The Government has this week announced plans for a National Internship Scheme to help graduates facing the toughest job market in a generation.

John Denham, the Skills Secretary, said that the scheme would incorporate up to three months’ paid work experience. He revealed that four well-known companies, including Microsoft and Barclays, have agreed to take part.

While the internships will not pay a full salary, pay levels will be set slightly above the combined total that a student would earn in that time from a grant and a loan. This means that the interns’ income will not suffer.

The minister justified the scheme saying, “they [new graduates] will be a very big group. We can’t just leave people to fend for themselves.” He added that he hopes the placements will lead to permanent positions. He said, “at the end they will be more employable, and some of them will get jobs.”

The director of the Oxford University Careers Service, Jonathan Black, praised the scheme, “In general, it is a jolly good idea. It is better to be doing an internship rather than bar work. It is important to tackle long-term, young unemployment. It can blight an entire generation like in the 1980s.”

Similarly, students are positive about the government initiative. Anna Hill, a modern languages finalist at New College said, “The national intern scheme is a step in the right direction, as long as the participating graduates don’t get their hopes up too much about the possibility of permanent employment as a result.”

However, the scheme has not yet been confirmed. A Barclays spokesperson said, “Let’s not get ahead of ourselves. We are in on-going talks with the government. It is too early to sign anything yet. However, we look forward to exploring how any government initiative can be integrated with our own programmes.”

Some students think that the scheme will only help graduates in traditional ‘milkround’ industries. A St Anne’s finalist said, “either they are into Law/Banks/Accountancies or they are really not. I think people at Oxford are really split into two in terms of careers.

“I think this government programme will help people who want to go into these. I’m not really interested into going into these industries. I want to take a post-graduate course, but that decision hasn’t been affected by the credit crunch.”

In the ‘milkround’ industries, many gradates are facing a tough time. Paul Kavanagh, an Economics and Management finalist, despite a predicted first class degree has been rejected from several investment banking posts. He said, “From what I’ve experienced…everyone is finding getting a job in investment banking really difficult this year and given the number of applications to jobs being offered, unless you have had prior investment banking experience, such as an internship or close family connections in the industry…it’s really hard to secure a job, whereas any other year it would have been relatively easy.”

As a result, Kavanagh is applying for a Masters degree, even though it’s going to be a “financial struggle”. He admits, “The only reason I’m applying for a masters is because of the job situation. As I feel it’s better to do something constructive…rather than just wasting a year.”

Jonathan Black emphasizes that the competitive environment in the investment banking does not mean that the majority of undergraduates will be negatively affected.

He said, “there are clearly fewer jobs in the traditional sector. However, it is important to keep in mind that only 4% of our graduates go to work in investment banking. Only 100 students or so will have to think about different industries. For example, some retail companies have pockets expanding and will recruit for management.”

The consensus is that the credit crunch forces graduates to look beyond the financial industry. Another E&M finalist said, “I think now the economic crisis has made a lot of people look into other sectors or even post-grad study which they probably wouldn’t have considered before.”

Anna Hill added, “despite so many negative effects, the credit crisis is certainly encouraging people to think of creative solutions and I think we could see an increase in entrepreneurship amongst graduates who are so often stereotyped as blissfully unaware of life outside of comfortable grad schemes.”

The widow of a student from Brasenose who died last Trinity term is returning to Oxford to resume her degree.

Nicola Carver married Matt Caver in July but he then died of leukaemia the next day.

Nicola, 22, has resumed her Mathematics degree at New College. She said, “I have lots of friends who are still there and who are going to take care of me. I have to at least try. If I don’t go back now, then I’ll never go back.”

She told the Oxford Mail, “I really wanted to get the degree and I know Matt would have wanted me to get it too. I wouldn’t describe myself as brave, just somebody who has been put in a bad situation and is doing what they can.”

In January last year, Marr was diagnosed with blood cancer leukaemia. The couple was planning to get married after graduation but brought the ceremony forward to July after hearing Matt’s diagnosis. The marriage took place in Brasenose’s chapel.

The couple met through the university wind orchestra three years ago. Matt proposed in December 2007.

Nicola added, “It’s quite hard to comprehend all that’s happened in the past year.”

A fierce row has erupted between Oxford University Boat Club and a
conservation group over a swing-bridge footpath by the River Thames.

The Open Spaces Society, a national conservation body that seeks to “create and conserve common land, village greens, open spaces and rights of public access”, has attacked proposals by the Boat Club to divert the Thames Path over the swing bridge at Wallingford.

