St Catherine’s JCR have called a rent strike in protest at the College raising battels charges without consulting students or the College’s Governing Body.

The JCR rent committee claims that the College failed to inform them that students’ rent would be increased by nearly £175 per year, and that they had repeatedly and deliberately ignored attempts to communicate with members of the JCR.

In an email to members of the JCR sent out last Friday, the rent committee condemned the College’s actions and urged students to withhold part of their rent payment for the coming term.

"We believe that the College has acted in a despicable manner in coming to these charges. The College have ignored our emails, and not even informed us of what the charges were going to be, let alone consulting us over them," it said.

The committee also suggested that this was deliberately intended, saying, "They have admitted that it was their plan to actively withhold information about these charges from us."

The strike was called with the backing of OUSU President Martin McCluskey, who said he supported the JCR "wholeheartedly". He also suggested that it was only the possibility of a rent strike which meant the College re-entered negotiations again this week.

"The threat of the rent strike had made the College come back to the table and engage with them [the JCR]. This is hopefully going to end positively," he said.Earlier this week the College reopened negotiations with the JCR. A spokesman for the rent committee said, "We hope to reach an agreement about a fair level for charges and to ultimately get a fair rent deal for students."

Have you noticed, thronging in quads and staring at architecture, groups of Malaysians that any sensible person would describe as ‘tourists’? And did you also notice that they were wearing academic dress, but not as we as Oxford students know it?

This is a branded age, where a single prestigious name becomes instantly recognisable, as does an equally lucrative opportunity for the unscrupulous. No students are unaware of how heavily the Oxford University brand is marketed in 2007, whether it be for clothes, books or on CVs. But what happens when the brand is usurped and used, in the words of Keble’s Domestic Bursar, to deliberately "mislead" all concerned?

The Oxford Centre for Leadership (OXCEL) is an unwanted bruise on the University’s shoulder. The company purports to having only been set up in the United Kingdom since April, but has been awarding ‘qualifications’ in Malaysia for far longer. The numerous Malaysian celebrities ‘awarded’ these have raised the company’s profile in the region, yet all the time exploiting the credibility of the University with which they claim to share a name, but not be affiliated with.

Naturally, OXCEL plays up to all the false perceptions that outsiders have of the University. By charging money for easily obtainable awards, the stupid and idle rich can buy themselves the sort of credentials usually only obtained by years of hard work. It takes only a few seminars, a quick trip to an Oxford college and dressing up in gowns and soft caps to become a great leader, if you would believe the information distributed by the Centre. The same is true of the equally unlikely ‘5-Day Millionaire MBA Programme’, warning that you will "be shocked at how simple and easy steps can be used to accelerate that incredible potential of yours to become a millionaire".

And at the heart of it all stands two men, the men behind both OXCEL and the ‘Oxford Business Club’, Saiful Bahri and Ernest Yeap. They claim that although they came up with the idea, they no longer have responsibility for the Club’s website as it was their students, doubtlessly inspired by those testing motivational sessions, who have since assumed power. It hardly seems remarkable that a Malaysian minister agreed to officially ‘launch’ their company last year.

The scandal is that the University has allowed such activity to go unnoticed in its own quads for so long. In the mad scramble for profit from companies and conferences, ethical concerns have been sidelined. It seems surreal that the University could passively encourage an organisation so detrimental to its own interests to hire out its accommodation and facilities, at the expense of its reputation at home and abroad. The University was only spurred to action after the government, in the form of the Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills, referred the matter to it after months of ignorance about OXCEL’s activities.
But pleading ignorance, for a University that prides itself on its formidable intellectual reputation, is not good enough. Students, and OUSU in particular, must demand not only socially responsible investment from colleges for the long-term, but also socially responsible revenue for the short-term. For all our emphasis on where colleges’ money goes, few ask where it comes from originally and bursars, like any public figures, must be held to account. And yet they will sigh, and complain, and sulk, as the sad irony is that everyone is making money out of Oxford, except for Oxford itself.

Agatha Christie called herself a “perfect sausage machine”, but her approach to murder was positively schizophrenic compared to the tabloids’ formulaic techniques.

