Controversy has erupted at the Oxford Union over the decision by members of staff to implement a costly security project without the knowledge of the society’s President or the authorisation of Standing Committee.

The committee gave their approval to the principle of a new security system being installed in response to a series of incidents.

However, at the end of Trinity Term, a special adjournment motion was levelled to prevent the implementation of a standing committee decision until it had been debated by the chamber this term.

During the Summer Vacation, staff at the Oxford Union hired contractors and began work on the security system, which would require new membership cards to gain access to the buildings during open hours.

The Senior Treasurer, Mr. Stephen Dixon, admitted that it was he who had originally set plans in motion by consulting with the Oxford Literary and Debating Union Trust (OLDUT), the charitable association of old members which owns the Union Buildings and funds modifications.

He had advised the Bursar, Ms. Lindsey Warne, who is also employed by the society, that such a system should be implemented, and the work began without the knowledge of members when the President, James Dray, was away from Oxford. On his return to Oxford the President requested that it be immediately halted.

“I was informed that the Bursar had been advised by the Senior Treasurer, after consultation with fellow trustees, that the gates should be installed. In light of the Special Adjournment Motion (SAM) submitted on 25 June 2009 I have instructed the Bursar to immediately cease installation,” he said in a statement to the members.

Some members were angered by the unauthorised installation, which they felt to be against the democratic principles of the society, including Daniel Johnson, who had brought forward the special adjournment motion.
“The ultimate power [of the society] lies with the members via termly elections and the chamber. [The Bursar] has shown that she does not have the least respect for that.

“She was present in the meeting of Standing Committee where you announced the SAM and explained its impact, and yet never raised it with you,” he said in a letter to the President, in which he called for an investigation.
“Quite simply, we can have no faith in her ability to partake in the administration of the Society.”

The Senior Treasurer emphasised his commitment to the members of the society, but conceded that he had advised the work to go ahead before being put to the membership.

“I agreed that the system would not be activated until after the SAM had been resolved, such that members would continue to have free access to the premises exactly as in the past until after the members had voted. If anyone is to be held responsible then I accept such responsibility, but will strongly defend my decision,” he said in a statement.

However, many members of the Standing Committee were angered by the actions of the Bursar and the Senior Treasurer, especially as the President had not been consulted.

“It surprises me that charitable money was sunk into a project that might not have been used,” said Aled Richards-Jones, Chairman of Consultative Committee, in Monday’s meeting. Standing Committee voted that the work had been in breach of the SAM, and therefore had contravened the rules of the society.

The Bursar conceded that informing the President of the implementation of the system had “slipped her mind”, and made no further comment.
The Union rule book makes no clear reference to the position of staff in such a situation.

One member commented, “Union insiders were openly questioning whether the Bursar’s actions could lead to further consequences and whether this, coming at the end of a string of similar acts, might be the final straw.
“It is unclear at this time whether Standing Committee has the right to dismiss the bursar.”

However, The Senior Treasurer rejected any such notion. “Any attempt to remove the Bursar over this matter will result in an external tribunal at which I will strongly support the Bursar who has acted in the interests of the Union throughout.”

James Dray agreed that there had been controversy over the staff’s actions. “Over the past five days a number of allegations have been levelled against various members of staff with regards to the installation of a security system at the St Michaels Street entrance of the Oxford Union.

At a meeting yesterday, standing committee agreed that a special adjournment motion had been breached.

Oxford City Council is launching a new voluntary landlord accreditation scheme, intended to raise the quality of rented accommodation. It is hoped this will help potential tenants to identify landlords and agents who are dedicated to providing a good standard of housing and service.

The Council’s City Executive Board approved the principal of the scheme and is currently in consultation with landlords, letting agents and tenant groups to outline the details of its implementation. The accreditation will act as a “stamp of approval” and allow the Council, as well as organisations such as OUSU, to share information on landlords who have agreed to meet the obligations of the voluntary certification. 

Labour Councillor Ed Turner, Board Member for Strategic Housing, said of the scheme: “I think students will welcome being given information on which landlords have signed up to our code of best practice.  We are determined to raise standards in privately rented housing.”

The plan sets out minimum standards of safety, contractual and service delivery that tenants can expect landlords to meet when initially renting the property, as well as throughout their lease. In addition, landlords would attend a compulsory training day. Safety certificates would need to be provided for all properties in their care.

