Sunday 24th August 2025
Blog Page 323

Oxford’s JCRs and MCRs to be exempt from higher education freedom of speech bill

Maurício Alencar
-
0
Oxford’s JCRs and MCRs to be exempt from higher education freedom of speech bill

Oxford and Cambridge JCR and MCR bodies are set to be made exempt from new freedom of speech laws targeted at higher education providers and their student unions, according to The Guardian.

The bill states that higher education providers and their student unions must “secure freedom of speech” for students, staff, and speakers. This includes making venues available to all groups or speakers and the publishing of a code of practice for all events.

The bill also gives the government the power to fine higher education institutions who do not enforce the rules.

Oxford student common rooms will be exempt from these laws but Oxford colleges will not be. During a debate on the bill, Michelle Donelan MP, the universities minister, said: “Colleges do fund their junior and middle common rooms. And to that extent, they can exert a lot of control over their activities, as these groups do not own or occupy their own premises, or run the room booking systems. And so imposing these freedom of speech duties on [them] does seem quite unnecessary and overly bureaucratic.”

The exemption was criticised by Labour MPs who accused the government of giving Oxford and Cambridge special treatment. Matt Western MP, the shadow minister for universities, said: “It is ridiculous for ministers to say that students in Warwick or Hull should be subject to unnecessary, burdensome bureaucracy and their student unions put at risk of being sued, but not the students of Oxford or Cambridge due solely to the makeup of the university. The government’s exclusive approach risks creating a two-tier system across our universities.”

Oxford University Student Union has been approached for comment.

Image credit: Mr Eugene Birchall / CC BY-SA 2.0 via Geograph

A selfishly practical democracy: Canadians go to the polls

Irene Zhang
-
0
A selfishly practical democracy: Canadians go to the polls

It is an astonishing fact that 0.48% of the global population has sole and sovereign say over 20% of the world’s freshwater, 10.4% of its oil, 8.5% of its forests, and possibly the North Pole (depending on your side in the Santa dispute).

I’m exaggerating a bit, of course: nature and its resources have no regard for borders. But the future of a vast swath of land was nevertheless on Monday night’s ballot as the world’s second-largest nation went to the polls, and from afar it might appear that we Canadians are fans of Groundhog Day. Not only did we give Justin Trudeau’s Liberal Party, in power since 2015, its third mandate, we even landed on largely the same parliament. From 2019 on the Liberals have governed with a minority of 157 in a 338-seat House of Commons; though the votes are still trickling in, it looks like around 155 Liberal MPs will sit in Canada’s 44th parliament. The Conservative Party’s new leader, moderate Erin O’Toole, also mostly brought his party to the same old destination: as in 2019 the Conservatives won the popular vote by 2%, but will land just above 120 seats. Two seats so far look to change hands in favour of the left-wing New Democratic Party (NDP) led by Jagmeet Singh, while Yves-Francois Blanchet’s separatist Bloc Quebecois (BQ) sees 30+ MPs reelected in la belle province. Just another day in 21st-century Canada.

The thrill, perhaps, is in the minutiae. The Canadian Greens’ dramatic and bizarre implosion over the last few months have captured national eyeballs for a party that consistently polls below 10%: after its charismatic former leader Elizabeth May stepped down in 2019 at the height of a Green wave, her successor Annamie Paul has been embroiled in controversy and leadership challenges from within. As of Monday night it seems that two Green MPs will be heading to Ottawa after all, but Paul won’t be among them: she came last in her home constituency of Toronto Centre last night, and with the Green vote collapsing from coast to coast her leadership is up in the air.

And what of that much-discussed threat to “Western democracies”, however useless the term may be? Canadians walk a fine line between individualistic tendencies and collectivism: our superiority complex towards our southern neighbours tend to make us sneer at their self-obsessed extremes, but to the rest of the world we like to appear, well, “free”. This dilemma has been stretched to the brink by recent implementations of “vaccine passports”, which conveniently lent visibility to a fledgling far-right movement. Maxime Bernier’s populist People’s Party of Canada (PPC), founded after his tense departure from the Conservative caucus, was rendered to bare irrelevancy after its anti-immigration message failed to land in 2019. Emergency public health measures gave it a second life and a new demographic: by openly courting the individualist, vaccine-sceptic crowd, within a few weeks it soared past the Greens and Bloc Quebecois in polls. As of Monday night, the PPC is on track to capture one in 20 votes. First-past-the-post means that it translates to exactly zero seats: Bernier himself swallowed a bitter defeat in Beauce, his home constituency (and the constituency with the highest percentage of White voters in Canada). The PPC is no AfD — if anything, it played into the Liberals’ favour by splitting right-wing votes in key constituencies. Its future likely hinges upon the course of the pandemic: if Trudeau plays his cards well and leads Canada out of the pandemic intact, Bernier and co. may just be yet another herd without a cause.