The perfect tabloid story drips in pathos and outrage. In the case of Lucy Braham’s murder, pathos was easily achieved by juxtaposing the contorted image of William Jaggs with the beaming smile of his innocent victim. Outrage, meanwhile, relies on the sound bites of relatives, particularly those comments that apportion blame.

So Harrow School came in for the greatest criticism when Braham’s father noted that “despite visible, spoken and written warnings about Jaggs’ behaviour…no action was ever taken”.

But Jason Braham also pointed the finger at the “despicable drugs fraternity at Oxford University”. The red tops ignored this, though, since drugs at university is as mundane a topic as pills in a pharmacy (until you reach the Cabinet, at least, and Jacqui Smith’s experiences with cannabis in Oxford were only really of public interest because her surname rhymes with “spliff”).

Those few columnists that didn’t ignore the “drugs fraternity” remark merely noted in passing that Oxford might somehow have failed Jaggs.

Uncharacteristically, they didn’t dig their teeth in because the lines are too blurred: a university is clearly more than a glorified boarding school, and yet for undergraduates it is far from a nine-to-five workplace. Nor is it a halfway house between school and work.

All but a handful of Oxford undergraduates have reached the age of majority and are legally responsible for their actions. But the moral responsibility of parents towards children does not end at the stroke of midnight on their eighteenth birthday. Which is lucky, because most workplaces do not feel the need to provide for the personal welfare needs of workers under the age of 22.

Why should the University or its colleges act any differently? Why should they worry about anything other than our academic welfare? It’s easy to argue that the intensity of an Oxford course (living and working in the same place) warrants greater provision of personal care.

But far from being helpful, the immaturity of this argument does none of us any favours. It ignores the unspeakable truth: that in many cases, students bring their academic difficulties upon themselves with excessive partying, drinking and drug use. And no college is going to make provision for these personal problems without wanting to tackle their origins. After all, prevention is better than cure… and more cost-effective.

Unfortunately, prevention means protective parenting as well as Orwellian measures unworthy of a fifteen-year-old. “Your essay this week was weak… and I notice that on Monday you returned to College thirteen minutes after the 9pm curfew.”

The consequences of a parental college run deeper: could we honestly expect the powers-that-be to take the views of a JCR seriously with such an asymmetric relationship in place? Scouts and gardeners would be more influential than undergraduates. They would have the power of employment law behind them; we would be subject to that curious law that makes parents always right.

Of course it is commendable that the door is left open for students who have genuine difficulty with their work; indeed, that even students such as Jaggs have a place held for them is reassuring. We are all human and the luxury of a second chance is very welcome.

However, we should resist colleges ever supervising the rehabilitation of those who have gone wrong for personal reasons; even acting in an advisory capacity, colleges must be kept in check. In crude terms, a college is generous to say “come back when you’ve sorted yourself out”, but it is taking liberties (quite literally) when it tries to do the “sorting” itself.

In this respect, Oriel’s tutors acted perfectly with Jaggs. But it is still possible to provide a reasonable level of care to students without compromising the relationship between college and student. This is where the role of the student union lies. Colleges and JCR welfare teams should be able to confidently refer beleaguered students to OUSU, whether for lack of publicity or effectiveness, this has not been the case.Effective student union welfare provision wouldn’t stop another Jaggs, but it would keep overzealous colleges at bay.

Endless newspaper reports link cannabis with suicides, murders and assaults. The headlines are dramatic: "Another cannabis teenager in knife killing: Boy on skunk butchered a grandmother"; "Get tough on skunk or more will die"; "Cannabis addiction soars as drug gets stronger"; and so on.

Is this a case of ‘moral panic’, or are concerns about the mental health effects, amid claims that cannabis is as much as 20 to 30 times stronger than in the past, justified? Did the reclassification of cannabis from Class B to C send out ‘the wrong message’ that it is safe, or at least less harmful than before?