The council enter into further discussions with landlords and letting agents in October, primarily through questionnaires. A Landlords’ Forum will also be held later in the month and the scheme may be modified to reflect any further issues raised.

Over 25 per cent of the general housing stock in the city is composed of rented accommodation. A large portion of the accommodation is taken up by students living out.

Stefan Baskerville, OUSU President, said: “Students often pay huge rents for properties which have problems with mould, security or disrepair. We’ve had several meetings over the summer with the city council about the accreditation scheme, and we’ll be helping them launch it in the new year. The scheme will help to clamp down on dodgy landlords and improve the quality of housing which students rent in the private sector.”

Not everyone believes it will clamp down on inefficient or dishonest landlords. Many Liberal Democrats have called it a “toothless” version of a proposal put forward by their party in February 2008.

Steve Goddard, a Lib Dem parliamentary campaigner for Oxford East, called it “a limp-wristed response from an administration that hasn’t grasped the severity of the problem. This incident sends a clear message: the Lib Dems are good for tenants, Labour are good for dodgy landlords.”

The Lib Dems’ proposal would have lowered the number of occupants required to be living within a house before Houses of Multiple Occupancy (HMO) licensing was required. This would have meant many smaller rented accommodations would have had to be brought up to the same standards as larger ones before being licensed.

The proposal was intended to provide a safeguard against landlords who would purposefully lower occupant numbers in order to avoid the licensing process. One example of such an occurrence was cited in the original proposal application, where a fifth occupant had been requested to vacate a property in Harefields by the landlord, allegedly to avoid the need to licence the property as an HMO.

The proposal met with heavy resistance from landlords and agents, however, who claimed that the costly HMO licensing would hit those who genuinely strived to meet the criteria far harder than the dishonest ones.

Elizabeth Brogan, Senior Policy Officer for the National Landlords Association, was quoted at the time as saying: “The irresponsible [landlords] will continue to get away with overcrowding their houses, maximising their income and failing to comply with safety standards.”

Labour deny any connection between the two schemes, citing the record number of successful prosecutions against landlords who failed to meet national standards as proof of its dedication to tackling with dishonesty in letting property.

Turner said of the accusation: “We fully intend to progress both landlord accreditation and licensing of houses in multiple occupation to raise standards; the Lib Dems only proposed one tool. I think students will welcome being given information on which landlords have signed up to our code of best practice. ”
Turner challenged the Liberal Democrats to provide some consistency in their message, adding, “In Parliament, Sarah Teather MP, as Lib Dem housing spokesperson, said there was a “danger of over-regulation” of privately rented housing, so perhaps Oxford’s Lib Dems could try getting their own side on board first.”

Oxford residents gathered last week to call for a halt to the rise of “student ghettos” in the city.

Several residents’ associations from across Oxford met at All Saints Church in Headington, where together they called on the Universities, the city and county councils and Oxfordshire Primary Care Trust to join together to fight the problem of “studentification”.

Residents complained that students are noisy, host loud parties, throw up on the street and even occasionally have sex on the bonnets of cars. Stephanie Jenkins of the Central North Headington Residents’ Association claims the late night noise caused by students “destroys people’s sanity”.

Students were further criticised for failing to maintain cleanliness of their surroundings. Jenkins said, “The heaps of student rubbish everywhere are the one thing that depresses everyone, even if they don’t live near students.” Parking also poses a serious problem to residents as students park on residential streets and fail to move their cars for weeks on end.

Elizabeth Mills, chairman elect of the Divinity Road Area Residents’ Association, said many long-term residents in East Oxford feel they are living in “studentified ghettos”, where they are a small minority. Mills claims only eight houses on Divinity Road are occupied by full-term residents.

In response to residents’ complaints about “studentification”, Dr Anne Gwinnett, Director of Corporate Affairs at Oxford Brookes University, who also chairs residents’ meetings held in the Headington area said, “Oxford Brookes is aware that some residents have a number of concerns linked to the impact of students in the community and is keen to work with those residents to clarify issues.” She said Brookes wants to “ensure our students make a positive contribution to their communities.” Oxford City Council and Oxford University have not taken the opportunity to comment.

Eorann Lean, OUSU VP for Charities and Community, said, “The solution to ‘studentification’ is to not think of it like that. It’s important that students are integrated into the community and treated as residents of Oxford, with the same responsibilities to put their bins out on time and warn neighbours about parties beforehand rather than a separate group… There are some bad neighbours that happen to be students, but there are also bad neighbours who aren’t.” She added, “The most effective way of improving relations is simply to get to know your neighbours.”

