Sunday, May 18, 2025
Blog Page 20

Oxford now has the right approach to animal testing

Arun Lewis
-
0
Oxford now has the right approach to animal testing

This newspaper recently conducted an investigation into animal experimentation performed at Oxford for medical and research purposes. Animal experimentation has long been a divisive issue, and the suffering it causes subjects is always regrettable. But important medical research relies on animal experimentation, and the importance of post-pandemic medical research has never been higher.

The University no longer uses animals in teaching, but their use continues in research. The vast majority of these – over 190,000 – are rats. Over nine years, the number of animals subjected to experiments has fallen by 30,000. In 2023, barely 1% of experiments resulted in fatal outcomes, with most of this burden again falling on mice. Anti-testing protestors and activists have never been shy about expressing themselves.

As the investigation details, bombings in 2008 cost the University £14,000 and saw an extremist jailed for a decade, whilst the construction of the Biomedical Sciences building had to be paused for five months in 2004 after threats were made against it. The late Sir Colin Blakemore, who sewed kitten’s eyelids shut and later killed them to understand lazy eye, the most common then-incurable cause of childhood blindness, had HIV-infected needles sent to his house. It’s clear that research using animals both endures at Oxford and continues to be deeply controversial.

Undoubtedly, some of these experiments are unpleasant, and the maiming, suffering, or death of animals for no good cause should not be celebrated. It’s right that medical students no longer use live animals when recorded demonstrations are available. It’s laudable that both the number of experiments conducted on live animals is falling, and that the number of fatal experiments are so small, and primarily conducted on rats rather than larger mammals such as apes. Elon Musk’s treatment of monkeys in his Neuralink experiments, for example, reaches an unnecessary, insensitive level of cruelty that Oxford doesn’t match.

Avoiding such brutality should be the primary goal of researchers when handling such subjects in experiments, acknowledging that they are experimenting on living, feeling creatures regardless of their intelligence. The use and destruction of animals in pursuit of cosmetics research, a purely commercial application, should be and is rightfully condemned as a disgrace. 

Yet an all too easy appeal to simply banning all animal testing would do incomparable harm to quite literally millions of people. The vital role animal testing has played in understanding cognitive development, illnesses, infections, and physiology cannot be waved away as unjustified. Could any well-intentioned protestor, who genuinely cares for the wellbeing of animals, look at a patient suffering from a currently incurable condition, or one which causes chronic pain, and conclude that they deserve to suffer for the benefit of non-human animals who would otherwise be tested upon?

In an ideal world with no pain, animal experimentation would of course be unnecessary. But in a world riven with illness, diseases, and all manner of conditions which can cause great harm and suffering to a great number of people, we as students, and as a country, have to decide what we are more willing to let trouble our conscience. The suffering of animals in pursuit of a cure, or the avoidable suffering of a colossal number of people, who for instance inherit a debilitating condition, in an area of the world with higher levels of disease or worse healthcare facilities, or simply one facing poverty.

I have to confess a personal stake in this question. Not only did my grandfather carry out research on naked mice, testing the efficacy of leprosy cures, but there is a far closer reason I feel animal testing is deeply unfortunate, but necessary. My namesake, my grandfather’s brother, died of TB in the early 1940s in rural Bengal. In 1944, the first effective treatment for TB was deployed, and by the 1960s, TB was widely and easily treatable. How many more families would still suffer the same heartbreak mine did, if animal experimentation had not contributed towards the development of treatments for TB?

In an era of antibiotic-resistant infections, when conspiracy theories regarding science and a lack of trust in medical professionals are rampant, and spread profligately online and  by way of leaders themselves, animal experimentation continues to play a small, unfortunate, yet unavoidably important role in the progress of medicine. The suffering and sacrifice of the animal subjects should never be forgotten, nor minimised, and the use of animal testing should remain at a low level.

Yet there is little substitute for the real benefit that can be derived towards medical progress from it, and so no matter how well-intentioned and righteous those who oppose it may be, Oxford’s current position of involving animal testing in research, but not teaching, is the right one. This University may struggle to get many of the big questions right, but it has hit on the correct formula to balance the suffering of test subjects against the benefits of animal testing.

Have an opinion on the points raised in this article? Send us a 150-word letter at [email protected] and see your response in our next print or online.

