A newly-formed group of Oxford students are calling upon the Chancellor, Vice-Chancellor and the five Pro-Vice-Chancellors to all cut their carbon emissions by 10% in 2010 in their personal capacity.

The group is part of 10:10 campaign, which is pushing the climate change agenda by asking for an ambitious but achievable 10% reduction in carbon emissions in 2010. Rather than focusing on distant long-term targets, 10:10 calls on individuals, institutions and businesses to take action now.

Dan Vockins, 10:10’s Campaign Manager,spoke at the 10:10 Oxhub event last Wednesday. He said he hoped that Oxford would follow the example set by other Universities who have already signed up. He said, “It’s easy to feel powerless in the face of a huge problem like climate change, but by uniting everyone behind immediate, effective and achievable action, 10:10 enables all of us to make a meaningful difference.”

Will McCallum, a student at Wadham commented, “While we will be putting this through the University’s standard governance system, it would take almost a year for it to work its way though. That is why we’re calling on the University’s representatives to take personal action to build the momentum to make the changes that are needed today.”

Jake Leeper, President of the Oxford Hub said, “With the Cabinet, Shadow-Cabinet, 150 other MPs as well as Oxford City Council all signed up, I think that it’s important that the leaders of our university also commit to act now. Oxford students have a great record of achieving change and pushing the University forward on important issues. 10:10 is a mainstream campaign, and with groups like Microsoft, B&Q and Pret a Manger, as well as the NUS pledging their support, the University’s key members shouldn’t be slow to act.”

Residents Associations in Oxford have claimed that students are keeping restaurants with poor health and safety records from going out of business by providing them with patronage. La Croissanterie, The Mission and Jamal’s are some of the restaurants that have received poor health and safety records.

Oxford City Council has been using the Scores on the Doors national public information service to publish the results of environmental inspection reports since June. The website uses a star-rating system to indicate the extent to which premises comply with food safety regulations.

Stephanie Jenkins, a member of one of Oxford residents’ associations said, “It’s a great pity that students don’t appear to be consulting the Scores on the Doors website, as they are keeping alive some dubious establishments which have received a pretty damning report from the city council.”

Businesses given a no-star rating show “almost total non compliance with obligations and poor management track record” whilst a five-star rating indicates an establishment with an “excellent record of compliance” and “high standards”.

Restaurants receiving between 2 and 5 stars are given a certificate to display on their premises.

La Croissanterie on George Street, which received no stars, said that students make up 25-30% of their clientele. When asked about their health and safety rating, a staff member commented, “I have no idea, I can’t answer that…but it doesn’t seem right to me.”

Café Opium, also on George Street, was another restaurant to receive no stars. Eddie Song, restaurant manager, estimated that in term time 60-70% of their clientele were students and said, “we get good feedback from customers”. In response to inquiries about their last health and safety report, he added, “on the website they gave us zero stars because of structural problems which I think is unfair.”
In May, Oisi Master Sushi bar on St Clement’s was closed down after two incidences of food poisoning were traced to the restaurant.

Policy procedure published by the Oxfordshire Better Regulation Group, which oversees implementation of the new ratings system, states that scores may not always be accurate as premises are not checked or rated between visits, even if they have been refurbished.

According to one council Environmental Inspection officer, “Inspections only represent a keyhole in time, one hour every 18 months and we don’t see what happens in between. The application of stars is based on inspections we could have carried out 18 months or 3 years ago , at which point we didn’t know they were going to be translated into scores on the doors.”

However, premises which have a very poor safety record are usually visited more frequently than those with a strong record of compliance, with even a one-star rating bringing a business “almost up to prosecution stage”.

Inspection officers use “experience” and a range of criteria to determine standards of cleanliness and how well the business is managed, including whether appropriate food safety systems are in place, food storage and the position of wash hand basins.

Jamal’s on Walton Street is another popular student restaurant that has been the subject of a damning council report. The tandoori, which is a regular haunt for students on socials and crew dates, has a no-star rating.

Leon Upton, a student at Pembroke commented, “Most people don’t really care about the food or the hygiene when going to Jamal’s or other curry houses…you go there because you’re allowed to bring your own booze and be noisy without getting kicked out.”