Oxford students living in the local community are often detached from the local life around them. One Oxford student living in the Cowley area admitted, “We don’t know our neighbours and have nothing to do with the local community.” However, some students volunteer for local schools and charities, such as Jacari.

Jake Leeper, a student living in Jericho, said, “I think it’s a shame that it’s often only the bad aspects of student behaviour that get recognised. There are already hundreds of students who volunteer in Oxford and who realise that they’re not just University students but are part of an Oxford community instead. Their volunteering helps to create a positive view of Oxford students and I think that it’s important that community volunteering continues to grow so that Oxford’s residents can see that students care about the city that they live in.”

Many residents consider student exploitation by landlords a contributing factor to making areas of Oxford appear run-down. Councillor David Williams claims some property owners are “only interested in packing in as many as possible and doing as few repairs as they must.”

Most of the residents’ complaints were directed towards Brookes students. There are fewer Oxford students living in rented accommodation in the area and many Oxford students living out are housed in accommodation owned by colleges, meaning local residents have a point of contact in case of disturbances.

Residents are calling on Brookes to reduce the number of students living in privately owned properties and to build new facilities further outside of the city centre. Some suggest Brookes should employ night-time wardens in order to control anti-social behaviour and discourage students from bringing cars to Oxford.

Cllr Williams argues the Universities should “help disperse the student population more evenly across the City” and urges students and locals alike to “work together to avoid a Town and Gown divide.”

The residents’ meeting followed the rejection of Brooks’ plans to expand and modernise their Gipsy Lane Campus.

The scheme was halted when Oxford City councillors voted 20 – 13 against the £150 million redevelopment of the site, despite planning officers giving the scheme the go-ahead for approval. The rejection was a surprise victory for local residents.

Mills said the expansion plans went against the “interests of the local community” and added that Brookes has been “riding roughshod over concerns of local residents for years.”

Cllr Williams, himself a graduate of Brookes University, was pleased the redevelopment was thrown out, claiming the new building would have been “massive and overbearing”. He said Brookes needs a building “that has a ‘wow’ factor, something to be proud of. Architecture speaks volumes about what goes on inside…what is needed is something that says…This is a first class world renowned University.”

Brookes were disappointed that the plans fell through. Paul Large, Acting Registrar of Oxford Brookes University, said Brookes had “listened to residents’ complaints carefully” since planning began in 2005 and that following the decision made by city councillors, Brookes would now consider its “next course of action.” Oxford Brookes is trying to replace old buildings from the 50s and 60s and consider it “very important that our facilities match our reputation as a leading university.”

Professor Andrew Hamilton has taken up his post as the 296th vice-chancellor of the University and laid out some important changes he wants to make in Oxford.

Hamilton particularly wants to improve financial aid with more generous bursaries and scholarships for students applying to Oxford. As the government reduces spending on higher education, the new vice-chancellor believes universities must find other ways of improving funds, including more co-operation with industry and raising tuition fees.

Hamilton has spent the last 28 years working in ivy-league institutions in the United States, including both Princeton and Yale, and has a very impressive track record for fundraising.

He wants Oxford alumni to give more to “ensure future students will have the same opportunities that they had when they were here.”

In the face of the current economic climate, and given funding cuts proposed by the government Hamilton has admitted, “financial sustainability is, without any question, going to be one of the biggest challenges for us.”

OUSU have welcomed Hamilton’s promises saying, “Higher donations will help fund new facilities and Oxford’s exceptional quality of teaching while also making the university’s financial position more stable.”

Jonny Medland, Access and Academic Affairs Officer for OUSU, agrees that the priority should be attracting the best and the brightest regardless of their background. However, he does not see tuition fees as the way forwards. “Raising fees will undermine all the outreach work which Oxford does at the moment, and contribute to the fear of debt which we know discourages young people from applying to university,” he said.

Stefan Baskerville, President of OUSU, supported Medland’s comments. “Fees are not the way forward. The students of Oxford have voted for a fairer and more sustainable system to fund higher education: a graduate contribution scheme. We challenge the University in the coming months to think creatively about the options available for funding higher education, and we look forward to engaging them constructively in that debate.”

Alumni do already donate significant amounts to the University. One student who participated in college alumni phone trawls seeking donations claims former students are “generally positive” and “happy to give”. However, he agreed that the system could be improved.