Palestine Action protesters vandalise Blavatnik School of Government

Ila Banerji
-
0
Palestine Action protesters vandalise Blavatnik School of Government

The Blavatnik School of Government was vandalised in the early hours of Friday morning by Palestine Action. Glass smashed in the windows and doors of the building. Some of the damaged glass was sprayed with what appears to be red paint.

The Blavatnik told Cherwell: “The vandalism will not impact the opening and operations of the Blavatnik School. We remain open for students and staff through the back entrance.”

The Blavatnik has been a target of pro-Palestinian protest before, with Oxford Action For Palestine (OA4P), protesting outside the building as former Governor of South Carolina, Nikki Haley, spoke inside. 

Palestine Action has vandalised University buildings in a similar way before, smashing the glass of the doors of the University’s Wellington Square offices and spraying them with red paint, in October of last year. 

In an Instagram post, Palestine Action said: “Oxford university targeted again over ties to genocide, including investments in Elbit Systems, Israel’s largest weapons manufacturer.

“Last night’s targeting of the Blavatnik School of Government sends a clear message to the board of governors: End your complicity or expect direct action.

“Rishi Sunak is due to take up his new position on Blavatnik’s board soon. Under his direction, Britain participated in the genocide of Palestinians.”

A University spokesperson added to Cherwell: “The University is working with the Police to identify those responsible.”

A spokesperson for Thames Valley Police told Cherwell that they had “received reports of criminal damage” but that “no arrests have been made at this time [and] an investigation is ongoing”. 

Whilst OA4P claimed they were not involved in the action, they posted a statement on Instagram in “solidarity” with the action. A spokesperson told Cherwell that “OA4P was not involved in but stands in solidarity with actions calling out Oxford University’s complicity in Israeli genocide, apartheid, and occupation”. 

Oxford Union believes there is no moral difference between American and Russian foreign policy

Poppy Littler-Jennings
-
0
Oxford Union believes there is no moral difference between American and Russian foreign policy

In Thursday night’s debate, the Oxford Union voted in favour of the motion “This house believes there is no moral difference between American and Russian foreign policy”, with 155 members voting for the motion and 125 members voting against it.

The same debate took place in the Union 41 years ago to the day, as was noted by several speakers over the course of the evening. On 27th February 1984, the chamber discussed whether there was any moral difference between the foreign policy of the US and that of the USSR. Then, the noes had it, with 271 members voting against the motion and 232 members voting for it.

The debate commenced with the Union Librarian, Moosa Haraj, opening for the proposition. His argument focused on how, despite the purported values of freedom of the US and the frequent depiction of Russia as the “villain”, both countries only pursue “power not principle”. He cited the invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the invasion of Ukraine in 2022 – a contentious comparison which was questioned later in the debate – arguing that in both instances, actions were claimed to be for liberation, when in fact they were for nothing other than self-interest. He argued that, fundamentally, the sole difference between these “two self-interested titans” was that the US “just has better branding” to disguise the imperialism that lies at the heart of its foreign policy.

Following this, the Treasurer, Sarah Mughal Rana, took the floor as the first speaker for the opposition. She opened her speech for the opposition by conveying her personal connection to the motion, explaining how she grew up in the thick of the war on terror. She insisted on the importance of examining the moral frameworks that underpin these two powers, arguing that whilst the US couches its foreign policy decisions in claims of neoliberalist and secular values, Russian policy is modelled on the preservation of its own sovereignty and resisting Western opposition. She noted a certain difference in priorities and strategy, as Russia is known to pursue external annexation, whereas the US is not, as well as the existence of “specific accountability frameworks” in the US, such as in the Senate, as opposed to a distinct lack thereof in Russia.  

Next to take the floor for the proposition was Israr Khan, President of the Union, whose argument, similarly to the Librarian’s, primarily entailed an examination of the way in which the US obscures its intentions with regards to foreign policy decisions. He argued that one of the few advantages of the Trump administration is that the President is upfront about acting uniquely out of self-interest on the international stage, contrary to previous US leaders.

President Israr Khan then drew his listeners’ attention to the 251 American military interventions that took place between 1991 and 2022, as compared to Russia’s 25, as well as the 1 million people that died in US wars post-9/11. In light of these figures, he underlined the phenomenon of American exceptionalism and claimed: “Washington weaponises the dollar”. He drew his speech to a close by asserting that the solitary moral difference to be observed between Russia and the US is one of “style” rather than of “substance”.

