Oxford University has announced the construction of a new research centre focusing on Business Taxation. The centre has received £5 million in funding from The Hundred Group, and will focus on the impact of taxation on aspects of the economy such as business, public finance and international competition. Several doctoral fellowships will be created in the establishment of the centre which will be based in the Saïd Business School and is expected to be in operation by September 2006. Professor Colin Mayer, an acting director for the creation of the Centre, said “we are extremely excited about the potential of this Centre. This will be the first major research centre of its scale and type in Europe.” The centre will carry out a number of projects evaluating the structure of taxes including corporation tax, and determining how to achieve the optimum balance between business growth and government finance. Further topics of research will include the effect of taxation on international businesses. The Centre plans to research the effect that differing global tax policies have on multinational companies, who often determine the location of their business activities on the tax regimes that operate in a particular country. Professor Colin Mayer emphasised the significance of the Business Taxation Centre for Oxford University, saying “the Centre reflects the fact that beyond the university, outsiders appreciate the practical approach of this research and are keen to support what goes on here.” He added that “this centre demonstrates how well Oxford University can promote partnerships between academics within the university and practitioners in the outside world.”The Business School this month also sees the announcement by the University’s Vice-Chancellor of the creation of stronger links between the School and Templeton College, which specialises in management studies and international business. Professor Michael Earl, Dean of Templeton College, said “the combination of business school and specialist graduate college represents a unique and valuable differentiator in the field of management studies. This reorganisation gives Templeton a wonderful opportunity to focus on being a very modern Oxford college.”ARCHIVE: 1st week MT 2005

His Royal Highness Prince Turki al-Faisal of Saudi Arabia spoke in the Oakeshott Room of Lincoln College to an audience of approximately fifty students on Tuesday night, hosted by the Oxford University Philosphy, Politics and Economics Society (PPESoc). The event marked al-Faisal’s last address in the United Kingdom as Saudi ambassador to the UK and Ireland before becoming Ambassador to the United States later this year. He has held his previous position since 2003.In his speech, Prince al-Faisal stated “terrorism is the single biggest threat to peace and stability in the Middle East,” adding that terrorism “is the creation of twisted minds.”  He discussed numerous meetings he has had with Osama bin Laden during the 1980s, as well as attempts to capture the head of al-Qaeda.  The Prince was adamant to assert that Saudi Arabia has, not and does not support terrorists.  He also said that Saudi Arabia is as concerned about recent terrorist attacks, and about terrorists springing up across his country, as those countries that have suffered attacks.  Prince al-Faisal said he believes that the “deepest wound” fueling terrorism in the Middle East is the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.  Following his speech, the Prince answered questions from the audience on topics including the war in Iraq, the influence of al-Jazeera television, education systems in Saudi Arabia, and accusations that the Syrian government are supporting terrorism.The prince served 24 years as the Head of the Saudi external intelligence service.  He is the son of the late King Faisal and brother of Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal.Mohan Rao, Magdalen College, President of the PPE society said “I thought that his talk was engaging and compelling – His Royal Highness covered a wide range of ground, and gave an interesting insight into the main causes of radicalisation among young Muslims today.” “It was also very kind of him to take part in a question-and-answer session after his talk – again, he showed an exceptional command of detail, and also a sense of humour and ready wit” he added.Last year, Prince al-Faisal won a case of libel against Paris-Match magazine over claims that he himself was linked to the 11 September terrorist attacks.ARCHIVE: 1st week MT 2005