Ali Hydar, manager of Jamal’s, confirmed the popularity of his restaurant within the student community, commenting that during term time 70% of their trade comes from students. He described Jamal’s as “a traditional Indian restaurant which has been going for 22 years, loved by students and the local people of Jericho”. When asked about health and safety he said, “They did the rating before they inspected it….at the moment we’re a 3-star but it’s not on the website yet. We’ll be inspected in January and we have a letter saying we’re a 3-star.”

Another restaurant which has been a hit with students, but has a low rating, is The Mission on St Michael’s Street. The Mexican burrito bar qualified for a 2-star rating at the last inspection.

Stefan Cabrol, restaurant manager, said, “That rating was given when we had only just opened. Everything has been changed since and we are waiting for a new inspection now.” He added, “We have just opened up a new shop. Our success is the result of hard work and our customers obviously know that.”

When asked if the two-star rating would affect his perception of the restaurant, a Pembroke student dining in The Mission said, “It wouldn’t affect me coming back again, I like the food.”

It’s not all bad news for Oxford students, however, as fast food junkies among us will be pleased to hear that McDonald’s, KFC and Burger King all received exemplary 5-star ratings.

Twelve of Oxford’s colleges also benefit from the highest rating on the website, including Christ Church, where one 3rd year commented, “Christ Church upholds high standards, I would expect nothing less.”

Charlotte Gibney, Food and Housing officer at Hertford College, which received a 4-star rating said, “Students often have budgetary constraints to adhere to, and thus may choose to eat out in cheaper establishments. However high food and hygiene standards should be expected from any public eatery and people shouldn’t be afraid to kick up a fuss, no matter how much the meal costs.”

However, one 3rd year at Somerville commented, “It’s idealistic to expect high health and safety standards every time. A low rating would affect my view of a place, undoubtedly, but not for places like take-aways or kebab vans where I don’t expect the same standards as if I was eating out somewhere more formal.”

City councillor, John Tanner, encourages students to check the Scores on the Doors website and be more aware of where they’re dining. “Fortunately, from cosmopolitan Cowley Road to Oxford Castle and lots more, we have some excellent places to eat [but] we want tourists, students and residents to check the Scores on the Doors before they choose where to eat.”

www.scoresonthedoors.org.uk

Leaflets made by the student-run publication The Oxymoron were confiscated and banned from Freshers’ Fair last week.

Organisers were concerned that first year students would not realize that the publication, which included headlines such as ‘Rail replacement buses temporarily replaced by trains’, was satirical.

Jack Robinson, one of The Oxymoron’s editors said, “It’s the magazine-cover-style side that the Freshers’ Fair people took exception to, specifically the main article, the headline ‘Fall in JSoc membership blamed ‘on the Jews,” and the ‘Leper: Actually I’d rather be at Cambridge’ article.

“We left our supply of leaflets on the table the day before the fair, and came back in the morning to find a post-it note saying they’d had to take them away.”
The Oxymoron team was frustrated by the decision. “The guy organising it said something like ‘I know you’re being satirical, but we can’t really have these headlines in case someone takes them seriously.'”

Robinson considered the decision “pretty ridiculous – after all, we’ll be delivering copies to JCRs later this term and we’re very much of the opinion that freshers don’t need OUSU’s protection from satire.”

The Oxymoron has recently been nominated for the Magazine of the Year at the Guardian Student Media Awards for the quality of its humour.

Jake Leeper, Freshers’ Fair organiser explained his decision, “The Oxymoron’s material was removed after concerns were raised by a student as to whether it was immediately clear that the fliers they had on their stall were part of a satire magazine. With thousands of students passing through the Fair it is not always possible for them to stop and read in detail what each stall has to offer. The concern was that students would simply read the headlines and move on.”

However, George Waldersee, PPE fresher, described the move as “patronising”. He said, “This is so obviously satirical. Freshers should be able to tell the difference between satire and real life.”