Following him was Erik Ramanathan, an American attorney who served as US ambassador to Sweden under President Joe Biden from 2022 to 2025, who began by describing the motion as “dangerous”. His argument centred around the US’s interest in other nations as allies rather than mere vassals, as they are understood by Russia, as well as the power held by the American people to “sound the alarm” when foreign policy decisions are taken that they don’t approve of, giving the example of the Vietnam War. 

He did, however, stress the power of the right to protest and the freedom of press that bridles such a movement, stating: “Resistance is growing stronger by the day.” To this he opposed the lack of such opportunity for change in Russia, somewhat wryly concluding his speech by assuring the chamber that, unlike in Russia, no one would be arrested for which door they walked through. 

The third speaker for the proposition was Vladimir Pozner Jr, a Russian-American journalist who acted as a spokesperson for the Soviet Union during the Cold War. He also stressed the point of exceptionalism as a common trait for both powers, and used the expression “intellectual junk food” coined by President Nixon, to explain how both countries present their foreign policy in a way suited to the sensibilities of their respective publics. 

He spoke of how, in 60 years as a journalist, having spoken to many highly ranking people, both publicly and privately, on both sides, not once has he heard any of them say a word about moral foreign policy. To conclude his speech he thanked the members for their attention and wittily cited Shakespeare: “A plague on both your houses!”, earning a bout of laughter from the chamber.

Speaking next was Russian investigative journalist and Russian security services expert, Andrei Soldatov. He stressed a fundamental difference in the motivations of Russia and the US relative to foreign policy, attributing fear to the former and ambition to the latter. He argued that decisions made by Russian leaders betray a deep-seated fear of regime change, something that can be attested by the fact that he himself has been placed on the wanted list by the Russian Ministry of Internal Affairs for his work in investigative journalism. 

Following Andrei was Liza Barkova, a first year PPE student at Christ Church College and a Russian citizen with, as Sara’s speech earlier teased, an alleged Russian oligarch for a father. Like the preceding speakers for the proposition, she argued that the ultimate and only goal of both powers was a protection of self-interest. She highlighted the impact of Russian foreign policy on its own people, discussing the conscription of boys her age to the war in Ukraine as well as a personal anecdote in which her best friend found herself having to hide in Kiev after the outbreak of war. 

She made a case not for the equal “immorality” of the two countries but for their identical “amorality”, claiming that their shared goal of power is pragmatic, and that pragmatism is essentially amoral. She concluded that “there is no moral difference because there is no morality in it [both Russian and American foreign policy].”

The final speaker of the evening was a member from the audience, who took the place of President Guillermo Lasso, who had to leave the debate due to an “emergency”. The member underlined examples of the US intervening with the intention of saving smaller nations from atrocities such as genocides, and, by comparison, the manifest lack of such an action in the history of Russian foreign policy. He also argued that the invasion of Iraq is not comparable to the invasion of Ukraine and to do so is morally abhorrent and “a mockery of this union”.

Also expected to speak was Nina Khrushcheva, the granddaughter of Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev and a Professor of International Affairs at The New School, but she withdrew prior to the debate.

Fontaines DC and the (re) rise of indie Sleaze

Kiaya Phillips
-
0
Fontaines DC and the (re) rise of indie Sleaze

I recently took to my finsta to post a story claiming that the Fontaines DC’s Radio One Live Lounge cover of Lana Del Ray’s ‘Say Yes To Heaven’ should play at: “all my future birthdays, my wedding and my funeral.” It’s undeniable that recently the band seems to be dominating the music scene, with their alternative indie-sleaze aesthetic, dry Irish humour, and pints and cigarettes in hand, they are the perfect image of ‘bad boys’ that you can’t help but be obsessed with. 

Fontaines DC are at the front of the continuously growing Irish Indie scene, followed closely by bands like Inhaler who have also boomed onto the scene this past year. If you don’t know them, get to know. Fontaines DC, who originally met in music college in 2014,  have grown their audience immensely, allowing them to perform at larger venues such as Glastonbury, and next year hitting the United States, Japan, New Zealand and Australia.  With artists such as Fontaines DC, Wunderhorse, Inhaler and The Dare becoming more mainstream, it’s clear there is set to be a resurgence of the sleazy early 2000’s scene.