At many points, the snap election has appeared like an obscene caricature of Global North privilege: the moral grandstanding of our democracy must go on, despite a still-raging pandemic, despite bodies of children found from sea to sea to sea, despite towns burnt off the map by domes of fire. Every party leader apart from Justin Trudeau, who called the election to strengthen his minority in the House, made a point of criticising the very happening of this vote. It would be naive to think that O’Toole, Singh, Blanchet, and Paul genuinely prefer the continuation of a Liberal government over a chance to expand their own parliamentary shares, but pandering to a frustrated public didn’t necessarily pay off. Five weeks of pandemic-style campaigning later, the curtains fall on a country that just wants its government to get back to work.

Don’t worry, I know better than to call our election ‘theatre’: however much those of us in democratic states may feel frustration with our first-past-the-post systems, feeble politicians, or indeed the choices of our fellow citizens, to denigrate the process itself is an insult to the 23% of the world ruled by unaccountable authoritarians. Only 24 hours before Trudeau emerged victorious, Hong Kong’s elites cast ballots in a puppet show that does not belong in the same sentence as an election. Covid is ripping apart public confidence in institutions globally: at least in Canada, we tell ourselves, we still get to speak our conscience.

But what if my conscience tells me that these institutions need to be rebuilt from the ground up? It has been a summer of unrelenting trauma for Indigenous peoples and horrifying (though far-too-late) shock for the country’s settler majority, compounded by a fourth Covid wave, wildfires, the difficulties of economic recovery, and violent incidents of anti-Asian racism. The CBC (Canada’s public broadcaster) reported live from constituencies across the country on Monday night: poignantly, one journalist reported from the doorsteps of the former Kamloops Indian Residential School, where 215 bodies of Indigenous children were found and a national reckoning was set off. How could any political agenda truly reconcile this? We can no longer look for saviours in our politicians: in the postmortem era of Trudeaumania, we expect practical continuity functioning in the background of difficult seismic shifts.

As Canadians send the exact same government straight back to work, most of us are realistic: we’re now all-too-familiar with the Trudeau Liberals’ policy strategies and tactics, and we know more or less what it will and will not do. The rest of the work may just be on our own shoulders, as well as the shoulders of provinces, municipalities, and communities. It is the state that emerges triumphant no matter the winner: the 44th election changed little of Canada’s political landscape, but we did collectively reaffirm some kind of belief in some kind of Canada. I would never dismiss the sacred importance of voting: being the first and only actually enfranchised voter in my family, this enormous privilege is not lost on me. But what Monday night showed us, above all, is that we’re diversifying our relationships with political power. The state will not save us from ourselves.

Image Credit: Can Pac Swire / CC BY-NC 2.0 via flickr

We don’t need a ‘cure’: Challenging the discourse around autism

Ciara Garcha
-
0
We don’t need a ‘cure’: Challenging the discourse around autism

CW: Ableism, description of electroshock therapy, eugenics, genocide, physical violence, sexism.

Up to 450 volts of electricity courses through the body during electroconvulsive ‘therapy’ (ECT) sessions. The procedure works by passing an electric current through the brain, triggering multiple seizures that alter brain activity, supposedly relieving a plethora of traits associated with various mental health issues.  A ruling by a federal appeals court in Washington DC overturned the Food and Drug Administration’s ban on the use of electric shock therapy on people with mental health issues, after a legal battle focused on its use on autistic individuals at a Massachusetts residential school. This points to a fundamental problem in our discourse around autism and disability more widely; we should be attempting to understand and support autistic people, not to cure them. 

The Judge Rotenberg Centre in Canton Massachusetts was thrust into the global spotlight after winning a legal challenge enabling it to continue its use of electric shock devices on patients with mental health issues and disabilities, a number of whom are autistic. ECT was first used on humans in the late 1930s when Italian scientist Ugo Cerletti witnessed its use on pigs at a slaughterhouse in Rome. Cerletti and one of his colleagues, Luco Bini, carried out the  procedure on a man found wandering the city, subjecting him to 110 volts which caused a seizure. Over the course of the treatment, his muscles spasmed, his skin was singed and the patient repeatedly struggled for breath. Yet at the end of the session, it was declared that it had been a success and that electroshock therapy was safe for human use. 

