A graduate student at Brasenose College has died. James Worthen, who was studying Classics, died in Bristol last week.

Avon and Somerset Police have said, “The death is not being treated as suspicious”. A spokesperson was also able to confirm that he was found in a gorge area near the Cumberland Baisin.

A spokesperson for the college released the following statement through the University Press Office:

“Brasenose College is deeply saddened by the death of James Worthen, who died on Sunday May 10th aged 22.

“James had come to Brasenose from Bristol University to read for the MPhil in Greek and Latin Language and Literature. He performed extremely well in this course, achieving consistently high marks, and had received AHRC funding to continue to the DPhil. As well as pursuing academic goals he played football for Brasenose and chess for the University, and was a well-liked member of college.

“The College’s concern at this time is for James’ family and friends; they are in our thoughts and prayers; and we ask that their privacy is respected in their time of grief.”

The University declined to comment further, but reminded students, “The College is sensitive to the needs of students at this difficult time and support will be available both from the College and from the University through the usual channels.”

The Oxford University Counselling Service provides free and confidential assistance for students with personal, social, emotional or academic problems. For more information, see the Counselling Service website.

Several Oxford academics have voiced agreement with the Cambridge Head of Admissions in stating that personal statements are an irrelevant part of the application process.

Earlier this week, Geoff Parks, the Director of Admissions at Cambridge declared that the personal statement reveals little about a student and is rarely the sole work of the applicant.

Michael Allingham, the former Head of Admissions at Magdalen College said, “I know people who don’t read [personal statements] on principle, who believe that they muddy the waters…Whereas we look at everything, they are far from the most important thing.”

He added that the decision over which applicants to invite for interview is based on only objective information such as GCSE or A Level results, predicted grades or a subject-specific entrance test. Consequently, a student would never be refused an interview on the basis of a poor personal statement.

Mike Nicholson, Oxford’s Head of Admissions agreed that the personal statement is less important than other parts of the application. He said, “the amount of emphasis that will be placed on the personal statement will be much more limited than at most other universities.”

However, he added that the personal statement may be helpful to evaluate students who wish to undertake a course not linked to their post-16 subjects. He said, “the personal statement provides scope to draw upon the wider range of experiences.”

Zoe Hallam, a first year PPE student stated that she was asked a question based on the first eight words of her personal statement. She said, “I don’t think they particularly cared about the personal statement in the interview, but I think they’ve used it to shift through the applicants.”

One first year Magdalen said, “When I was writing mine, I was told that different colleges treated personal statements differently. Some scrutinised statements and others completely ignored them. I just wished they’d told me which was true for the college I was applying to.”

Several students have expressed anger at the revelation of admissions tutors. Harry Philips, first year linguist questioned the processes that decide interview places, saying “I’m sure that at this educational establishment, not everyone who sends in an application is given an interview. It can’t surely be done just on academic grades?”

Oxford University spent last week honouring Dambudzo Marechera, nearly four decades after expelling him. Events took place over the week, celebrating the work of the writer that one Zimbabwean newspaper called “the most controversial author Zimbabwe has ever produced.”

After gaining a scholarship to New College, Marechera was expelled following a series of incidents, including threats to burn down the college. After growing up in poverty, he had previously been expelled from the University of Rhodesia in 1973 after a student demonstration.

Professor Elleke Boehmer, co-organiser of the event, explains that Marechera had a “schizophrenic disposition, which was never formally diagnosed,” and was made worse by his “extreme isolation, as one of the only black students in a very white Oxford.” It was this combination of race and class prejudices, Boehmer suggests, that led to such behaviour.

She stressed the continued relevance of the work, stating that “People now still relate to the crises which Marechera faced, especially in his native Zimbabwe.

His thinking represents precisely the opposite to the kind of rigid, binary thought of someone like Robert Mugabe. He asked a lot of difficult questions, and crossed boundaries.”

However, some object to the perceived double standards of the institution. Wadham second-year Sophie Lewis directed a production which combined two of Marechera’s plays, but split from the conference organisers “after a very difficult beginning.” Lewis objects to the idea of the University embracing the writer after rejecting him as a student.

“I don’t want to see Marechera’s dramatics, his nationsroman, his poems, stultified by the academic institution he rejected, and which rejected him.”

One English undergraduate said, “I always think it’s quite ironic when Oxford welcome back someone they barely cared about at the time. I don’t think they mean to be hypocritical, but there is the sense that they want to share in Marechera’s success.”