The origins of Indie Sleaze is branded by bands like The Strokes, Yeah Yeah Yeahs and Interpol, which also birthed bands like The Arctic Monkeys who still continue to dominate the indie scene to this day. In this era, making music independently suddenly became a lot easier due to the advancing of technology and online social media platforms that allowed the opportunity for the indie scene to be big. Currently, everyone has access to the potential to create music at their fingertips, as well as the potential to be successful. Where one viral TikTok can change a career trajectory, perhaps it’s these mass technological developments that are helping cultivate more independent artists. 

We must also remember that originally Indie was also a political movement, an optimistic response to the era of the great recession. Now, in an age where everything is progressing extremely fast, we crave a certain type of nostalgia and release, exactly the kind the era of Indie sleaze offered us. It’s not just music, it’s fashion, television, photography, the parties, the hedonism, it’s a lifestyle. It first had its comeback in the form of a cultural response to the pandemic, and now we can see indie sleaze as a response to the cost of living crisis, as we are nostalgic for an era in which the vintage clothes of the 2000s were a few quid in a charity shop, as opposed to hundreds sold by some sketchy Depop seller….


Indie fashion has also had a major comeback, with bands like Fontaines utilising a punk edge with hits of neon green, dyed hair, baggy silhouettes and feminine edges. They not only push past the boundaries of music but also of clothing, pulling apart gender constraints and harking back to the old days of rock and punk. Visually, their music videos also stand out for their extreme aesthetics and images of blood, violence and politics. The Starburst video echoes explicitly Chatten’s statement in a recent TikTok that since reading: “an article a couple of years back about us having reached the tipping point in terms of climate change…every kind of pleasantry feels like some bizarre fantasy that we all kind of like, are forced to buy into in order to survive and go about our daily lives. That’s Romance to me. This illusion that’s necessary in order to carry on.”

In the music video Chatten struts around his Irish town going about errands, walking through fields of wind turbines, often returning beaten and bruised and changing outfits throughout, each one as extreme as the next. All the videos Fontaines release are purposefully difficult to pin down and dissect, adding to their illusive punk image, but the dissatisfaction Chatten is personally feeling in this repetitive world that is seemingly incapable of change shines through nonetheless. 

Fontaines DC’s newest album Romance I must have listened to over fifty times. The eerie quality of the record adds a unique element to its indie roots, but it’s the lyricism that hits hardest. Where the band has been applauded in the past for their rawness and post-punk sensibilities, this new album brings much more sophistication. They have pulled up and out from their humble small-town roots, and have exchanged longtime collaborator Dan Carey for producer James Ford, known most for his work with The Arctic Monkeys, Gorillaz, and Depeche Mode. Romance keeps that inherent darkness, the first line of the album announcing our quest ‘into the darkness again’ that is central to the band’s work and image as they push the music further, experimenting more with sound and lyricism. Some of Romance’s popularity and mass appeal stems from its exploration of emotion as lead singer Grain Chatten begs ‘To be anesthetized/ And crave emotion’ then going on to identify how this numbness of emotion can become seductive as he ‘don’t feel anything in the modern world,’ only making people ‘sick with feeling’ that leads to fatal consequences. ‘My childhood was small,’ Chatten declares on their first record, ‘but I’m gonna be big.’ Here he makes a broad statement about their music in general, as they take the intimacies and intricacies of individual life and emphasise them musically, inviting everyone to participate in the catharsis. The importance of the poetics in their songwriting doesn’t go amiss, as the home truths they proclaim in their lyrics that are spliced between catchy choruses and melodies creates a raw album that sits well in a discography that is full of real songs.

The most distinctive track for me is ‘Horseness Is The Whatness’ a quote from one of Fontaines DC’s original heroes, James Joyce. Irish author Joyce is a frequent source of inspiration for the band, and his work is often alluded to in other tracks such as ‘Favourite.’ Chatten even claimed that the decision for it to be the final track in the album stemmed from the fact that: “It’s like Finnegans Wake by James Joyce, to get my daily reference in, but it ends with the same sentence that it begins with.” ‘Horseness Is The Whatness’ is a beautiful track that explores the journey of life, as Chatten pleads us in his raspy drawl: “Will someone / Find out what the word is / That makes the world go round? / Cause I thought it was love / But some say that it has to be choice.” I could write a whole literary essay just examining that one quote. The addition of soft percussion sounds like small explosions in my ears and the strings only add to the track’s intensity. Whether you like it or not, it’s undeniable that indie is having a comeback. I can talk all I want about how much I love Fontaines DC, and Romance in particular, but Chatten himself puts it best when he says: “It’s intense but it’s beautiful. Like coffee.” So, drink up. 