The Judge Rotenberg Centre – renamed after county judge, Ernest Rotenberg, who stopped an attempt by Massachusetts state authorities to ban ‘aversives’ (physical punishments used for behaviour correction including smacking, pinching, and ammonia exposure) after the death of a 22 year old autistic man at one of the centre’s homes – has been the focus of much hurt and anger from the autistic community. Aside from the disturbingly brutal nature of shock therapy, much anger has focused on the attempts themselves to ‘cure’ autism. Autism is not an illness; it is a part of an individual and their identity that cannot be removed. 

Efforts to cure and treat autism are not limited to ECT and the Judge Rotenberg Centre. The Spectrum 10K study has raised questions of how we discuss and understand autism here in the UK. The study, by researchers at Cambridge University, University of California Los Angeles (UCLA), and the Autism Research Centre, amongst others, has asked for 10,000 autistic individuals to send in their DNA for research. Its stated aims are to “investigate the genetic and environmental factors that contribute to autism and related physical and mental health conditions to better understand wellbeing in autistic people and their families”. But the nature of the study’s focuses have raised serious concerns.

Efforts to study the genetic causes of autism generate understandable anxiety that the study might be seeking to ‘cure’ or decrease the prominence of autism. Indeed, whilst Spectrum 10K organisers insist they are not attempting to find a cure for autism, a number of those who are either part of or affiliated with the study have also partaken in projects that would suggest otherwise. Daniel Geschwind, co-principal investigator, has affiliations with an organisation called Cure Autism Now (now part of Autism Speaks), a fairly self-explanatory organisation that focused on research into and treatments for autism. Professor Simon Baron-Cohen, director of Cambridge’s Autism Research Centre and project leader has also stated that there was “no way we can ever say that a future political leader or scientist won’t use the research for eugenics”. 

Attempting to eradicate or decrease the prevalence of certain characteristics through genetics, as organisations searching for ‘cures’ and preventative measures for autism do, is eugenics. The eugenicist movement, which first rose to prominence in the UK in the 19th century before spreading across the world, is associated with many of the horrors committed by fascist regimes. The early 20th century saw many governments attempt to ‘phase out’ certain characteristics, including disability and particular ethnicities and sexual orientations, through forced sterilisation, controlled ‘breeding’ programmes and genocide. Cloaking attempts to use genetics to phase out autism in the language of potentially developing ‘pregnancy screenings’ and ‘supporting autistic people’ do not make their true intentions any less terrifying and alarming. Baron-Cohen admitting the possibility of misuse of data has quite appropriately shocked many in the autistic community, who fear future attempts to prevent autism or eradicate it entirely.

Baron-Cohen has also himself been widely criticised by the autistic community. A 2009 BBC article written by him propagates many of the harmful stereotypes around autism. Baron-Cohen writes of the link between “males, maths and autism”, asserting that “people with autism are much more likely to be male” and tying their “male brains” to exceptional mathematical ability. The truth is that whilst the majority of those diagnosed with autism may well be males, autism is not a gendered ‘condition’ and a key reason why autistic men and boys outnumber autistic women, girls, gender non-conforming, and gender diverse people, is that diagnostic criteria remains heavily coded in stereotypical language and assumptions of gender. The trope of autistic people being cold, unfeeling mathematicians and STEM geniuses is equally harmful: autistic people can be creative, we can be empathetic, and we can be talented outside of these fields. Autistic people can also be academically average; the ‘autistic people are superheroes’ narrative would not let you believe it, but autistic people may be academically unexceptional. That is fine too. Baron Cohen cautions that pregnancy screenings or treatments for autism may risk reducing “the number of future great mathematicians”, but in order for an autistic person’s life to matter they do not have to be “great” or exceptional. In order for there not to be a eugenicist attempt to eradicate autism, autistic people should not have to prove their worth.

In this same article, Baron Cohen, whilst discussing the ethics of attempting to prevent autism during pregnancy, writes, if a ‘treatment’ to reduce testosterone in a foetus (believed to contribute to autism) “helped that baby’s future development, we would all be delighted”. “Delighted” to get rid of autism? He then goes on to caution against preventing “not just autism but the associated talents that are not in need of treatment”. The idea that you can take an autistic person and separate out the traits that society is ill-equipped to deal with but keep the characteristics that would benefit society is problematic. The concept of taking the ‘good bits’ from an autistic person, but preventing and eventually eliminating the ‘bad bits’ is dehumanising and concerning. Baron Cohen’s role at the helm of Spectrum 10K has only stoked concerns that the study’s intentions are dubious.