Cannabis is a potentially harmful drug. A few years ago, I heard an advocate for cannabis legalisation claim that the worst that can happen if you smoke too much is fall asleep. Does anyone today believe such nonsense? The Independent on Sunday, which had campaigned for the drug to be decriminalised, doesn’t: it declared an about turn with the front page headline:
"Cannabis, an apology".

In July the Prime Minister announced a review of cannabis classification, the second since the drug was reclassified in January 2004. The Government’s expert advisory body, the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD), reviewed the evidence two years ago and recommended the status quo. But the Home Secretary, in her recent letter to the Chair of the ACMD, said, "There is real public concern…in particular the use of stronger forms of the drug, commonly known as skunk."

It was also reported in July that a new study, published in The Lancet, found that cannabis users are 40 percent more likely to develop a psychotic illness and that smoking just one joint a day could double the risk of schizophrenia. Surely compelling and persuasive evidence that the harmfulness of cannabis has been underestimated? Well, it would be if the reports accurately reflected what the authors of the study concluded. Echoing the findings of the ACMD in 2005, the study found a consistent association between cannabis use and psychotic symptoms (sufficient to highlight the risks) but emphasised that an association does not establish causation.

Cannabis can worsen mental health problems or trigger relapse and may for a small proportion of the population trigger the onset of serious problems. But many people with mental health problems use cannabis to self-medicate, to relieve the symptoms of their condition or the effects of medication. Over 10 million adults (between ages 16 and 59) have used cannabis with around 3 million having done so in the past 12 months. The vast majority have not come to obvious harm, but quantifying those who do is fraught with difficulties. As yet, there is no evidence to confirm that the incidence of schizophrenia has increased in the last 30 years, despite a significant increase in cannabis use.

The cannabis market in the UK has changed substantially, which may explain why (not least among our politicians) there is the belief that the drug is ‘different’ from what it used to be and inevitably more potent. Ten years ago about 90 percent was imported, with cannabis resin (mostly from Morocco) dominating. Today up to 60 percent is grown here in the UK and sold in leaf or ‘herbal’ form. But not all ‘herbal’ cannabis is skunk (sinsemilla), indeed gangs responsible for many of the UK’s cannabis factories tend to use faster-growing, less potent plants. The average THC content (the main psychoactive constituent) of skunk has doubled over the last ten years or so and is on average twice as potent as resin: a worrying increase, but not of the magnitude some claim.

Cannabis is a harmful drug and reclassification did cause some confusion. But based on the overall harms caused, and compared with some other drugs (legal and illegal), it is not our greatest problem, yet it receives disproportionate media and political attention.

Since reclassification, levels of use have actually fallen, particularly among young people, although patterns of use can change. The latest review matters because it will test whether drug policy is proportionate and evidence-based, or driven (even in part) by media headlines and political considerations.

Martin Barnes is Chief
Executive of DrugScope

PERHAPS Oxford’s least-trumpeted asset is its ability to offer its students almost unparalleled opportunities to become involved in competitive sport whilst at university. Finding your own way through the maze that is Oxford sport can be daunting and difficult, however, so Cherwell has put together a brief, and hopefully informative, guide to explain sport underneath those dreaming spires.

University Sport

At the top of the Oxford sports pyramid are the university teams (referred to generally as the “Blues”), which compete in a range of sports from the traditional (rugby, netball) to the obscure (real tennis, fives). Blues sport generally requires a level of commitment that can leave little time for much else when work is also taken into account. The rewards, however, are worth it, especially if you are selected to play in a Varsity match against Cambridge. The Tabs, as the Light Blues are known in these parts, are the sworn enemy of every Oxonian, and the experience of defeating them in a Varsity fixture, no matter what the sport or level, is one that you’ll never forget.
Others, however, will tell you that it’s “all about the stash”, which Blues sportsmen and women are particularly fond of showing off everywhere from your 9am lecture to The Bridge. You simply cannot escape stash in Oxford as its students, for some mysterious reason, still really want to show off that Oxford University Trampoline Club hoodie that they “earned” in Michaelmas of their first year.
But Blues sport at its best is more than deserving of all that embroidered nylon. The rugby side draw large crowds as they take on Premiership sides with bold, running rugby. The netball girls will blow you away when you catch them in action and the rowers aren’t too bad either…