One St. Hilda’s student said, “I have enjoyed my time at Oxford and as soon as I have enough money I will be happy to give to help future students.”
Another student admitted, “I would only give money if Oxford had helped me become successful. If I struggle to find a good job after graduating, I will definitely have different priorities.”

Two male students, separated while kissing in an Oxford nightclub on Friday night, have expressed anger at what they felt was “homophobic” treatment by an Oxford nightclub bouncer. The club manager is insisting that the incident was not an issue of homophobia and stated that the club does not discriminate against anyone.

In a letter of complaint to the club, one of the students gave his account of what he viewed as “a shocking, and indeed traumatic experience,” which began when he was “pushed away” from his boyfriend by a bouncer while kissing him. Upon questioning the bouncer, the students were asked to discuss the matter in a stairwell.

“I asked again what I was doing wrong,” the student said. “He told me that ‘four girls’ had complained about me kissing my boyfriend and that this was something I should ‘do in private, not in public’. At this point I was so outraged that I got quite upset. I asked for his name, which is a piece of information we are surely entitled to, and he refused to give it to me. I felt entirely helpless.”

The club does not have a reputation for objecting to kissing on its premises. One regular visitor said, “There are always people getting off with each other and I’ve never heard of the management intervening before.” Last year, Kukui was criticised for hosting naked KY jelly wrestling event.

One friend of the pair who witnessed the incident said she had seen the bouncer separating the kissing couple and also claims to have heard the bouncer’s “not in public” comment. The student, also from St Hilda’s, expressed outrage at the incident adding, “In a place like Oxford, you expect better.”

Another witness to the proceedings said she had seen the boys being pushed apart and was “very shocked”. She said there was no way a complaint could have been made about the boys in the time they had been kissing, because it was only a “matter of seconds” before the bouncer split them up. She considered the way the couple were being treated “outrageously”.

The angered students then went to find the duty manager. In his letter of complaint, the student went on to describe how the manager told him to “go back into the club ‘to enjoy myself’. Feeling aggrieved and ignored, I told him I would go and get the bouncer for him.” However, the student claims the bouncer refused to accompany him.

Mr Steven Tingle, the General Manager of Kukui insisted, “This club does not discriminate against anyone.” He agreed the pair had approached the manager, but stated that they were reassured they were not being removed from the club. Mr Tingle said it was only when they subsequently became aggressive to staff members that they were removed.

Mr Tingle stated, “These two gentlemen were not asked to leave the club for kissing. They approached the manager on the front door and made allegations that they were being ejected from the club. The manager reiterated to them on several occasions that they were not being ejected from the club and [they] were told to go back inside the club and enjoy their evening.” He claimed that the students “went back inside but refused to calm down and were subsequently ejected for their aggressive behaviour towards the staff.”

After leaving the club, the angry students reported the incident to some police officers. One of the police officers fetched the bouncer and brought him to talk through their grievances. In his letter of complaint, the student claims, “At one point in the conversation I asked the bouncer ‘would you have done this to a heterosexual couple?’ to which he bluntly responded ‘No’.” This claim has been supported by another witness.
The incident was discussed at a meeting between OUSU representatives, JCR presidents and the Kukui management on Monday.

Jesse Harber, JCR President of St Hilda’s College commented, “Kukui, OUSU and I had a very constructive meeting. It’s clear to me that this is not an issue of homophobia on the part of Kukui and that Kukui is committed to providing a good time to the students of this university. I am also looking forward to working on this formal procedure for students to bring their grievances to clubs.”

A joint statement issued after the meeting described the incident as “regrettable”. It said that Kukui welcomed “all students regardless of sexual orientation” adding that the club has “a single standard for what is considered appropriate expressions of affection.”
However, they added that they “could have made it clearer how the students could have brought their grievances forward.”

The statement also emphasised that Kukui will be reiterating to its staff the existing policies on non-discrimination and acceptable behaviour within the club.

Oxford students face the highest weekly living costs in the UK, a study has found.

The Student Living Index, released annually by NatWest, found that an average week in the city costs students £238.38. Birmingham offers the lowest weekly living cost, at £171.14.

The cities were ranked according to calculations made using average local weekly student expenditure and average local weekly income for working students. This suggests that the figure could be skewed by the fact that Oxford students do not get jobs during term time, unlike students from Oxford Brookes. Students at the city’s main university may therefore face higher living costs than this figure suggests.