They have claimed that doing so would leave the footpath “at risk of interference and closure” and have attacked the “bloody arrogance” of the Boat Club’s plans.

Christopher Hall, Oxfordshire representative for the Open Spaces Society, has denied OUBC’s legitimate claim to the land.

He claimed that the OUBC boathouse built in 2007 was placed “illegally and without permission” over the official route of the Thames Path.

He condemned the actions of OUBC as arrogant and damaging to one of the country’s “most popular long distance trails”. He stated:

“The Boat House has come and put up a new building across the right of way of one of the most popular long distance trails in the country, and forced everybody using it to put up with their arrangements.

“In my book that is bloody arrogance.”

However, OUBC spokesman Steve Royle has denied that the buildings were constructed illegally. He has insisted that OUBC was “granted all the necessary permissions” to construct the new boat house.

Steven Corrigan from South Oxfordshire District Council has defended the Boat Club, stating that he was “satisfied” that users of the Thames Path could walk through the boathouse if they wished.

Despite this option, most walkers now choose to walk in front of the
building and use the bridge which was built at the same time as the new boathouse and crosses a small inlet from the boathouse to the river.

It is accessible to walkers at all times, apart from when the river floods and the bridge must be swung open to allow rowing boats and motor launches to pass through.

However, Mr. Hall has declared that the Boat Club’s insistences that the bridge is only used infrequently were “not good enough” and stressed the potential long-term implications of diverting the path. He said:

“The society is concerned about the long-term future of the path.

What happens if the club’s premises change hands and a commercial marina takes over with more frequent use of the bridge?”

Mr Royle responded by saying that Mr Hall’s concerns for “people 200 years
from now” were “admirable”, but insisted that “common sense needs to prevail”.

Colin Smith, President of OUBC, also spoke out to defend the necessity of the bridge. He described it as “absolutely fundamental” to the function of the boathouse.

The Boat Club submitted an application to divert the Thames Path away from
its buildings and over the bridge in September 2005.

The District Council accepted the application and made an order in April 2007, but has faced serious opposition from the Open Spaces Society.

The society has insisted that the order to divert the path onto the swing bridge should contain “binding conditions” that will remain in force under any future ownership of the land.

Such conditions must, they claim, limit the times and lengths of opening the bridge.

Mr. Smith has declared that such proposals are “preposterous” and insisted that the bridge is only used when absolutely necessary. He said:

“The bridge is designed to negate the ill effects of flooding.

It’s a big effort to use the bridge – we don’t use it willy-nilly.

I can’t see how [the proposals] are going to help anybody.”

The District Council plans to hold talks between the affected parties in the coming weeks. The dispute will then be referred to the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, who will make a final decision.

A celebration held by Dutch students at University College has been condemned as “racially insensitive, and arguably racist” by prominent members of the MCR.

Both the Vice-President and Treasurer of University College’s MCR have condemned the celebration and attacked the “endemic apathy towards racism in the Oxford community.”

Micaela Owusu, the MCR treasurer, wrote an open letter to the college, condemning the “Zwarte Piet” celebration which was held in the college at the end of last November.

Owusu has stated that she saw two students in black face make-up sitting within a crowd of students to mark the Dutch holiday celebration.

Traditionally, the “Zwarte Piet” feast is held on the 5th of December in Holland and celebrates “Black Peter” as the companion of St. Nicholas. It has frequently involved “blacking up” in imitation of the character.

Owusu stated that as “one of a literal handful of black students at University College” she felt “extremely isolated and targeted in such a scenario.”

She went on to state that the issue was not one of political correctness but the fundamental question of what should be acceptable in college common spaces. She said, “beyond the morality of partaking in a racially insensitive (and arguably racist) celebration, I question why such an event is deemed suitable for a University common space.

“This is not a matter of political correctness, but a matter of fact that SEVERAL students felt unwelcome, uncomfortable, and/or discriminated against in our common room.”

The organisers of the event have since apologised to Owusu and other potentially offended parties. They stated that they “express their sincere apology for having been the sender of hurtful expressions”.

They explained that they “find an apology to be a very meaningful expression in itself, furthering awareness in both the sender and the recipient.”

In return, Owusu responded via email saying, “I do very much appreciate the strides that the Dutch society has made to ensure that such an incident does not happen again.”

She added though “these issues should never come to this point – a single student should not have to fight to demonstrate that she or he is also a face of the university.