Boehmer acknowledges that the celebration may “seem on the surface” to be hypocritical, welcoming back the writer now that he is safe and dead, but points out that ‘the English Faculty and academia has moved on. We’re now in a place where black writers’ work are discussed and celebrated. It’s a different Oxford from the one Marechera experienced.’

“This isn’t in any way trying to excuse or make up for the past, but a genuine recognition and celebration of his work.”

The first mixed year at St Hilda’s college has seen JCR elections overwhelmingly dominated by men.

Next year’s President, Treasurer and Secretary will all be male, with no women even contesting the last two positions.

Oxford Women in Politics President Katy Theobald said she found the results disturbing. “The fact that in a single year there has been a shift to under-representation presents an interesting but very concerning problem. Often such an imbalance is attributed to a lack of role models but at St Hilda’s there were of course clear examples of women holding these positions for many years.”

She suggested that a quota could be introduced, and said “more should be done to ensure equal numbers of men and women run for a position, so that potential female candidates are not overlooked.”

President-elect Jesse Harber, however, said he felt gender was irrelevant. “We’re representing those who elected us, and I wouldn’t want to second-guess them.”

“I don’t think quotas are necessary, and I think they may do more harm than good. A quota would just paper over the cracks – female under representation in the JCR is a symptom of deeper issues.”

He said that the issue had rarely come up during campaigning. “It was certainly mentioned a few times, but mostly the policies and vision were discussed.”

Current JCR President Katherine Terrell expressed mixed feelings about the outcome of the election. She said she did not feel that sexism had been an issue at Hilda’s hustings, and that for the positions in question “there is no reason why either gender would do a better job.”

However, she agreed with Harber that the under-representation of women stemmed from wider issues. “There is a university-wide lack of representation for women in student politics, as well as in many other areas, which needs to be recognised; few women putting themselves forward for Presidential and VP positions is a phenomenon that many colleges find.”

She added, “I look forward to a future in St Hilda’s JCR, and across the university, where men and women are equally represented in student politics.”

St Hilda’s was Oxford’s only all-female college for thirteen years. In 2006, the governing body voted to admit men. The student body voted in support of the motion by a margin of just 55% to 45%.

Harber said male students had found the integration process very smooth. “Sometimes it’s difficult to remember that we’re the first year to be mixed – everywhere you look you see both male and female students.”

The press secretary of the newly appointed Archbishop of Westminster has apologised for verbally abusing a student during a meal at Blackfriars College.

The senior aide to Vincent Nichols, who was installed as Archbishop of Westminster yesterday, is alleged to have launched an unprovoked “foul-mouthed tirade” against Oxford student Matthew Tye after a dinner with Francis Campbell, British ambassador to the Vatican and former policy advisor to Tony Blair, at the Aquinas Institute at Blackfriars College, Oxford.

Mr. Campbell had delivered an open lecture on Faith and Foreign Policy before attending the dinner with other distinguished guests, to which Tye had been invited.

A masters student at Campion Hall, Tye claims that after “drinking heavily” at the dinner, a “plastered” Mr. Jennings – whom he had met once before while interning for a Catholic organisation at The Birmingham Oratory – launched into a verbal attack on him, repeatedly calling him a “sh*t”, concluding with “Nobody wants you, good riddance” as he made for the left the room.

“It was completely unprovoked… and quite unbelievable,” said Tye.

“There were guests who tried to calm him down but to no avail.”

He said that he was “in shock and dismay” at the incident, and he wrote to the Archbishop requesting an apology, in which he wrote, “I’ve never been subjected to such sustained verbal abuse in public in my entire life.”

The letter was leaked to the Mail on Sunday and the incident has subsequently been widely reported in the national press. On Monday the story featured on the front page of the online edition of Bugün Gazetesi, a major newspaper in Turkey, under the headline ‘Blasphemy scandal at Oxford’.

Although Mr. Jennings has issued an apology, Tye said that it was not sufficient, and was frustrated that neither Mr. Jennings – nor the Archbishop – had made any personal apology expressly to him.

“In his political apology, he made up the excuse that I’d brought up at dinner that he’d been sacked as spokesman of Birmingham Oratory,” he said.

“More than anything I’m appalled that someone in his position is lying and trying to spin his way out of trouble.

“His credibility is completely destroyed, and the political apology is a disgrace. I just want an honest and sincere apology, accepting what he did and apologising for the embarrassment caused to all the guests who were there,” he added.

He also remarked that he thought that Mr. Jennings would be “fired in a subtle way” once the storm had died down.