While London students receive a larger maintenance loan than students in the rest of the country, which can amount to up to £4,988 per year, Oxford students receive no such subsidy, despite enduring the highest living costs.

Owen Evans, St Anne’s JCR President, expressed concern at the findings, “Worryingly, the data published by Natwest indicates that the average annual cost of living in Oxford is £5,721.12, which renders the full maintenance student loan of £3,564 pitifully insufficient.

“I feel that this problem is of greatest concern for the silent majority of Oxford students, who fall into the bracket between those who qualify for a grant and Oxford Opportunity Bursary, and those whose parents can fully support them through university. It is these students who compile the most debt and feel the squeeze of battels, fees and living costs greatest. This issue urgently needs addressing, especially with talk of a hike in the cost of tuition fees.”

Fortunately, for those in receipt of the Oxford Opportunity Bursary, the apparently high cost of living in Oxford isn’t always felt. Natalie Theodoulou, a second year chemist, feels that she is adequately covered by it, “Compared to other places in the country Oxford is very expensive, however, I am fortunate enough for the university to provide me with a bursary which makes it a lot easier!”

There are even some who do not receive a Bursary who feel that Oxford is not as expensive as the study claims. “I’ve never really thought of it as being too expensive,” said Paddy Unwin, a second year mathematician. “I get by okay.”

There is, however, by no means a consensus on this issue. Olly Richards, a historian from St. Anne’s commented, “Oxford is certainly a very expensive place to live, and to live within a reasonable budget requires substantial concessions to be made. If a student were forced to live out they would either have to live in the prohibitively expensive Jericho or the inconvenient Cowley.

“An extension of the student loan [as for London students] should be considered, especially as this is a very low risk option as Oxford has one of the highest post-university employment rates in the country.”

Last week, the University’s new Vice-Chancellor Professor Andrew Hamilton called for higher bursaries to prevent poorer students being priced out of university.
“We must take great care not to fail the students [by] allowing a degradation of the quality of education that is provided by the great universities of Great Britain,” he said. “But also not to fail them in the commitment that the great universities must make to any student who has the academic credentials, the academic potential to attend. The commitment that we must make to them [is] that they will attend Oxford irrespective of their economic circumstances.

“Oxford has a very generous bursary offer, but obviously as this debate unfolds we’ve got to reinforce that and quite frankly improve it.”

An Oxford professor has been accused of hacking into the private computer correspondence of a member of staff.

Dr. Cecile Deer, an academic specialising in the political economy of education, claims that her Balliol college e-mail account was unlawfully accessed by her ex-doctorate supervisor Professor Geoffrey Walford, after she accused him of sexual discrimination.

Deer made the accusations after Professor Walford, a fellow of Green Templeton College, refused to give her a reference for a job application. Deer claims that his decision was influenced by the fact that she had previously sued the University in 2008 for sexual discrimination.

Deer won an out of court settlement with the University last year after they excluded her from the women’s football team. She claimed that she was excluded because having three young children made her an “unreliable player”.

She has now sued Professor Walford and the Chancellors, Masters and Scholars of the University for sexual discrimination again at a hearing that is taking place in Reading, saying that Walford’s decision not to issue a reference must have been influenced by discussions in the faculty about the previous hearing.

Natasha Joffe, representing Dr. Deer, said that her client believed negative remarks must have been made about her in the department.

She also claims that, when a questionnaire was sent to Professor Walford regarding the sexual discrimination accusation, he hacked into her email account to help him answer the questions. She holds that one of Walford’s answers must have been aided by private information found in her correspondence, including exchanges between herself and another referee for the job application.

However, the University claim that Professor Walford asked for a list of Deer’s academic publications since she completed her doctorate and having seen the list decided she was not suitable for the job.

According to Jane McCafferty, a representative of Oxford University, he then explained to Dr. Deer that this was the reason he would not provide her a reference.

She added that Professor Walford knew little about the previous case, saying that when he was asked about it Walford replied, “I know virtually nothing other than it was something to do with football.”

McCafferty said at the hearing that there had been little contact between Dr. Deer and Professor Walford since 2000, when Walford ceased to be Deer’s doctorate supervisor.

McCafferty suggested that Deer’s allegations have “little chance of success”, adding that claims made were “most serious”.

Judge Louise Chudleigh has decided that Dr. Deer must pay a deposit of £100 if she is to proceed with both of her allegations.