Oxfordshire’s mental health services have announced cuts in their psychiatric department, leading to criticism by a University psychiatric expert amid concern that this could lead to an increase in suicides across the county.Oxfordshire Mental Health National Health Service Trust has proposed plans to axe Barnes Unit’s psychiatric accident and emergency service, located at the John Radcliffe Hospital in Headington, as well as cut back on 23% of its junior doctors and 12% of its consultants. Such cutbacks are part of the trust’s plan to save £6m, 10% of its budget. Professor Keith Hawton, the director of Oxford University’s Centre for Suicide Research, has said “this will undermine care for some of Oxfordshire’s most vulnerable people. There is potential risk for an increase in suicides.”The Barnes Unit cares for approximately 1,765 people a year who arrive at the John Radcliffe Hospital after self-harming or attempted suicide. Psychologists and medical staff at the unit provide specialist assessments, treatment and follow-up advice. Professor Hawton believes that students at Oxford will be particularly vulnerable to the cutbacks. “I think this could have major consequences for the service for students who are presented to hospital following self-harm.” Suicide is a particularly prominant issue affecting students of the University. In August of this year, a verdict of suicide was declared for a prospective student who was due to have come up last academic year, but was found drowned off Beachy Head just days before the start of term.Hawton took part in an influencial study published in 1995 which found that there was a significantly higher rate of suicide amongst eighteen to twenty-five year olds, compared to the general population over a fourteen year period. If the unit is axed, some of the services will be transferred to the Crisis Resolution Team based at Littlemore Hospital, which is located further out of the city centre, close to the Blackbird Leys area. Professor Hawton said of the transfer to Littlemore “I think it unlikely that any substitute clinical service which already has major commitments elsewhere will be able to give the time necessary.” Oxford University Student Union Vice-President (Welfare), Aidan Randle-Conde, expressed his concerns about the trust’s proposals stating that “with many students experiencing issues of self-harm and suicidal feelings the cutbacks will create major problems across the University.”ARCHIVE: 1st week MT 2005

I    study publishing here, which is quite a mixed, skills-based course. I applied to this after Eton; it’s a strong basis for going into marketing or advertising. Our workload involves about thirteen to fourteen hours of lectures and seminars a week, which are very interactive and geared towards group-based work. Other than lectures, we have about three personal reports as well as two presentations to do a term. Most people here work very hard; certainly most people I know here are very, very motivated. The publishing course at Brookes is very well respected, and the business school is also very, very popular. Most people I’ve talked to in the city reckon that Brookes is one of the best new universities, and I’ve met a lot of alumni who have all got very successful jobs. I don’t think that Brookes is marketed more towards upper-middle class students: I’d say 60% of our student population haven’t paid for their education. Brookes does have a reputation for Sloanes and husband shopping, but it’s a reputation that I think is ill-deserved, assumed through most people coming up and seeing people with blonde hair. True, there are quite a number of them to see, but I’d say last time I was up in Newcastle that kind of population was a lot more dense.We’re big drinkers as much as any other university. There are quite a lot of large nights out – we go out to clubs three or four times a week, Brookes’ favourites being Escape, The Bridge and Clementines. I’ve heard a couple of wild drunken stories about breaking into Oxford colleges, although for the record it wasn’t me! But let me just say that four or five of the colleges have walls that are very easy to scale. As to which ones, I couldn’t possibly comment. You can sense a different vibe between Brookes and Oxford nights. Brookes students seem more enthusiastic and chatty. This could be because the people there have more things in common and possibly less to prove, but admittedly that’s merely speculation. Do Oxford students have superiority issues? I think that’s something you have to judge on an individual basis. I don’t think you can ever make a generalisation about Oxford students – certainly my friends at Oxford aren’t like that at all. Concerning how we feel about them, there are absolutely no hard feelings whatsoever; everyone I know at Brookes has at least two friends at Oxford anyway. To us, Oxford University is just the place down the road. I think there is actually a lot more animosity from Oxford towards Brookes students than the other way around. To be honest, most people have chosen to go here as their first choice, so have no hard