Cheap cashmere in freezing February

Martha Gathercole
-
0
Cheap cashmere in freezing February

Cashmere is a luxury fibre, warm in winter, sustainable, but you may have been put off in the past by its rocket-high prices. In this interview, Nearly New Cashmere offers reworked second-hand cashmere that is affordable for the student budget, with prices starting at around £45 per jumper rather than soaring into the triple figures. I strongly recommend you purchase one as the February chills seem to be here to stay!  

Ali, the brand’s founder, shares the joys of second-hand cashmere and tips for second hand shopping.

Why is starting sustainable brands so important?

Ali: We believe in consuming less, and being considerate of our environment. It is shocking how much textile waste there is in the world, and especially in the UK. I think not many of us really understand it, but how can you if you haven’t seen it with your own eyes? How do you get across the message of sustainability without sounding preachy or judgy? 

What makes cashmere unique as a material and better than, for example acrylic and other synthetic fibres?  

Ali: From a warmth point of view, there’s nothing like it. It’s a luxury fibre, from the underbelly of goats which is combed out, making it expensive. It’s also expensive to produce and only made in specific areas of the world where the climate is just right.

In terms of sustainability, it is a natural fibre, so when it reaches the end of its life and is discarded, it can be recycled quite easily into either yarn, but if it ends up in landfill it will just decompose like any natural product. However, it is mostly out of people’s budget, particularly for students, so I would encourage them to buy one or two cashmere pieces rather than a load of acrylic pieces, for the reasons I’ve mentioned. Cashmere will last you years and years. We’ve all had a disappointing acrylic jumper. Cashmere, although it has a reputation for being hard to care for, is really quite easy once you know what you’re doing. 

Do you think other brands should follow the example of Nearly New Cashmere? 

Yes, I think it’s a good idea to keep second hand shopping simple. I did wonder about doing it with tweed, but I couldn’t get the supply, whereas cashmere is all over the world. If second hand brands stuck to one material, it would be cheaper for them and easier for the consumer. 

I also like how with Nearly New Cashmere, the site is very accessible and easy to use- which might be a good solution for those who find the chaos of Vinted or a charity shop off-putting. 

Ali: Yes, often when buying on Vinted you just end up with more stuff to resell. You can find good things, but for something special, like an outfit for a wedding, it’s not straightforward, especially for my generation. I don’t think we do second-hand shopping terribly well in our charity shops, it’s too much of a jumble and they resell things that are not great. Why would I want a Tesco t-shirt if I can buy it new for a few quid? They’re run by volunteers and are completely overwhelmed with donations, but I prefer the model in the states, where it’s well organised and prices on garments that don’t sell are gradually knocked down. 

For those who might be a bit intimidated by second hand shopping, do you have any tips? 

Build an understanding in your mind of where the good charity shops are where you live and just pop in regularly with no expectations. You could go in three or four times and find nothing but then another day find a jewel. I think also following people on Instagram who are advocates of second-hand is useful, like @charityshopgirl. It’s important to get inspired by following people who are shopping second hand and styling it. Just try things and avoid all the tat!

68.1% of SU’s proposed budget goes to unelected staff costs, 15% to student projects

Ila Banerji, Euan Elliott, and Bryn Mollet
-
0
68.1% of SU’s proposed budget goes to unelected staff costs, 15% to student projects

Cherwell has obtained documents which outline the SU’s draft financial plans, expenditure, and income for the 2025-26 budgetary year, presented to the board in January 2025. 

The SU projects an income of over £1 million, of which 68.1% is planned to go toward staff or administrative costs, including 52% in unelected staff burdened salaries, whilst the rest has been allocated toward development, legal fees, office equipment, and other administrative costs. Meanwhile, student projects are expected to receive 15.0%.

Separately, £59,054 was projected to be spent on “settlements” during the current budgetary year, according to a version of the 2024-25 budget updated in November 2024.

Of the anticipated 2025-26 income of over £1 million, a projected amount of £911,921 will come from the annual grant from Oxford University and its colleges, and the rest from Freshers Fair, partnerships, and other sources.

£560,560 is projected to go toward burdened salaries for unelected non-student staff, which includes CEOs, two ‘Advice Advisors’, and various full-time or part-time roles. The burdened salaries, alongside other staff and administrative costs, will take up 68.1% of the proposed budget. Meanwhile, the four elected student sabbatical officers will be paid £158,607 altogether. 