Leeper said the incident had not been his decision alone. “The materials were removed only after I consulted with Eorann Lean, OUSU Vice-President. Later in the Fair the Oxymoron brought in a new publication that Stefan [Baskerville, OUSU President] said he was happy for them to have on display.”

One Jewish student, responding to the Jsoc reference, said they were not concerned by such material. Sebastian Grey, a student at Magdalen College said, “whilst it’s certainly true that people sometimes use ‘it was only a joke’ to disguise some highly unsavoury opinions, I think it’s clear that on this occasion it was anti-semitism rather than Judaism which was the butt of the joke. As a person of Jewish extraction I found it both sympathetic and hilarious.”

The Oxymoron continued to advertise at Freshers’ Fair. “We had to print off a load of new flyers to give out without the offending material, which was a pain,” said Robinson.

The Oxymoron was not the only student organization, which had trouble at the Freshers’ Fair. A number of societies were refused a stall because they failed to fill out their risk assessment form.

Andrew Griggs, a representative from the skydiving society explained, “We’d hoped that we could get a stall at Freshers’ Fair as we are a new society – just starting out in March.” The society was rejected because of a lack of proper documentation.

Griggs admitted, “It may threaten the existence of the club.” However he went on, “Ultimately the bureaucracy is there for a reason, and we wholly understand its necessity.”

The Oxford University Morris Men were also not allowed to attend; their bagman Gerard Robinson described how “bureaucracy got the better of us this year”. They registered with the proctors in the 1950s and have not been to Freshers’ Fair in about 25 years. They had not realized that the rules about what paperwork was required had changed. He said it was “a shame”.

Oxford University has released sample interview questions to cast light onto the applications process in an effort to broaden access.

The list, compiled by the office of Admissions, is gathered from interviewers across all colleges and disciplines. Questions range from “If you were to save either rainforests or coral reefs, which would you save?” in Biological sciences to “Why it might be useful for an English student to read the ‘Twilight’ series?” in English.

Mike Nicholson, Director of Undergraduate Admissions justified the list, “We are keen to show the reality of an admissions interview at Oxford. Many myths persist about Oxford interviews, but these questions show there are no trick questions, no special knowledge is required, and there are no ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ answers.”

Helen Swift, a Modern Languages interviewer at St Hilda’s said that she would ask a question, “What is laguage?”. She explained, “Although I would never launch this question at a candidate on its own, it might grow out of a discussion. Students sometimes say they like studying Spanish, for example, because they ‘love the language’. In order to get a student thinking critically and analytically, the question would get them to consider what constitutes the language they enjoy – is it defined by particular features or by function (what it does)? How does form relate to meaning? And so on.”

Ben Ellis, a second year historian at St John’s commented, “I was asked questions like, ‘What is the value of popular history, like Andrew Marr’s books? Do you think that British history is more important than European history? Why should it be taught?’ I think they were fair: the questions were about things that we should have had an opinion on.”

Zoe Hallam, a second year PPEist, does not believe releasing interview questions is sufficient to counter the Oxford myths, “Publishing interview questions doesn’t stop people not liking Oxford as it doesn’t tell you about life at Oxford. There are a lot more aspects to being at university here.”

A recent spate of television programmes featuring the classic Oxford stereotypes have caused concern within the University over the effects this will have on broadening access.

In spite of efforts to broaden Oxford’s appeal, the University’s attempts to project a modern and inclusive image have been hampered by a batch of recent television programmes feeding off Oxbridge myths. ITV2’s new drama, Trinity, is set at the fictional Bridgeford University, where the characters and situations in the programme are based around traditional stereotypes about Oxbridge. Channel 4’s “When Boris Met Dave” examines the lives of David Cameron and Boris Johnson when they were at Oxford together in the 1980s, focussing on their time in the Bullingdon Club.

A spokesperson from the University commented, “The high profile given to the Bullingdon club in the national press is a concern to the University, since it disproportionately focuses on the activities of a very tiny number of students, who are in no way representative of the overwhelming majority. The collegiate University spends £2.8m a year on outreach activities, many of which aim to break down stereotypes and misconceptions about Oxford, and many of which involve current students, who are the best representatives of Oxford’s diversity.”