“Ultimately, as I stated in my original emails, my reaction to the “incident” was really not so much about me, but about people who may not feel as comfortable as I do in pointing out the egregious nature of the incidents that are continually occurring in our university spaces.”

The Dutch students have also resolved to cease using make-up to depict “Black Peter” by wearing black make-up and will instead depict “whimsical characters of various rainbow colours”.

However, several students within University College have defended the actions of the Dutch Society and denied that such actions should be thought of as racist.

One student who defined himself as from an “ethnic minority” spoke out to support the celebration saying, “I don’t think this is an example of racism at all. It’s part of the national culture in Holland which is one of the most liberal countries. I’m an ethnic minority student and I’m completely fine with this.”

Jim O’Connell, a second year PPEist, called the event an “unfortunate cultural misunderstanding” and denied that the college was turning a blind eye to racist activities. He said, “I think it is an unfortunate cultural misunderstanding. There is certainly no institutional racism at Univ, and a few bad apples aside, no widespread culture of prejudice at the University”.

He also stated that a forum on the subject of political correctness organised by the college’s PPE Society will be held at the end of first week.

He explained, “we thought that in the wake of recent events it would be appropriate to start our Beverage Soc speaker series with a discussion forum on political correctness. I don’t think Univ is a racist college at all but I think it is important for us to have a mature debate about ourselves and ask the question: how far is too far?”

Oxford University has won the World Universities Debating Championships, held in Cork, Ireland. The team of two students beat 304 other competing teams to win the prestigious Sam Maguire trophy.

James Dray and Will Jones formed the ‘Oxford A’ team and beat others from Harvard, Melbourne and other internationally prestigious universities.

The motion they debated was “this house would ban abortion at all stages of pregnancy” and Oxford were in opposition. 15 minutes preparation time was given and each of the eight contenders had a seven minute speech. Oxford’s speeches were based on the argument that abortion can be self-defence and can prevent long term problems for mothers. Jones said, “the subject as was extremely sensitive and very close to the bone.” He noted, “there were no women in the final so it was eight men debating about abortion. I was personally very happy not arguing to ban abortion.”

The convener of the debate, Art Ward, said on the subject, “we obviously need a contentious issue that will divide a room for the basis of good debates. Everyone was happy to debate abortion and I think they did the subject justice.”

The final debate was held on 3rd January between four teams. Another Oxford team, the ‘Cs’ took part in the final, along with the Harvard As and Monash Bs. After a two hour deliberation, the judges voted in favour of Oxford 5-4. Jones said the final “was very very hard. The Australian team were a bit nasty but we got lucky. The two hour judging proves that this was by no means an easy victory.”

James Dray is studying for a doctorate in politics at Mansfield College. He said, “we are both very happy and also quite relieved. It was really close and the others did really well. The event itself was extremely stressful and scary.”

Will Jones studies politics at Balliol. He said of the competition, “I had forgotten just how exhausting and stressful debating is. But it was also very enjoyable in a masochistic way.

Ward said of the two debaters, “I saw them lose in the finals two years ago and now they have come back and proven their position as one of the better teams in the world. The guys are known on the circuit and are good characters. Other universities don’t want to face them in debates to a scary degree.”

The competition was held at University College Cork. It consisted of nine preliminary rounds over three days with 1,000 contestants from 40 countries. At times, 78 debates were running simultaneously. Each win accumulated points and the 32 highest ranked teams entered a knockout final. Jones said, “The event was phenomenally well organised and we are very grateful to University College.” Dray added, “the only issue we had was that Ireland was so cold.”

Both students are also the current European champions and saw this as their last competition. Dray noted, “I’m definitely going to the next one to watch it. I’ve also been invited to be deputy-chief adjudicator in the 2011 competition, but no, I’m not doing the debating again. This has been my last proper debate.” Jones agreed and added, “Instead, I’m going to continue coaching the Scottish national team and do more coaching in schools. I have had a wonderful experience doing this and have made some good friends.”

Oxford debating is run by a sub-committee of the Union. Its Chair of the Debating Selection Committee, Neil Dewar, coordinated the team. He said: “they have done very, very well. With the US, Canada, Australasia, East Europe and others involved in the competition there was a bigger pool of talent and lot more top end teams.” He added: “we are trying to get a trophy cabinet.” The two debaters were presented with a crystal trophy by the chief adjudicator.

Oxford has won the annual competition twice in a row now, winning last year’s final in Thailand. It is the second university ever to do this. Next year’s competition will take place at Koç University, Turkey.