15.0% of the proposed budget will go toward student projects. The majority will be allocated to the Freshers Fair which brings in a profit. 4.9% of the total budget will be allocated to the SU projects not aimed at making profit, including The Oxford Student newspaper that is expected to cost £23,575. 

The proposed budget will allocate £500 to each of the ten SU Campaigns. Campaigns are one of the main ways the SU interacts with students and includes projects such as the Campaign for Racial Awareness and Equality, Class Act, LGBTQ, and Suspended Students. A further £5,000 is projected to be spent on elections, the latest of which saw a turnout of 1471 voters out of 26,000 eligible students. Student meetings, which also witnessed low engagement recently, are projected to receive £3,400. 

This comes after the SU recently discontinued campaigns in favour of individual ‘community officers’; as such, campaigns will “cease to exist as democratic structures” at the end of this term, according to a statement from the Disabilities Campaign (DisCam).

The campaign wrote: “You may have seen the SU’s all-student announcement confirming the Trustee Board decision to discontinue minoritised student representation via Campaigns at the end of Hilary, in favour of an individual ‘Community Officer’ structure. DisCam was not informed of this decision before it was sent to all students, nor were we consulted by SU in the decision-making process. The SU also had made the decision to prohibit Campaign committee officers from participating in University working groups, committees or liaising with University staff on behalf of the disabled student community during the Transformation period.”

The 2025-26 budget suggests that the SU is due to adopt a Co-CEO model with two full-time contracts with burdened salaries of £98,236 and £89,591 each. The role of CEO was previously held by one person with an unburdened salary range of £53,348-£61,818, according to job advertisements posted on LinkedIn for 2022-23, which did not factor in cost-of-living and other changes. (The burdened salary refers to the total cost to an organisation for hiring and maintaining an employee beyond their direct compensation in wages).

The fully burdened cost (including indirect costs) of the two Co-CEOs is projected to be £196,000, whereas in 2022-23, the Senior Leadership Team comprised three people with a fully burdened cost of £208,000.

In response, solicitors for the SU provided the following comment on their behalf: “The Oxford SU’s priority as a charity is to support all our students through our in-person and online services throughout the year. Our work includes primary purpose representation through student advocacy, supporting student-led campaigns, liaising with colleges to support student welfare and delivering independent student advice services. Our staff are focused on supporting student officers to deliver student representation, enhancing student projects and improving overall student life at our university. We rely on grants and income-generating activity to cover our overheads (including benchmarked salaries for staff across the education and charity sector) and our spending is audited each year within our publicly available accounts.”

See full details of the proposed 2025-26 budget in this table:

CategoryAmountSubcategories% Total
Unelected Non-student Staff Salaries£560,560Advice & Student Representation Staff £284,695 + Communication & Operations Staff including OSSL £275,865 = £560,560(52%)
Staff Development & Reward£22,770
Legal & Professional Fees£73,573
Transformation£10,000
Misc.£68,115Staff Output Communications £15,938 + Office Premises & Equipment & IT £24,031 + OSSL Admin £1,218 + NUS Associated Costs £26,928
Total for Non-elected Non-student Staff/Admin£735,018 (68.1%)
Elected Student Sabbatical Officer Salaries£158,607
Student Officer Engagement & Development£23,000Engagement £10,000 + Development £13,000
Total for Elected Students Officers£181,607 (16.8%)
Campaigns£5,750The SU runs ten campaigns: CRAE, International Students, It Happens Here, LGBTQ, Disabilities, Women’s, Class Act, Suspended Student, Refugee Rights, and Environmental Affairs, with £500 each, plus £750 in discretionary spending
Elections£5,000
Student Meetings£3,400
Student Training£1,000
Student Advice Services£8,897
Welfare£4,400
Freshers Fair£109,633*Freshers Fair is projected to make a net profit, with an income of £125,589
Student Output Communications (The Oxford Student Newspaper + Oxide Radio)£24,297
Total for Student Projects£162,377(15.0%)
[4.9% excluding Freshers’ Fair]
Total£1,079,002

Council’s new budget includes new council homes, community centres and tax rises

Conor Walsh
-
0
Council’s new budget includes new council homes, community centres and tax rises

Oxford city council has agreed a new budget which will see the construction of over 1,500 council homes, two new community centres, and council tax rises. Initially proposed in December, the budget is balanced for the next four years and will utilise £19m in profit from council-owned companies to fund services and investments.