College Sport

For the slightly less gifted and the much less committed, inter-college sport offers a truly fantastic mix of leagues, rivalries and legends. Colleges range from the über-sporty (Teddy Hall, Catz) to places where balls and exercise are practically banned (Merton, Trinity).
The most popular sports have leagues that are keenly contested and reported and all sports have a Cuppers competition – essentially a knock-out tournament between the colleges.
College sport itself also offers many levels of participation – you’ll spend as much time playing alongside a Blue in the first XV as you do frustrated at the dropped catches of the quiet kid from biochemistry you spoke to once in fresher’s week. Most of all, however, you’ll drop to your knees and thank UCAS that you go to university in a town that must have the highest number of picturesque, well-maintained sports grounds in the world per head.
On the stash front, college kit is generally a bit cheaper and less dark blue than its university equivalent. It is still highly prized, however, especially cheap polo shirts from Primark that can be printed by those helpful chaps at Elmer Cotton.

Rowing

Rowing is an integral part of Oxford life, and you really should experience it in some way at least once if you get the chance. What you get from the Isis will depend on whether you’re an ultra-competitive, tireless monster, or someone who just wants to mess about on the river.
The first option is to jump right in this term, with 6am wake-ups, frostbite and discovering a mythical machine known as the “erg”. Training for college first and second boats is extremely serious, especially at the “Big Three” of Pembroke, Oriel and Magdalen. You’ll certainly make lots of friends very quickly but, unfortunately, they’ll all be rowers.
An alternative is to wait until Trinity term and catch crabs while the sun shines. Afternoon training, silly costumes and copious amounts of Pimm’s are the order of the day, and Summer Eights is an event not to be missed in the Oxford sporting calendar.

Blue, a
Awarded to those who compete in a first team Varsity match. Only an elite of sports are awarded Full Blue status, the rest are only given Half Blues.

Blues, the
General term referring to a university first team in eligible sports.

Blue-tack
For women, a girl who likes a good sportsman on her arm. For men, someone who hangs out with Blues in order to get himself ahead.

Crew Date
Your team goes for a curry or to  hall with a team or boat from another college, preferably of the opposite sex. There are good crew dates and bad, but never sober ones.
Cuppers
Inter-college competition. Winning ensures legendary status, at least until the end of term.

Elmer Cotton
Turl Street-based sports shop. Flash the Bod Card for discounts.

Iffley Road
Site of the university sports centre, rugby, football and hockey pitches, swimming pool and athletics track. Take the third exit at the Plain roundabout as you head towards Cowley.

Initiation
What you will be forced to go through in order to gain the acceptance of your older, wiser team mates. You’ll enjoy it a whole lot more next year.
Isis, the
River where rowing takes place, found at the bottom of St. Aldate’s. Prone to reaching dangerous levels at even the slightest drop of rain.

Parks, the
Home to the Blues’ cricket and lacrosse sides, as well as a few college teams.

Ringer
A player obtained from somewhere else (usually Brookes) to compete in a College game. Frowned upon, but rarely reported to the authorities.

Stash
Worn everywhere, prized above a first-class degree, obtaining rooms full of the stuff is the single most important thing you can do in your time in Oxford.

Training
Essential and dedicated for Blues teams, optional and ill-attended at college level.

Vinnie’s
Invitation-only social club for male members of university sides. And Blue-tack, if they’re lucky.

