Last Trinity, the Oxford Conservative Association (OCA) was rocked by allegations of racism after it emerged that racist jokes had been told during hustings.

Oriel student Nick Gallagher, then a member, was directly implicated in the scandal, accused of racism by the national press, and was the only member to be indentified and pictured in a Daily Mail article on the event after resigning from then-OUCA.

Speaking publically for the first time in a Cherwell exclusive interview, Mr Gallagher disputed the record of events appearing in the national press, claiming that his remarks had been taken out of context. He asserted that the joke made had been in relation to a discussion about freedom of speech, and that he had not uttered any racist punchline.

“The important thing to realise from the beginning is that the Proctors conducted a six week investigation into the hustings and found no reason to proceed against me, but did proceed against OUCA.”

He added, “I’m the only person who was at the hustings who is not under university interdict right now.”
Striking out at his former organisation, Gallagher claimed he had been pushed into resigning his membership.
“If I didn’t resign I would have been thrown out of the association with a press release branding me a racist. I was literally taken round the back by three of them and told this. Some of them were friends of mine, all of them knew what happened. It was an act of pure cowardice, they were afraid for their own political survival and nothing else.”

Gallagher recounted that members of the association who didn’t know him “judged on the basis of a slanderous story and a photograph that makes me look like a complete twit.”

Gallagher was pictured alongside a Daily Mail article on the controversy, wearing black tie and holding a glass of champagne. He alleges that he was approached by a Daily Mail reporter ostensibly writing a sympathetic piece about the event. According to Gallagher, the reporter then proceded to “twist what I said into an admission of guilt”, even adding a punchline which Gallagher claims he had never heard.

“The ironic thing is I’m not even a Tory, I’m the first kid in the history of my school to go to Oxford as an undergraduate, I know three adults in this entire country, I’m a practising Roman Catholic and an American of Irish descent – I’m hardly the image of Tory privilege.
Gallagher was also critical of the national Conservative party, branding the move to affiliate with OCA has “disgustingly political”.  He added, “The real disgrace is that right now, knowing all of this, knowing OUCA has been expelled from the University, the Conservative Party has decided to readmit the association when it has undertaken only the most cosmetic of changes.”

During the scandal, Andrew Griffiths (Chief of Staff to the Chair of the Conservative Party, Eric Pickles) called Gallagher and asked for his account of events.
Gallagher recalled, “He said that the party would make a decision before getting back to me. At around one in the morning the Daily Mail broke the story, at which point it became apparent that the Party had put out a press release defending itself and throwing me under a bus, telling the papers that I had been suspended – none of which they had seen fit to inform me of.”
Gallagher claims that he was taken by surprise by the media reaction.

“At the time the notion, as an outsider, that a twenty year old foreign kid saying something to a room of about twenty people would become national news seemed absolutely ludicrous to me.”

Turning to the accusations of racism levelled against him, Gallagher defended his remarks. Explaining his version of events, he stressed that his remarks were in contrast to OUCA’s long-standing tradition of telling inappropriate jokes.

“The candidates running for the position immediately before mine were asked, as is traditional at OUCA hustings, to tell a racist or offensive joke. In any event one of them did and there was an uproar, with half of the room shouting it was inappropriate, and the other half saying they’d always asked it in OUCA hustings, so why should they stop now? They were gabbled down, at which point it was my turn to speak.”

Mr Gallagher was due to take part in a discussion on freedom of speech – he claimed that it was in this context that he made the following remark: “Well, the atmosphere’s a little tense in here, why don’t I open with a joke?”

Admitting that following this, he said ‘What do you say when you see a television moving around in the dark?’, he was adamant that he never made any racial slur: “I never delivered the punchline.”

Mr Gallagher blames the interpretation of the joke on a lack of appreciation for its context. “It was in the middle of a discussion of freedom of speech”. He describes it as “the difference between showing hardcore pornography and discussing it in the context of female stereotypes in society.”

When asked why he hasn’t spoken up until now, Gallagher replied, “I didn’t want my response to this to occur in the dead of July when nobody at Oxford would be aware of it.”

Justifying his decision to speak to Cherwell, Gallagher says simply, “I see no reason why I should be crucified for the Conservative Party’s historical sins.”

Oxford has dropped out of running for the UK Capital of Culture in 2013. It has emerged this week that the city will instead be bidding for the UNESCO World Book Capital.

The decision not to compete to be the first UK Capital of Culture was made despite Oxford was on the shortlist of 29 cities. Oxford City Council cited lack of funding as one of the main reasons for the withdrawal. It was felt that Oxford “could not commit a large amount of money required for such a speculative bid and there was no funding attached if we received the City of Culture.” There was also uncertainty about what was required from the winning city and the Council felt that resources would be better directed towards the bid for the World Book Capital in 2014.