Oxford has one of the longest social housing waiting lists in the country, with an average wait time of 5.2 years. 1,558 new homes will be constructed over the next eight years, bringing the council’s total housing stock to 9,500. 

A pilot scheme assisting those in supported accommodation will also be allocated £200,000. This follows £600,000 of additional funding from the national government to help with homelessness prevention.

Aside from housing, the budget includes £2.5m to reopen the Cowley Branch Line, a rail service connecting Cowley and central Oxford, and an additional £157,000 for gritting pavements and bike lanes. A further £1m will also enhance the redevelopment of the Covered Market, two new community centres will be constructed in East Oxford and Blackbird Leys, and the council will introduce a freeze on pitch-hire fees for sports teams.

Despite additional funding from national government and council-owned companies, the budget will see council tax increase by 2.99% in 2025/26. Second homes will also be charged double council tax from this year.

Households where everyone is a student enrolled in full-time education are exempt from paying council tax in the UK. The council also remains committed to providing a full discount on council tax for residents on the lowest incomes.

Deputy Leader of the Council Ed Turner said: “We’ve been listening: our residents’ survey said that people wanted their City Council to get the basics right so we are stepping up spend on graffiti removal, pavement repairs and gritting, verge cutting, litter picking and free play provision. We will build more than 1,500 new council homes to help local families in housing need. 

“This is in the context of a shortfall in government funding, but we have managed to avoid major cuts to frontline services by our ‘Oxford Model’, which uses income from our wholly owned companies, partnerships and commercial property to support the front line.”

Oxford study reveals support for online content moderation over freedom of speech

Iona Mandal
-
0
Oxford study reveals support for online content moderation over freedom of speech

A global study recently conducted by the University of Oxford and the Technical University of Munich (TUM) has shown that most people are in favour of imposing restrictions on negative online content, such as threats of violence and discriminatory content. 

Extensive research and surveys around the topic regulation of social media and freedom of expression, has revealed that 79% of respondents surveyed believe that online incitements to violence should be removed. A majority of US respondents also supported this but to a lesser extent, at 63%. 

Only 17% of respondents believed that users should be allowed to post discriminatory content which specifically attacks groups of people, highlighting a general support for the regulation of some online content. When asked to choose between an unregulated social media platform which prioritises freedom of speech, and one which is entirely devoid of hate speech or misinformation, most were in favour of the latter.

There were also differences in the question of where accountability should lie for creating safer spaces online. 39% of respondents in Brazil, Germany, and the UK believed that this responsibility should lie mainly with the platform operators. There were larger differences in survey responses in regard to support for government accountability for online spaces. For example, 37% German and French respondents supported state-initiated approaches, but only 14% did in Slovakia. 

In terms of sensitivity around abuse on social media, 59% of those surveyed believed that hate speech, disrespect and discrimination online were unavoidable. However, a large majority also believed that these platforms can be utilised as spaces of healthy discussion, with only 20% of respondents stating that rudeness is a necessary part of conveying opinions online. 

Despite this, Professor of Politics at Oxford’s Department of Politics and International Relations Spyros Kosmidis, said that “we do not necessarily have a universal consensus…people’s beliefs are strongly dependent on cultural norms, political experiences and legal traditions in the various countries. This makes global regulation more difficult.”

The study comes in the wake of important developments in online content regulation. Recently, Meta and X have relaxed regulations intended to restrict fake news and discriminatory content. Late last year, Australia became the first country in the world to ban social media for under 16 year-olds, with social media companies facing fines of up to £25.7m if they do not comply. Questions have been raised as to how easy such a policy will be to enforce and whether responsibility should lie with the social media platform or the operating system. 

Research conducted for Safer Internet Day 2024 has shown that while young people are enthusiastic about technological advancements, they require “conversation and better support.” The research also revealed that there is a lack of knowledge around the Online Safety Act 2023, which aims to hold social media companies more accountable for the content circulated on their platforms. 

Christ Church receives surprise Lewis Carroll collection from US philanthropist

Noah Robson
-
0
Christ Church receives surprise Lewis Carroll collection from US philanthropist

A private collection containing thousands of letters, photographs, books, and illustrations by the author Lewis Carroll has been donated to Christ Church by an American businessman and philanthropist. Jon A. Lindseth gifted the college the unique collection, which also includes a number of early editions of his Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland books, some of which have personal inscriptions to family and friends.