The National Autistic Society (NAS), one of the biggest autism-focused organisations in the UK, has expressed its reservations towards Spectrum 10K project. It states that it “declined to take part” in the Spectrum 10K study and urges “autistic people and parents considering taking part to look into this study carefully and consider the potential benefits and harms”. It goes on to discuss the difficult history of research into autism: “for many years, autism was mis-characterised as a disease or illness and something to be cured… Society and researchers still have a long way to go to fully earn the trust of all autistic people.”

All too often in research and autism discourse, the voices of autistic people are lost or drowned out. Many conversations about autism continue to be dominated by those actually removed from autism: parents and researchers rather than autistic people themselves. Autism Speaks contradictorily only has two autistic board members out of a total of 28 directors on its board. For an organisation which quite literally claims to speak for autistic people and related issues, autistic voices are seemingly rare. Many (but admittedly not all) of those who have come forwards as Spectrum 10K ‘celebrity’ ambassadors are, again, not actually autistic people themselves, but the parents of autistic people. These include TV show host Paddy McGuiness, the father of three autistic children, who described himself as “excited” by the project, and television personalities Carrie and David Grant, who describe Spectrum 10K as offering “hope that it could have real impact on health outcomes and the support available”. In particular, David and Carrie Grant highlighted their “passion…to see more being done for girls and women on the spectrum” as key reasons for urging others to take part in the study. But rather than platforming the voice of an autistic woman or girl, or supporting one of the many organisations that work in partnership with autistic women and girls to aid them, this plea again takes up space that should be for autistic people. A quick Google search of autism will yield countless results and blogs on parenting autistic children and similar parental-focused issues. It requires concerted effort to actually find an autistic voice. Whilst doubtlessly harbouring good intentions, those who speak over autistic people are, in reality, doing very little in terms of tackling societal stigmas and supporting autistic individuals. A seemingly obvious first step of rectifying the many issues with the way we discuss autism is surely to listen to autistic people. 

The outcry over both the Judge Rotenberg Centre and the Spectrum 10K study also forces us to examine the way society interacts with disability more generally. The social model of disability, developed as part of the disability rights movement of the 1960s and 1970s, urges us to change the way we consider and discuss disability. It holds that there is nothing intrinsically ‘wrong’ with a disabled person, but rather it is society which is at fault for disabling the individual. This model highlights the systemic barriers and impairments that make life more difficult for disabled people and urges for a more accommodating and supportive social structure. In contrast, the medical model of disability sees the individual as impaired and shifts the ‘fault’ onto them. These two contrasting models are caught up in efforts to ‘cure’ autism. The social model of autism posits that autistic individuals face barriers from an unrelenting and unaccommodating neurotypical society. It still recognises autism and autistic individuals as disabled – not ‘differently abled’ – as they are disabled by neurotypical society. The structural, cultural, and institutional barriers autistic people face do not make them ‘differently abled’, but actively work to disable them. 

Those who advocate the social model of autism are also therefore suspicious of any attempts to find a cure for autism. There are many ways society can support autistic people and make their lives better, and the social model encourages this, but attempts to treat or prevent autism switch the lens to a medical one. Studies with the aim of better understanding autism and to improving the lives of autistic people are to be encouraged, but when they are instead attacking autism and therefore autistic people, often subtly through the language of ‘treating’, ‘preventing’, and even ‘supporting’, these studies understandably ring alarm bells. Autism ‘treatment’ through ECT at the Judge Rotenberg Centre or the Spectrum 10K genetic research do not address the societal problems around autism and the treatment of autistic person but, as per the medical model of disability, scrutinise and in many cases punish the autistic individual for simply being themself. 

For many autistic people, autism is part of their identity. For me, being autistic is as much who I am as having brown eyes or being mixed-heritage is. None of these characteristics can be fundamentally changed or altered and nor should they be. Reading about genetic attempts to cure or prevent people like me is as dehumanising as it is insulting and offensive. Autism cannot be extracted from the individual, leaving a shiny, super-talented genius behind; for many of us, it is a fundamental part of who we are and our identities.