In order to qualify for the nomination, Oxford needs to convince a panel made up of UNESCO judges and representatives from the three major branches of the publishing industry that they have created a suitable programme of events to promote reading in the city.

Reactions to Oxford running for World Book Capital have been very positive. A spokesperson from the University of Oxford stated, “We are delighted that Oxford has been chosen as a potential candidate to become the World Book Capital. We look forward to working with our partners in the city to ensure Oxford is a serious contender.”

The Bodleian Library is also supporting the bid. A spokesperson commented, “Oxford’s libraries have made a major contribution to the book culture of the city for at least 800 years, and continue to play a key role in supporting the world class research and learning, publishing, reading and writing that take place in the city today.” There seems to be a consensus that the award would have a positive impact on the city, bringing recognition to Oxford as a centre of excellence.

Donna Clews, a co-ordinator of STIR, Oxford’s guided reading project, emphasised the importance of reading, drawing attention to the benefits of getting children excited about books at a young age. She said, “Winning this competition would place reading at the forefront of Oxford’s identity in a context not purely related to the university and I believe this won’t just result in a lot of excited students but will also increase literary engagement with people who live, work and grow up in Oxford.”

Alice Beckwith, a keen STIR volunteer, added, “I have seen first-hand the positive effect which reading has on children’s development and confidence. If Oxford were to be World Book Capital in 2014, it would be a massive boost to the community, involving everyone in a productive and fun activity.”

UNESCO World Book Capital is a relatively new prize, instigated in 2001 after the success of the World Book and the Copyright Day. The nomination does not include a financial award, it is “an exclusively symbolic acknowledgement of the best programme dedicated to books and reading.” The current World Book Capital is Beirut, its term began on April 23rd 2009, UNESCO World Book and Copyright Day, and will run for twelve months.

Members of the academic committee at Brasenose have questioned the validity of a JCR motion which voted against room privileges for scholars. In two meetings last term, 90% of students in attendance voted to remove the right of scholars to be placed top in the room ballot.
The motion, proposed by JCR president, Arvind Singhal, would have seen students who gained distinctions in last years’ prelims competing with commoners for less desirable accommodation. However, Brasenose SCR ruled that the decision was not representative of the student body, since only 50 students out of around 360 were in attendance.
The issue poses problems regarding the nature and effectiveness of JCR meetings, as Arvind Singhal said, “We do not normally have provisions for referenda [so] it could be a dangerous precedent to set.”
Following the controversy, it was decided last week that Brasenose students would be asked to vote on the issue by online survey. The survey received 149 responses, around half of the total undergraduate body, of which 52% were against room privileges for scholars.
Duncan Turnbull, outgoing Brasenose ball president said, “It is a highly boring debate which comes up every year because so many people are disappointed with coming near the bottom.”
Currently, precedence is given to the top four JCR committee positions with scholars and exhibitioners coming next, and finally commoners.
An examination of colleges who grant room privileges to first-class students shows that they are inversely associated with Norrington table rankings. With the exception of Christ Church, a number of colleges who award room privileges to scholars, including St Hilda’s and St Catz, have achieved consistently lower scores in the academic league table.
“A room is not enough of an incentive for people to work, they will only work if they want to”, commented one Brasenose student.
Colleges who allocate higher room draw positions to scholars are still in the minority, with the vast majority of colleges sticking with a random ballot system.
Concerns have been raised about the fairness of the system in the light of a large discrepancy in the allocation of distinctions across subjects. Examiners’ reports covering 2008 and 2009 show that while the number of students awarded a distinction in Chemistry prelims might reach 33.5%, only 11.7% of those studying Law and 9.5% of Medicine students were awarded top marks.
Hannah Cusworth, OULC co-chair elect and Brasenose student said, “Of course people who do well in exams should be rewarded by college but people are more likely to get firsts or distinctions in certain subjects than others.”
It has been suggested that one way out of the question for Brasenose would be to award incentives to scholars which do not work at the expense of other students – one option might be to pay for scholars’ gowns. Brasenose scholars are currently awarded £200, whilst exhibitioners receive £150.
No final decision has yet been made, but privileges will remain effective for scholars and relevant committee members taking part in the room ballot this Michaelmas. Questions remaining over the issue mean that Brasenose SCR is likely to reconsider both issues next year.

Second and third year students at Christchurch and Magdalen spiced up the formalities of Matriculation Day with light-hearted hijinks last week.

Christ Church freshers were dished up a veritable plate of sauciness as they assembled for their college photograph. One anonymous male student put all on display as he streaked across the college’s main quad and frolicked in the fountain – wearing nothing but a balaclava.

Meanwhile, two third-year students at Magdalen successfully re-matriculated at the Sheldonian Theatre and even appeared in the Magdalen 2009 photo.