Mr. Jennings has referred to the scandal and subsequent press coverage as a “storm in a teacup, or rather a typhoon in a teaspoon”, and denied many of the allegations against him.

“I most emphatically was not drunk,” he insisted. “I probably used the derogatory term beginning with ‘S’, two, maybe three times.”

He also denied that Tye had he had failed to apologise to Tye directly, and refuted claims that the attack was unprovoked.

“I have sent Mr. Tye a letter of apology which he requested, but have had no acknowledgement of this. I would expect him to accept the apology; instead, he has not had the courtesy to reply.”

Asked whether Archbishop Nichols might make a statement or apology, Mr Jennings was resolute that he would make “none whatsoever.”

“I was not representing him at the time, I was invited there in a private capacity.

“Far more offensive is that the letter has been leaked to the Mail on Sunday. Someone has deliberately given them the letter… out of malice and mischief.

“But again, I do apologise for speaking out of turn.”

Mr. Tye, on the other hand, joked that “he should probably go and be spokesman for Al-Qaeda or something,” but insisted that he was trying to “laugh off the matter”.

The outburst was not the first in Mr. Jennings’ career. Last month, it was reported Jonathan Wynne-Jones, Religious Affairs Correspondent for the Daily Telegraph, had been on the receiving end of a similar tirade following a discussion on the fact that Mr. Wynne-Jones had recently reported in the Telegraph “that a couple of Vincent Nichols’s colleagues were not particularly warm to the idea of him arriving in Westminster.”

“Considering Peter should have been celebrating given that his boss has just got the top job, I thought he might have been in a slightly better mood”, Mr. Wynne-Jones reported.

A controversial OUSU graduate tax motion was tabled for two weeks by the Council in order to allow for consultations with JCRs.

The motion proposed a graduate tax system as “the fairest way at present to fund higher education”. The system would introduce a tax on those who went to higher education and proceeds of the tax will then fund the universities. The amount of tax levied would be proportional to income.

The decision to put forward this motion comes at the time when the government reviews higher education funding. Currently, fees are capped at £3,145. According to vice-Chancellor John Hood, such low payments create a shortfall in Oxford University’s funding.

OUSU council will use the motion to lobby the National Union of Students. However, the discussion of the motion has thus far been restricted to the OUSU working group and last week’s Council. Magdalen OUSU rep Tom Meakin stressed the importance of engaging all students in the discussion.

“Although the student union has set up a working party, there has been little tangible engagement with students across the university”, he said.

Many were unhappy about the way the process has been carried out. Laurence Mills, Magdalen JCR President, spoke against the motion during OUSU council on the grounds that JCRs had not been adequately engaged. He has stressed the importance of involving JCRs in such important decisions, emphasising the need for a “bottom-up” process and states that “this issue is not one on which we can afford to bypass our common rooms”.

Others believed that the council should have made a decision on the issue there and then. Paul Fisher, JCR President of St Catz, argued that delaying the process would compound the view that OUSU is incapable of making decisions on behalf of the student body.

He said, “My largest concern was that we as a Council had avoided our responsibility as the sovereign body in the Student Union and decided once more to leave the issue until a later date. The reasons for doing this were very tenuous indeed- I thoroughly doubt that we will come back to the table any more informed as to how Oxford students approach the tricky issue of University finance.”

Some thought the motion has been unclear, as the confusion over what it means to support a ‘graduate tax’ has been widespread. Alex Bulfin, Univ JCR President commented, “the graduate tax has so many variables that it is difficult to say categorically whether you endorse it or not; it ranges from models that look remarkably like the current system to others which would be virtually unrecognizable and not all of these will appeal to all individuals.”

In principle, many supported the motion. Hannah Gomersall, the OULC secretary said, “OULC members voted overwhelmingly that a system of taxing graduates seemed the best way forward. We firmly believe that education at all levels should be accessible to everyone.”

However, the opposition to the practical implications of the idea have been widespread. One first year PPEist commented, “If I happened to earn a lot of money having been to a rubbish university, I would object to paying a higher graduate tax than some Oxbridge student who graduates and then does nothing with their life.  It is effectively just a hike in income tax. I would support it only if it was matched by a tax cut elsewhere.”

Other alternatives to graduate tax have been considered. However, there have been concerns that lifting the cap on fees would create a market for higher education. The motion states, “Oxford University will probably charge more than the average will reinforce the perception that Oxford is a more expensive place to study.”

Marius Ostrowski, Magdalen JCR Secretary added, “Even if the government and the University raise financial support limits completely proportionally to the increased cost of coming here, and also reform the effectiveness of the Access scheme to raise its profile, the angry tabloid headline will still read ‘Oxford and Cambridge raise fees to £7000′.”