In retaliating against efforts to cure autism, the names of exceptional autistic people have been reeled off and the prospect of their never having been born pondered. From Albert Einstein to Anthony Hopkins, autistic people have doubtless achieved many amazing things. But we should not oppose those who seek to eradicate or cure autism because of the successes of notable autistic individuals, but because autistic people are people too. Our lives are important and worthwhile no matter what we may or may not achieve. Support for autistic people should not be predicated on exceptionalism, but on humanity.

At the 1993 International Conference on Autism, Jim Sinclair, an autistic man, stated: “autism is a way of being. It is not possible to separate the person from the autism. Therefore when parents say, ‘I wish my child did not have autism’ what they’re really saying is, ‘I wish the autistic child I have did not exist and I had a different (non-autistic) child instead’.” When we talk of curing or preventing autism, we are directly attacking autistic individuals and the value of their lives. Autism often moulds the fundamentals of a person’s life and identity and so an attack on autism is almost impossible to separate out from an attack on autistic people themselves. Autistic people need support; we need extra accommodations and assistance; we need empathy, compassion and understanding. But we do not need curing.

Artwork by Mia Clement

University College kitten name announced

Charlie Hancock
-
0
University College kitten name announced

The search for a name for the successor to Clement Cattlee has drawn to a close, with Lyra receiving the most votes from a shortlist of five.

1,700 votes were cast over three days, with 36% cast for the winning name.

Other names on the shortlist included:

• Clawkins

• Martlet – a mythical footless bird in heraldry, several of which appear on University College’s crest

• Mary 

• Shelley

Lyra said via Angela Unsworth, Domestic Bursar: “Thank you to everyone who helped to name me, even my new friends at the Oxford Mail and the Cherwell got involved! I love my new name almost as much as I love bits of string, my comfy bed, and ‘accidently’[sic] pushing the big buttons on the Lodge computer (I don’t know what they are for but they make the Porters very excited when I do it…)

“I am beginning to see pictures of me popping up all over and lots of people are already dropping into the Lodge to say hello, now they can call me Lyra when they cuddle me. See you all soon!”

University College said Lyra may dictate future updates, which will be available on the College website.

Image: Cats of Oxford via twitter

Hillary Clinton among six to receive honorary degrees from Oxford University

Estelle Atkinson
-
0
Hillary Clinton among six to receive honorary degrees from Oxford University

Secretary Hillary Rodham Clinton will be among six honourands to receive an honorary degree from Oxford at the annual Encaenia ceremony on September 22nd.

Secretary Clinton is being honoured for her five decades in public service as an “advocate, attorney, activist, and volunteer, First Lady of the United States, First Lady of Arkansas, the 67th United States Secretary of State, and presidential candidate.” During her time as First Lady and Senator for New York she championed human rights, democracy, and opportunities for women and girls as she travelled to more than 80 countries before becoming the first woman to earn a major party’s presidential nomination ini 2016. She went on to receive 66 million votes. 

She will be honoured alongside Professor Dame Sally Davies, Professor Linda Colley CBE, Professor Anna Deavere Smith, Baroness Ruth Lister CBE, and Jeanette Winterson CBE.

Professor Dame Sally Davies was “installed as 40th Master of Trinity College, Cambridge in 2019, following a distinguished global career as a clinical academic and public servant.” She has served in roles within the World Health Organisation, the United Nations, and the UK government as Chief Medical Officer, championing combatting antimicrobial resistance throughout her work. She’s also known for establishing the National Institute of Health and Genomics England Ltd. She has been named both Dame Commander of the British Empire and Dame Grand Cross of the Order of the Bath.

Professor Linda Colley CBE is an “award-winning historian, Princeton’s Shelby M.C. Davis 1958 Professor of History, and a Fellow of the Swedish Collegium for Advanced Study.” She has written seven books in addition to having delivered the Trevelyan Lectures at Cambridge University, the Wiles Lectures at Queen’s University Belfast, the Robb Lectures at the University of Auckland, and the Prime Minister’s Millennium Lecture. She has received the Wolfson Prize, a Guggenheim Fellowship, and the CBE for her services to history. 

Professor Anna Deavere Smith is a “renowned access, playwright, teacher, and author.” She pioneered the style of ‘verbatim theatre,’ which consists of perceiving current events through the interpretation and performance of interviews. This has earned her the status of a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize and a nominee for a Tony Award. She has won two Drama Desk Awards, a MacArthur Award, and a National Humanities Medal from President Obama, and can be seen in Nurse Jackie, The West Wing, and, most recently, Notes from the Field.

