regularly for hardship funds, I understand how important they are to students. I’d really like to see college means test people for this money as currently you have to apply and prove you have run out of money.

“Personally I really worry about my finances at uni and spend every holiday working fifty hour weeks to make sure I can afford the next term. This means that I often end up missing out on the hardship fund.”

divert existing provisions elsewhere. In light of the ongoing student protests over the cost of the catering charge at Exeter, this donation could mean that more students are able to receive money from the college and mitigate the impact of the £800 fee.

Alternatively, Exeter could maintain the scope of hardship provisions as it currently exists, the increased cash flow would then allow the college to reduce the catering fee for all students.

The college have declined to comment on which of these two options they will take and have not been forthcoming with statistics regarding how many students benefit from already existing hardship funds and what the gift means in practical terms for students.