It is an annual tradition for Christ Church’s older students to distract the freshers while they are photographed in subfusc. Last year, a large number of students staged a battle dressed up as pirates and zombies behind the cameraman. This year, besides the traditional dancing, freshers witnessed a naked man jumping into the Tom Quad fountain.

The student, whose identity is unknown, stormed onto the quad wearing swimming trunks to where some second year students had gathered around the fountain. He tantalised the assembled crowd with risque antics before removing his shorts and vaulting into the water before fleeing the scene.

A second-year student at Christ Church, described the scene. “One guy came out in swimming shorts and a balaclava from Fell Tower, ran toward the freshers, mooned them and ran across the quad for a bit. He then pulled his shorts off to gasping freshers, front flipped into the fountain, climbed out and legged it back through college – and didn’t get caught.”

Another student at the college described the incident as “a pretty graphic demonstration”. She added, “the deans described the students as ‘a very brave man'”.

Christ Church’s censors are reported to have given up the search for the perpetrator, owing to the difficulty in determining his identity, and disciplinary procedures are extremely unlikely.

However, the streaker was willing to give one comment to Cherwell anonymously, “The fountain was freezing.”

Meanwhile, Matthew Chan and Matthew Shribman, two third year undergraduates, successfully posed as first years in their college’s freshers’ photograph, then went unchecked as they accompanied freshers to the Sheldonian and infiltrated the matriculation ceremony.

The two students dressed up in sub-fusc, and Chan, who as Magdalen JCR Vice-President was helping with the administration of the freshers’ photo, wrote his and Shribman’s names on blank namecards and stood in the photo. They were already in position before they were noticed by the academic administrators.

Nobody queried either of the two students as they entered the Sheldonian Theatre, even though Chan was wearing a scholar’s gown and then underwent matriculation for the second time in their academic careers.

“We just walked in with everyone and nobody stopped us – they weren’t looking properly,” said Chan.

Reflecting on their rematriculation experience, Chan and Shribman said, “We created a space for the past to emerge amidst the smiling faces of the future… Rematriculation is not a prank. It is a repetition of a ritual, something profound, worshipful. Rematriculation is liturgy…Third years posing as first years, we have become something in between the two. Second years.”

College authorities were unavailable for comment on the issue.

Nathan Roberts, removed as Queen’s JCR President at the start of term, has been denied the right to appeal the college’s decision.

Earlier this week the Provost informed him that the Governing Body would not be hearing his appeal, which had been due to take place on Wednesday.
Elected during Trinity Term, Roberts was removed from his post by the college authorities after they deemed his prelims results unsatisfactory.
Reacting to the news Roberts said, “The Provost wrote to me explaining that he has decided I can only appeal expulsion or rustication. This is a seriously concerning decision.

“In unnecessarily refusing me an appeal he has said that the committee can make any decision it likes. It can force the student to give up sport, it can force the student to stop playing in the local youth band, it can force the student to walk around on his or her hands all day, and these actions are apparently beyond scrutiny or accountability.
“Despite implying to me that an appeal was certainly an option, the Provost has suddenly reversed his decision and in doing so undermined both the JCR and me.”
The Queen’s College informed Cherwell that they had no comment to make.
Last week thirty JCR presidents signed a statement of support for Roberts, offering their “complete confidence and support.”

OUSU President Stefan Baskerville today reaffirmed his support for Roberts. “The denial of Nathan’s right to appeal is wrong and unacceptable. Right of appeal is a very basic part of any fair disciplinary process, and the college’s claim that students may only appeal decisions to expel or rusticate them is a serious error of interpretation. I continue to support Nathan’s right to appeal the decision.”

Jesse Harber, St Hilda’s JCR President, said “I’m disappointed in the decision of the Queen’s SCR not to allow him to appeal – it sets a precedent that in the future will really short-change students who feel that they have been wronged. It’s a sad fact that disciplinary procedures vary wildly across colleges, and an unlucky student can find themselves being severely punished for something that is only a minor offense at another college. This is entirely separate to the issue of whether his original dismissal was acceptable. Whether a decision is correct or not, it should always (within reason) be allowed to be appealed.”

Owen Evans, St Anne’s JCR President, said that “Nathan has strong support among the JCR Presidents, and we will continue to support in any way we can.”
Duncan Cook, Jesus JCR President, has also given his support. He commented, “I believe all students should have the right to select their own extra-curricular activities.”
The Provost still has the option of reversing his decision, and Roberts is hopeful that he will do so. “There is no ‘harm’ in allowing me to argue my case, and I in fact think this most recent ruling is the most damaging of all.

“I understand a teddy-bear is standing in the upcoming presidential elections. Teddy will have my vote.”