feelings about anything. We’re supposed to be the fittest university in Britain. From personal experience I’d say that’s true, although the types are actually a lot more varied than just the blonde hair and short skirts. Well, a lot of people I know, to be fair, have blonde hair and wear short skirts. Indeed, that’s the stereotype that may be applied to Brookes girls, accompanied by signet-ring wearing, shirt-and-jean wearing, long-haired boys. Degree of superficiality? I’d say no more than any other university. It’s very much a case of “you can’t judge a book by its cover”. People are generally very quick to judge short skirts and bleached blonde hair, but I think there’s a lot more to the look then that. I mean, maybe you’ll have this girl who will wake up tomorrow and think “I’d like to dye my hair blonde” – I don’t know, I don’t know why I’d dye my hair blonde. But I think to take a look at that phenomenon and think they’re all clones would be a gross underestimation.ARCHIVE: 1st week MT 2005

The former Master of the Household for the Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall has been appointed by Trinity as its new estates bursar. Kevin Knott has worked for Prince Charles and Camilla since 2002.  He was the deputy secretary of the Duchy of Cornwall and later served as Master of the Household. Knott will take over his new post in January and his election as a Fellow of the College will take place soon afterwards. As Master of the Household, Knott was responsible for domestic arrangements and staff, as well as the catering and official entertaining at Buckingham Palace and other royal residences. His new job as Trinity’s estate bursar will bring together the College’s financial, budgetary, asset and fundraising management into one full-time post. Trinity College president Michael Beloff said, “The College is pleased and proud to have attracted someone of Mr Knott’s distinction and ability to be its senior administrative officer,”Knott played a key role in organising the wedding between Prince Charles and Camilla Parker Bowles in April. He became controversial following a BBC Panorama documentary, “A Right Royal Shambles?” which revealed that there had been a mix up over the venue; dissent within the Church of England; the Queen’s decision not to attend part of the big day; a disastrous gaffe by the Prince in the media; and the possibility of a clash with the Pope’s funeral. A Clarence House spokesperson said, “Kevin Knott is leaving the household to take up the post of estate bursar at Trinity College, Oxford. “After 21 years of working for the Prince of Wales in various capacities Kevin felt it was the right time to move on. We are very sad to see him go, and we wish him well in his new job.” ARCHIVE: 1st week MT 2005

The St Hilda’s JCR has passed a motion to hold a referendum on the issue of the college remaining single sex. The motion passed with 40 votes for and no objections.After the referendum has been held, Ailbhe Menton, St Hilda’s JCR President, who sits at all “Agenda A’ Governing Body meetings, will use the result to represent the interests of the JCR. The move is a pre-emptive response to the pending publication by the Governing Body of a report titled “St Hilda’s and the 21st Century; a Strategic Report.” The document, which will be distributed to students at the college, discusses the advantages and disadvantages of admitting men to St Hilda’s. In addition, it emerged that the Governing Body has agreed to “build a consensus towards going mixed.”Menton proposed the referendum to ensure that the opinions of undergraduates at St Hilda’s are taken into account by the Governing Body. Menton said, “The last vote was held in Hilary 2003 and those are the views that I’m currently representing. My motivation behind holding a referendum is that I want to represent the views of current students.” Before the JCR referendum can be held, at least 50 of St Hilda’s 419 undergraduates must sign a petition in favour of the vote. During the weeks running up to the referendum a series of “information forums” will be held. The forums will present different perspectives on the admissions policy debate, so as to better inform the students’ decisions. The Principle of St Hilda’s, Lady English, issued a statement saying, “The Governing Body of St Hilda’s reconsiders the single-sex status of the college periodically, as part of its planning process. There are no immediate plans for a vote on the matter.” The last JCR referendum on the status of St Hilda’s was in 7th week of Hilary Term 2003. (57% against going mixed, 43% for.) The 2003 Governing Body vote which followed was understood to be just one vote short of the two-thirds majority needed to decide to admit men.The Governing Body will be under no obligation to act upon the findings of the JCR