The decision on the motion must now wait until the JCRs have been consulted. Paul Dwyer, VP for OUSU Access & Academic affairs commented, “I imagine that we will see a wide range of opinions reflected.” He added, “OUSU council would welcome amendments from common rooms, or new ideas to be put forward, so that our final policy can accurately reflect the will of the collective student body.”

The appalling state of college kitchens across Oxford University was revealed this week, after a Cherwell investigation uncovered more than 134 breaches of basic hygiene regulations.

Inspections carried out in 27 colleges exposed numerous violations of food safety laws, including dust and mould growth, damaged cooking equipment and “ingrained dirt.”

It unmasked a shocking picture for students, many of whom pay hundreds of pounds a year for food prepared in kitchens not fully up to Health and Safety standards.

The worst offending kitchen was that of Balliol College, after the Environmental Health Officer from Oxford City Council condemned the conditions as “unacceptably dirty.”

Meanwhile at Worcester College, staff were forced to work around a collapsed ceiling in the plate wash area, while tiles, shelves, the main catering unit and a dry goods store all desperately required repair.

Pest control was also a problem at Mansfield and Pembroke Colleges, with rats ravaging a rear yards full of debris. A mouse was also found feeding off food spilling from wheelie bins at New College, which was also criticsed for dirty work surfaces.

The offences were among many later exposed by Cherwell investigators in documents obtained using the Freedom of Information Act.

The biggest number of infringements was at Balliol, where inspectors found 18 breaches of hygiene regulations late last year.

In a subsequent letter to the college’s Domestic Bursur, the inspector warned: “I am concerned at the continued decline in the structural fabric of the premises.”

Among the violations he highlightered were evidence of dust and mould growth, “unacceptably dirty” doors to fridges, blistering paint and even the floor throughout the kitchen “starting to split and break up.”

The colleges are inspected regularly by Oxford Council Health Officers, usually every 12-18 months.

Not all college kitchens came in for criticism however, with Lincoln College receiving a glowing report from Health inspectors.

It was described in the report as having “excellent premises,” with a “beautiful traditional kitchen which has kept up all the original elements i.e. large fireplace, wooden beams and floors.”

It also reserved notable commendation for the “tight ship” run Head Chef, Jim Murden, who has been working in the kitchen for more than 35 years.

Merton also passed with flying colours and was described as “very well run” with kitchen and equipment in “very good order” and high standards of cleaning evident. Corpus Christi was also described as “a good example overall.”

Officials at colleges with less glowing reports responded to the revelations, with many stressing they were working to ensure the highest possible Healthy and Safety standards.

Many Balliol students remained completely unaware however of the conditions in which their food was cooked.

“I like the food we get a lot,” said student Isabel Thompson. “It always looks clean and safe and there’s no nails in the soup or anything, so I’m a fan.”

At Mansfield, the Food and Beverage Manager Lynn Partridge said that the college had endeavoured to improve their facilities since the report into conditions.

“The inspection brought to light several structural problems which have now been rectified,” she said.

“We have since be re-inspected and the Environmental Health Officer was completely satisfied.”

Despite these developments however, not all students at the college seemingly satisfied with the food on offer.

Melvin Chen, a second-year Economics and Management student at the college, said, “The food really is awful – I usually eat at the Business School instead.

“I had lunch there the other day and it really was terrible, so I feel justified in saying that.”

Another student, Beatrice Male said the food was remarkably expensive for what was on offer.

“The food is quite expensive, there is a two for one mark-up on everything,” she said. “You can’t even get a packet of mini-hobnobs for less than £1.”

New College JCR’s Food, Housing and Amenities Officer, Steve McGlinn, said he was very surprised by the safety breaches identified at his college.

He particularly pointed out that a survey last term found that members of the JCR rated food quality and service at 4.2 out of 5.

“Certainly, over the last year, we’ve seen a marked improvement in the food,” he said.

“Bringing in a new Head Chef has particularly made a difference. I know from working there that H&S is taken seriously, and so I, for one, am generally happy with how things operate.

“Over the past year, there’s been some repainting too, which is all the better.”

Balliol and Worcester, the colleges with highest number of contraventions, both have low food costs relative to other colleges. However, many students are paying more for the products of some of the catering facilities with the most infringements. Mansfield, for example, had 6 breaches of legislation, and yet the average lunch in Mansfield hall is over 70% more expensive than Balliol and a third more expensive than the college average.