She told Dr. Deer to “reflect on each aspect of the issues she is trying to establish”, adding, “I’m not saying she has no prospect of success, I’m saying she has little prospect of success.”

Many thousands of students across the country are still waiting for their student finance applications to be processed.

The Student Loans Company has received a record number of requests for loans this year, a 16% increase on 2008, and has been unable to process them in time for the start of many universities’ academic years.

One Magdalen College second year explained, “I will not be receiving my student loan until January, and I think it’s appalling. I am fortunate enough to be able to live of savings until then, but it’s such a pain to have to have to re-organise my finances. I can’t imagine how disruptive it must be for those who have to find other means.”

Niall Igoe, a St Anne’s student whose loan wasn’t paid until Christmas last year added, “they do seem ridiculously disorganised”.

A spokeswoman for the SLC told Cherwell, “This year we have received a record number of applications and calls and an unprecedented number of late applications – 120,000 over a four week period. However, already more than 750,000 students have had their applications for funding approved.”

She further explained, “We have put in place a number of measures for students to follow the progress of their applications and to address the problems some people have had trying to get through to our customer advisers. These include additional telephone lines, additional staff and directing customers to the website to find answers to common queries.”

Ralph Seymour-Jackson, chief executive of the SLC, apologised to those affected saying, “The problems with phone lines are real. We’re not pretending any different. Students are struggling to get through and we can’t pretend otherwise. For that we apologise unreservedly and ask people to use the website as much as they can.”

He claimed that an unprecedented rise in late applications, caused in part by the recession, had caused the delays. He said, “We are telling out staff they can have all the overtime they want. But the applications are unprecedented.”

Wes Streeting, the President of the National Union of Students, has strongly criticised the SLC for the problems, “I’m absolutely furious at the bizarre claim of the head of Student Finance England, Ralph Seymour-Jackson, that delays to the payment of loans to 50,000 students are ‘reasonable’.

“Tell that to the students I’ve spoken to who are panicking about how to pay rent, pay bills and pay for food. He must have been speaking live from Cloud Cuckoo Land!”

OUSU President Stefan Baskerville has been working to ensure that Oxford students will not struggle until late loans arrive. He commented, “OUSU has been in contact with the University Funding Office and has advised common room presidents on the situation. Some students may begin term short of funding for reasons outside of their own control, and will be looking to colleges for support and assistance. Colleges should be sensitive to the difficulties that some students will face, and flexible with regard to battels payments until full funding comes through.”

Pauline Linières-Hartley, Wadham College Bursar, confirmed that the college was ready to respond to loan delays, “Students have been asked to let us know if they are having problems so that we can arrange deferral of payment where this is necessary.”

Chris Wigg, treasurer at St Anne’s College offered a similar response, “If a student is relying on a student loan for funding and has applied properly and timely but has not received the loan due to problems with the loan company, then of course we will make allowance for this in settlement of college accounts.”

This is the first year that the SLC has handled applications directly. Previously they were handled by local authorities. David Willetts, the Conservative shadow skills secretary, pointed out that the new system “did not appear to be working properly”.

Colleges and departments across the University are preparing for a second wave of the H1N1 virus predicted to hit the country in the autumn.

Estimates suggest that during the peak period of infection anywhere between 15-35% of university staff could be away from work as a result of having contracted the virus, or in order to care for sick family members.

The University is currently in ‘red 3 pandemic’, the highest alert stage possible. The move into phase 3 was made over the summer after the first cases of swine flu in the Oxfordshire area were confirmed. The first case of swine flu in the University itself happened in early June, when a postgraduate student contracted the H1N1 virus while on a visit to Arizona. Since then several other cases have been reported.

The University is unwilling to give out exact figures for the number of Oxford students and staff that have been diagnosed with the illness. They commented, “We do not think it would be helpful to provide a running commentary on a situation which is constantly changing.”
Colleges are also keen to avoid putting a number on how many of their students have or are predicted to catch swine flu. According to a statement from Balliol college “because there will be no way of telling whether any flu outbreak is swine flu, ‘freshers’ flu or a seasonal strain, it will be impossible to report back with any accuracy.”

As part of its preparations for a second wave of infection, the University has released a Pandemic Planning Framework (PPF) document, outlining the establishment of a Pandemic Planning Team, headed by prominent members of the University.