referendum, yet students voiced concerns during the debate of the motion in Monday’s meeting that the result, if in favour of accepeting males, may be used as a ‘weapon’ to fast-track a co-educational policy. This view was largely formed as the last Governing Body vote was very close, making the JCR opinion potentially highly influencial.College authorities in support of the transition believe that going mixed would solve difficulties in recruiting staff, as well as improve the college’s financial and academic performance. St Hilda’s was placed 23rd out of 30 colleges in this year’s Norrington Table, having moved up seven places from last year. Opinion among the student body is divided. Anna Tierney, a second year at St Hilda’s, said, “University is meant to prepare you for life in the real world. We need men.” However, Georgina Edwards, Entz Rep for the JCR, said, “This won’t just affect Hilda’s; the University’s male to female ratio is already skewed enough – Oxford doesn’t need more men.”“I don’t care if they have testicles, I just want friends,” said Tamsin Chislett, a second year at the college.In 1986, Oriel became the final all-male college to accept women and Somerville remained single sex until 1992 when the decision was made to become mixed. University figures across all colleges show a very close male/female ratio, although individual colleges contain some imbalances. For example, in Balliol college, 36% of undergraduate first years are female, just 43 out of 118.ARCHIVE: 1st week MT 2005

The fast train from Paddington allows those not fortunate enough to inhabit our world to get close enough to peer in. They ingest voraciously from guidebooks entitled ‘Oxford: ville universitaire’, or ‘Oxford in a day’, in order to attempt an understanding of what it is that makes this institution the most famous seat of learning in the world. One would hope that they were being fed what we consider to be the realities of our world, but overhearing their conversations can be a little unsettling, particularly if we are inclined to associate ourselves closely with Oxford and its reputation. A well-built American applying to the Said business school could recently be heard agonising about whether or not he should mention his strongly Republican views. Meanwhile a French couple discussed Iraq, hypothesising as to whether it was in Oxford that they might find the roots of Britain’s conservative foreign policies. The Oxford of today chases political correctness with the enthusiasm of a New Labour apparatchik, with OUSU and the university itself emphasising equal opportunities this and diversity that. And rightly so. One would be hard pressed to find a dissenter against the relatively simple concept that a university, like our society, is a wonderfully broad church. Wandering the halls of the Exam Schools during freshers’ fair one was confronted with a menagerie of interests ranging from the occasionally offensive (OUCA), to the possibly battering (Tai Kwan Do). It is, in a sense, heartening to find us being accused of all things, at least in the place of one. Perhaps it allows us the opportunity to really feel part of this place, whatever and whoever we are, but in hoping that outsiders see the realities of our world, one would imagine that we had some vague concept of what that world really is. Therein lies the problem, for as we diversify, it is difficult to argue that we do not also dilute. Clearly the national press, as it constantly searches for stories to perpetuate myths that the general public enjoy, has little interest in portraying Oxford as a modern university, and while we can rant and rail at this cliche, who can really blame them? Who wants to talk about an Oxford that is Warwick with tutorials; maybe embracing our past isn’t such a bad idea after all. At least then we would know where we stand. In the 19th century, Oxford was inextricably associated with the conservative elite, and while it would be harsh conjecture to impose such a reputation upon all members of the University at the time, it was certainly something to hold on to.There is no doubt that we continue to turn out the great and the good, from Blair to Clinton, or even Thatcher and Murdoch, but no longer do they fit a certain mould. One of our most famous sons, Gladstone, dominated this university as president of the Union and a decorated scholar, and became its MP for a period in the mid-19th century. But by the time he became a Liberal Prime Minister, he had deserted those views which he held so strongly as he left Oxford. It had taken the real world to make him what he really was. It is unlikely that such a transition could be so marked today, leaving us wondering whether, with the erosion of whatever identity this place had, we leave with anything more than merely an education.ARCHIVE: 1st week MT 2005