At Pembroke and New College, the student buying lunch and dinner from hall every day of term can pay over £1,200. In contrast at Christ Church, the cheapest college in terms of food, it can cost as little as £764.

Lyn Partridge highlighted that the figures at Mansfield do not take into account different qualities of food. “I’m not aware that we are more expensive than any other college for the basic choice; however, students cannot expect items such as rib eye steak for the same price as sausages.”

The price of excellence is not necessarily high for the student however. While eating at Lincoln costs just above average, Corpus and Merton have some of the least expensive halls around, with lunches averaging about £2.55 and dinners about £3.20.

Worcester JCR has been forced to overhaul the format of its hustings following several complaints from college members. The new reforms have sparked a backlash among the students.

The new guidelines require an SCR member to be present at hustings after students voiced objections about last term’s hustings which saw female candidates for the position of secretary asked to drink half a bottle of wine each and perform a lap dance for the JCR President.

Other contenders were forced to “down dirty pints” in front of the attendees and to simulate sexual positions.

The observing SCR member will have to record tasks which “might contravene college standards,” whilst the JCR Secretary will record the names of the individuals making each request. The JCR President will also have to inform everyone present about the college policy on equal opportunities.

Students opposed to the rule change have set up an autonomous protest group called Worcester Students for Justice, to “make sure the SCR are clearly aware of the anger of Worcester students at the current state of affairs.” They proposed a motion at last Sunday’s JCR meeting to protest against a “dictatorial and aggressive SCR” that had “progressively destroyed” the “rights and liberties” of the Worcester JCR. The motion to campaign for a rule change was passed by a two thirds majority.

One first year stated that the SCR’s decision showed them “overstepping their mark”. She added, “I think people shouldn’t be allowed to ask questions which clearly humiliate a candidate, but it’s more a matter of judgement; a better solution would be to make sure the President did their role of vetoing inappropriate questions.”

David Barclay, Worcester’s JCR President, told the governing body that he was happy to draw up guidelines for future hustings, but requested that they “trust that we understand the importance of hustings and the terrible effects of harassment and intimidation.”

He admitted to Cherwell that some of the hustings had got “fairly rowdy” and had “alienated a minority and may have contravened equal opportunities legislation.” However, he added that many students feel “profoundly patronised” by the new move.

The controversy at Worcester has raised the question of appropriateness of hustings procedures within other JCRs. There is a concern among some that the culture surrounding hustings discourages students from running for JCR positions.

Maanas Jain, Worcester finalist, acknowledged a difficulty with hustings culture in the university. He said, “even if one member of the JCR doesn’t’t feel comfortable standing because of it, then there is something institutionally wrong with what’s happening.”

In an attempt to regulate the process, Rachel Cummings, OUSU VP Women, has produced a code of practice for hustings based upon the discussion among JCR Presidents.
The document recommends that the chair should disallow inappropriate questions at husts. It also proposes non-serious questions to be subject to a time limit. Among questions deemed inappropriate are those which include personal attacks, college gossip and sexual references. A ban on alcohol and nudity during hustings has also been suggested.

Many colleges are rethinking the structure of JCR hustings as concerns are pouring over the appropriateness of tasks to the positions.
St Peter’s has recently completed a major overhaul in the structure of hustings. JCR President Sanjay Nanwani explained that the college has “disallowed questions and tasks that may be deemed as humiliating, intimidating or unreasonable.”

However, despite the rule changes one second year student recounted, “Still, our entz rep candidate was asked by a third year ‘would you rather have sex with your dog whilst your dad watches, or with your dad whilst your dog watches?'”

Many have argued that the reason for livening up hustings is to encourage students to attend the meeting, which often suffer from a lack of interest. One Magdalen first year commented, “Our hustings are both uncontroversial and poorly attended”.

In St Anne’s college, the candidates for the JCR president have to fight to take each other’s shoes off. In last week’s St Catherine’s elections, those standing for the position of the president had to persuade staff at Oddbins to let them borrow a ladder. They then had to call the JCR President at another college to discover one controversial thing about them and about the current Catz President.

Roland Lasius, a candidate at St Catz for JCR President commented that such tasks “can play a healthy role in college politics”, yet warned that they “cannot become a merely entertainment commodity”. He said, “Good hustings would serve as the bedrock for an inviting, positive and productive JCR.”

Alex Bulfin stated that Univ JCR has sought to ensure that hustings are as “undaunting and as fun as possible”. He explained that the candidates for Bar Rep were asked to make, rather than down, cocktails for the rest of the JCR to sample.