IT’S a familiar scenario at the outset of what promises to be another compelling season of college football as the chasing pack look to wrestle the Premier League title from a Worcester side out to retain their crown for the third time in succession.
With flame-haired goal machine Mike Hobbiss having graduated, this could be the year where the likes of New College begin a new Oxford football dynasty of their own.
For New’s captain Tom Howell, thoughts of what might have been last season still linger. “Many of our boys still feel robbed of the league last year after a shocking linesman decision cost us three points against Worcester” he said. “We will be fighting for top spot again this year but still expect Worcester to be the team to beat.”
The other Premiership side to watch will be St. Anne’s, whose remarkable 2006-07 season ended with promotion from Division One as champions and a Cuppers final appearance after an odds-defying run. Having proved their strength in defeating Premiership opposition last season, captain Ryan Fox is confident that his side can cope with the step up in class this year.
“It’ll be real test to deal with the quality of the Premier Division” he said, “but with last year’s cup run behind us, there’s no reason why we can’t at least hold our own. We’ve also retained almost all of last year’s side, so with a few decent freshers we should have  enough strength in depth to last the season.
“A great deal depends on our giant striker Ed Border, who was the driving force behind last season’s success. As well as being a fantastic target man, he’s also one of the most skilful players in college football, so it will be an important season for him.”
The First Division is shaping up to be Oxford’s most competitive this year, with almost every side looking to make a decent stab at promotion.
Relegated St. Catherine’s, St. Hugh’s and Keble will want to make a speedy return to top flight football, whilst the likes of Somerville, Magdalen and newly-promoted Exeter will be keen to deny their more esteemed rivals promotion to the elite league.
Exeter can draw on a fine Cuppers run last year where they defeated Premiership sides Catz and Teddy Hall, before succumbing to eventual winners Brasenose. “We managed to beat Hall 8-0 in the cup” said captain Daivd Lee, “so we shouldn’t be written off in Division One this season. We’ll take things one game at a time, but with Jon George, who bagged 23 goals for us last season, we’ll be more than a match for anyone in this league.”
For Keble, however, anything less than promotion is not an option after being relegated last year despite only finishing two points of third spot.
“The end of last season was very frustrating” says captain Sebastian Singh. “We’re definitely not going to underestimate this division, but we should have enough quality and strength in depth to go straight back up.”

Oxford maintained their proud record in Varsity cricket with a comprehensive six wicket victory over Cambridge in the one-day fixture after the four-day match was hit by rain.
It was the Blues’ second consecutive limited-overs victory over the Tabs, and they haven’t been defeated in the longer form of the game since 1998.
Macadam, Dingle, Woods and Hobiss all picked up a brace of wickets to dismiss Cambridge for a total of 135, a score that was never going to be terribly competitive.
Oxford still had a lot of work to do in tricky conditions, but unbeaten 40s from Alex Ball and Spencer Crawley ensured the victory.

The Oxbridge boat race committee has refused to award a Cambridge rower a Blue after he failed to complete his academic course and instead returned to the German national team to prepare for the Beijing Olympics.
Thorsten Engelmann, a former World Championships silver medallist, left during the second year of his economics degree, making him the first Boat Race participant in decades to not receive a Blue despite helping his team to victory.
Engelmann’s departure was in breach of a Joint Understanding between the Oxford and Cambridge University Boat Clubs, which states that all members of the crew must be enrolled and residing at either University for the full academic year in which the race takes place. The rules are intended to avoid either university ‘parachuting in’ international rowers merely to win the Boat Race.
The Vice-Chancellors of both universities are rumoured to have discussed the matter and lawyers have been consulted for suitable action.
OUBC President Nick Brodie condemned Cambridge for knowingly allowing Engelmann’s participation. “Cambridge admitted to us that on the day of the race he knew he would not, and nor did he intend to complete his course, hence a blatant breach of the rules,” he said. “At the end of the  day we were the second boat to cross the finish line and this will always be the case, however according to the rules we were the first eligible crew to cross the finish line.”
Both clubs intend to pursue the matter further and will be meeting several times in coming months to reach a resolution.
“As President of OUBC this year I will ensure that this matter is properly addressed and not merely swept under the rug with the removal of a Blue, not only for last year’s boat but because it is my duty to uphold the standards and traditions of the Boat Race,” he said.
Chairman of the Boat Race Company Ltd, Giles Vardey, said in a statement, “It is our job to protect the integrity of the Race. The organisers of the Boat Race and the University Boat Clubs are guardians of one of the greatest amateur sporting events in the world.
“We all view very seriously any behaviour that is inconsistent with Boat Race traditions,” he added.
Engelmann was unavailable for comment at time of going to press.