Jeffery Sachs, who spoke at the  Oxford Union on Sunday, is the intellectual guru of the ‘Drop the Debt’ campaign and the world’s most famous development economist. He began his career as a hard-line free marketeer. As an advisor to Boris Yeltsin’s government in the early nineties he was responsible for the introduction of the disastrous “shock-therapy” of instant deregulation and privatisation which sent the Russian economy into freefall. A market Bolshevik no longer, Sachs has since turned his attention to Africa and the elimination of global extreme poverty within twenty years through a combination of debt relief, increased aid, and trade reform. For Sachs, democracy is not a part of this equation. He states bluntly in his new book, The End of Poverty, that “the links from democracy to economic performance are relatively weak” and that “the charge of authoritarian rule as a basic obstacle to good governance in Africa is pass”. Sachs’ fondness for railing against the neo-liberal “Washington Consensus” and the Bush administration might thus be explained by an enthusiasm for an earlier Republican ideologue, Henry Kissinger. Kissinger, who would be brought to the Hague on charges of war crimes if the US ever signed up to the International Criminal Court, did not care about democracy either. For Kissinger, monstrous dictators like Pinochet, Mobutu, Amin, and Papa Doc Duvalier may have been “bastards” but it didn’t matter because they were “our bastards”. Sachs, and his bleeding heart fellow travellers Blair, Bono and Bob Geldof, have their own set of “bastards”: rulers like Meles Zenawi of Ethiopia, Olusegun Obasanjo of Nigeria and Paul Kagame of Rwanda. None of these have been fairly elected and all are pumped full of praise and aid by Britain and the US. Until recently, Yoweri Museveni of Uganda would have been on this list. His attempts to rid Uganda of condoms no doubt still ingratiate him with the Americans. But now that he has decided to turn twenty years of dictatorial rule into a life presidency, he has been mildly rebuked. At the launch of the Commission for Africa report in Addis Ababa in March, Geldof declared, “Get a grip Museveni – your time is up, go away”. He has since apologised. Sitting alongside Geldof was fellow Commission member, Zenawi, who was returned to office in May courtesy of a rigged election. His security forces mowed down dozens who had the temerity to protest. These men are just the West’s presentable allies. In blatant contradiction with its avowed wish to see democracy flourish the world over, Washington embraces the vile dictator, Obiang Mbasago, of oil-rich Equatorial Guinea. Jacques Chirac, who wants to slap a fiver on every plane ticket to fund poverty reduction, described the brutal Gnassingbe Eyadema, deceased President of Togo, as a “personal friend” when he died in February after 38 years in charge. This may have been related to Eyadema’s generous funding of French political parties and the benevolence shown to individual French politicians who happened to be passing through his palace. Eyadema could afford this because he had amassed a fortune believed to be in the region of $3 billion; that is thrice Togo’s annual GNP.The example illustrates why Sachs’ view that dictatorship is no bar to economic development is false. The reason Africa is so poor is that kleptocratic dictators and elites, often with Western connivance, have looted their own countries. They are also inclined to be incompetent. The simple virtue of democracy is that it allows people to get rid of bad governments peacefully. The number of functioning democracies in Africa can be counted on two hands. Among them are Africa’s most prosperous and stable states: South Africa, Botswana, Namibia, Senegal, Ghana, Benin and the Cape Verde islands. Sachs regards China as an example of how a ruthless dictatorship can prosper. However, he admits in The End of Poverty that poverty has increased in rural areas there because of the abandonment of the public health system. A democratic government would never have been able to disregard public welfare so heartlessly.        The triumvirate of Sachs, Bono, and Geldof is immensely powerful. Able to influence both governments and public opinion, they are right to attempt to combine high-level lobbying with mass politics. It is thus dismaying that such potential for real change has been squandered on fringe issues in the war on poverty. The only reason debt is a problem is that the money was stolen and dissipated. The torrent of criticism directed against them for endorsing the status quo of Western power is similarly misguided. It is the very Western status quo of democracy and human rights which is lacking in Africa. More than any amount of charity, this is how to make poverty history. ARCHIVE: 1st week MT 2005