Many colleges have followed suit, setting up their own Flu Pandemic Committees. According to a representative at St. Peters College, “The college has a pandemic flu contingency planning committee – the committee has already met to ensure we are prepared for Michaelmas Term.” Other colleges have also confirmed that they are stocking up on face masks and gloves in preparation for the new term.

Some colleges have also been working with the JCR and MCR student bodies to try to contain infection rates, with networks of student ‘flu buddies’ being set up in order to maintain communications with other students should they fall ill.

“We have a ‘flu buddy’ system in place should anyone become sick with swine flu and need to be in isolation for a few days,” explained James Nation, JCR President for Merton College, who is confident in his college’s response to the flu pandemic.

“Merton College has been in contact with its students regarding the swine flu virus….We have been given assurances that College are suitably prepared should any staff member become ill.”

“Teaching might be disrupted if swine flu were to affect a significant proportion of students and staff this term,” said the representative from St. Peters, “In such an extreme case it may be necessary to vary term times and examination dates.”

Balliol has already set up ‘business continuity plans’ to make sure “essential functions and communications within college” are maintained in the face of a significant number of staff shortages. The college said it would be looking to the University “to advise if and when teaching should be suspended.”

According to its website, the University expects there to be a three to four month period during which it will need to continuously review the threat to its activities, and to adapt its operations and its plans accordingly.

“In a worst case scenario, when closure of certain operations of the University is under consideration, decisions may need wider publicity,” read a statement in the University’s PPF. In such situations the University would consider using local media, such as BBC Oxford and Fox FM, to communicate information about the status of the University to the wider community.

Many students are already voicing concern over the possible disruptions to their education that a second wave of swine flu might bring.

“Would we all just be sent home?”, asked a student from Hertford College, “That would be the sensible thing, college wouldn’t be where you would want to be.”
She added, “After all, they shut Oxbridge during the black death.”

A representative from Balliol college said, “The one thing we will be stressing to all freshers next week is, should they feel ill they should not go to inductions, and to reassure them that they will not miss anything.”
For now it’s business as usual for Oxford, “The University is continuing to operate as normal while, at the same time, remaining alert to any students or staff exhibiting flu-like symptoms.”

Oxford University Liberal Democrats will be using their stall at Freshers’ Fair to recruit the environmentally-minded amongst the new students.

For any student who signs up to the society for £1 at the Freshers’ Fair, the organisation will contribute to a reforestation project in Kenya. The aim is to offset the equivalent carbon dioxide emitted per person in an average week.

Mark Mills, Liberal Democrat councillor, OULD member and student of St. Edmund Hall is enthusiastic about the scheme, commenting, “People know that the Lib Dems care about the environment, and this is a practical chance to do something about it.”

The Green Freshers’ Week scheme is organised by Liberal Youth, the young people’s branch of the Liberal Democrats. The campaign is being implemented in roughly one hundred universities around the country. In addition to the offsetting initiative, every branch involved receives an environmental campaign pack containing bright green ‘switch it off stickers’ to be stuck next to light switches and appliances.

With the original goal of registering seven hundred new members to the party, the organisation has already exceeded its target. According to Joe Rinaldi Johnson, Vice-Chair Campaigns for Liberal Youth, Liverpool reported an almost 600% increase in new members compared to last year, with Glasgow, LSE and Reading reporting similar increases.

“These figures confirm a national trend,” said Johnson, “By joining Liberal Youth, students can choose to have a clear environmental conscience during the Freshers Week festivities.”

The scheme is not without its critics, however, with many seeing it as a green-wash for the Lib Dems, or an attempt to use climate change to draw freshers into party politics. One Magdalen student described it as “conscience-salving at best, conscience-exploitation at worst”.

Mae Penner, chair of the Environment and Ethics committee, warned that “providers of carbon offsets have often been shown to have flawed systems of calculation, which don’t take into account the permanence of offset projects or their own carbon footprints.”

She also expressed concern of over the choice of Kenya for the reforestation, “There are many concerns with such projects which can reduce biodiversity and contravene indigenous land rights.”

Penner emphasised, however, that these should not be a problem as long as the scheme has been thoroughly researched adding, “It is certainly positive that the Liberal Youth are trying to address the desire of young people to live more environmentally-considerate lives.”

Johnson remains emphatic about the scheme stating, “Environmentalism is a cornerstone of Liberal Democrat policy. We are the only major party today that is serious about climate change. We have been consistently ahead of the curve on environmental issues. [We] would take the tough steps necessary to build a new green economy based upon sound environmental principles.”