Carroll spent most of his life at Christ Church, mainly as an academic specialising in mathematics. This is also where he met Alice Liddell, the daughter of the Dean at the time, who became the inspiration for the Alice novels. 

Lindseth has been an avid collector of Carroll, curating a number of exhibitions on his life works, as well as writing for journals dedicated to him. Gabriel Sewell, the College Librarian at Christ Church, told Cherwell that Lindseth “got in touch by email last July offering Christ Church his Lewis Carroll collection.

“It is very rare to receive such a large collection as a donation. We think it is the largest donation Christ Church Library has received since the eighteenth century. Lindseth’s collection is thought to have been the largest collection in private hands so it would be very difficult to build such a large and varied collection from scratch.”

One first edition copy in the collection of Alice’s Adventures Underground has a note to Alice’s mother, reading: “To Her, whose children’s smiles fed the narrator’s fancy and were his rich reward: from the Author. Xmas 1886.” There are also multiple letters from Carroll, with “many written at Christ Church in his distinctive purple ink,” according to Sewell.

In addition to numerous original writings, the donation came with over 100 photographs, with Carroll being an avid photographer as well as a writer, even going as far as to build a glass studio on the roof above his rooms at Christ Church. Images range from shots of Alice Liddell herself, to famed friends of Carroll’s, such as poet Alfred Lord Tennyson and painter Dante Gabriel Rossetti.

The collection is on show at an exhibition in Christ Church’s upper library until 17th April, with this marking the first time it has ever been displayed in the UK. Sewell told Cherwell that Christ Church is “planning future exhibitions … and will consider lending material to exhibitions elsewhere, both in the UK and internationally”.

Oxford ranks fifth for UK councils with longest waiting times for social housing

Mair Andrews
-
0
Oxford ranks fifth for UK councils with longest waiting times for social housing

People wait on average 5.2 years for social housing in Oxford, according to a homelessness charity called Crisis Skylight Oxford. Oxford City Council ranks fifth in the UK councils with the longest wait times, more than two years above the national average, and with over 3,400 people on the waiting list. 

In the UK, the average wait time for council housing is 2.9 years. Greater London came top with a 6.6-year average waiting time. The city council’s allocation scheme for council housing is based on how much people need a new home, rather than how long they have been on the register. Crisis Skylight Oxford say that they have around 20 new people registering for support each week.

Oxford Council Cabinet Member for Housing and Communities, Linda Smith, said that “in recent years the cost of living, record private rent rises and the delay in delivering a ‘no fault’ eviction ban, first promised in 2019, have fuelled a sharp rise in homelessness across the country. Oxford is no exception.

“Together with a longstanding affordability crisis, this means most people wait years for general needs council housing and there is no guarantee of a council home however long you spend on the list.”

She added that since the relaxation of government borrowing restrictions in 2018, the Council has built hundreds of new council homes and the current budget includes funding for a further 1,600 council homes in the next eight years.

“We know this won’t be enough to meet needs but as the only council in Oxfordshire building new council homes, we know every single one can make a life-changing difference.”

Director at Crisis Skylight Oxford, Kate Crocker, said: “No one should have to live without a secure roof over their heads. But this is the reality for so many in Oxford, exacerbated by the rising cost of living and lack of social housing in the area.”

She reported that many families spend prolonged periods in unsuitable, temporary accommodation, and that children are being “robbed of their childhoods” by celebrating birthdays in inadequate living conditions. She called on government ministers to commit to increased funding for social housing. 

The data on waiting times was gathered in a Freedom of Information request sent to 387 UK councils by the Alan Boswell Group, unoccupied house insurance experts.

Councillor Linda Smith, Cabinet Member for Housing and Communities told Cherwell: “We are doing what we can to ease Oxford’s housing crisis. Since the relaxation of government borrowing restrictions in 2018, we have built hundreds of new council homes. Our budget for 2025/26 includes funding for a further 1,600 council homes in the next eight years.

 “We know this won’t be enough to meet need. But as the only council in Oxfordshire building new council homes, we know every single one can make a life-changing difference.”

1...192021...2,496Page 20 of 2,496

Support Student Journalism

Cherwell is Oxford’s oldest independent newspaper, established in 1920. We are entirely student-run. By supporting us, you will contribute to keeping our paper in print and online. Every donation makes a difference.

Donate

Explore

Follow us

More

Oxford Student Publications Limited © 2025 - All Rights Reserved | Privacy Policy

Website by James Ashley