Baroness Ruth Lister SBE serves as Emeritus Professor of Social Policy at Loughborough University. She has, throughout her career, fought poverty and inequality, publishing “influential social texts” and serving on “several prestigious commissions, such as the National Equality Panel.” She remains Honorary President of the Child Poverty Action Group and has served as a Labour peer since 2011. 

Jeanette Winterson CBE is an acclaimed British Writer. Her first novel, Oranges Are Not The Only Fruit, won the Whitbread Prize and went on to win a BAFTA for its BBC adaptation. Her memoir, Why Be Happy When You Could Be Normal?, is an international bestseller, and her latest novel, Frankisstein: A Love Story, was long listed for the 2019 Booker Prize. She has recently published a collection of essays entitled 12 Bytes at Al: How we got here and where we might be going next, and is currently working on a television adaptation of Virginia Woolf’s Orlando. She read English at St Catherine’s College, Oxford and is currently Professor of New Writing at the University of Manchester. 

Image: Gage Skidmore/CC BY-SA 2.0 via Wikimedia Commons

University announces plans for review of mitigating circumstances policy

Jill Cushen
-
0
University announces plans for review of mitigating circumstances policy

Oxford University has announced plans for a review of their mitigating circumstances policy and process this academic year. 

A spokesperson from the University told Cherwell: “The University’s Taught Degrees Panel is due to consider in Michaelmas Term plans for a review of the MCE policy and process. This will involve consultation with all stakeholders including student representatives.” 

Following the publication of a Cherwell investigation which outlined students’ concerns about the process, the spokesperson said that under the current policy for considering notices, “exam boards only have a limited range of options available to them at results stage”.

“It is natural for students to be disappointed when they do not achieve the grades that they had hoped, and the University has sympathy for anyone currently in that position”, they said. 

Students from across the University have continued to share their experiences of submitting mitigating circumstances applications as well as their opinions on how issues with the process can be addressed. 

David Tritsch, a recent PPE graduate, noted how finalists could be forgiven for questioning how “well intentioned” the University’s mitigating circumstances policy was this year but that “there is only so much examiners can do when confronted with a framework that was never designed for a global pandemic”. 

He said students were “disproportionately punished for factors out of their control” and that through their handling of this year’s applications, the University has proven “it is more interested in appeasing the grade inflation hawks among its governing body than offering a genuinely level playing field”. 

However, he concluded that “the damage to an entire cohort of young graduates is done” and added: “The only way to undo some of it is for universities and employers to understand that exams this year were not a genuine reflection of students’ potential. There will be no one size fits all response to this across institutions, but some options could include longer interview shortlists for companies or increased emphasis on writing samples and admissions tests for graduate admissions offices.

“Above all, Oxford needs to acknowledge that it has failed the class of 2021 and fundamentally reassess its priorities if it wants bright students from across the world to continue to put their trust in the system to give them a fair shot.”

A 4th year biologist who submitted a mitigating circumstances notice following the bereavement of an immediate family member, described the application as “impersonal and detached”: “The whole process has this stigma and atmosphere that you are trying to prove you are not lying or making it up.”

She said her tutors and department have been “fantastic and supportive” but thinks there are core issues with the policy at University level, including how opaque the system is, how distressing it is to write and the lack of support given to students. She added that the system is not built for mental health issues and there are a confusing range of outcomes to the application. 

Debora Krut, a second year Spanish student, described completing the application form as a “painful experience”: “I had to describe my mental state after brain tumour treatment. So it stung when I was told in two blunt sentences that nothing had come from my form.”

She said the University needs to make clear how the process works: “There needs to be more transparency about just how much mitigating circumstances will cover, because this ambiguity really makes people lose faith in a system that is meant to support them.”

Safa Sadozai, Oxford SU Vice President for Access and Academic Affairs, told Cherwell: “Many students are disappointed with the lack of adjustment made to their classifications this year, despite assurances that college approval and independent evidence would not be required for approval, as well as the insistence of departments and tutors that this year’s MCE policy would make up for the lack of a safety net, which numerous other universities and faculties across the country adopted.

“The [Sabbatical Officers] and I are working hard on fairer assessment standards this year and this issue will remain my priority. I have been working with the VP for Graduates (Devika) and the VP for Welfare and Equal Opportunities (Keisha Asare) to make sure we can come up with a policy that will be implemented at both undergrad and postgrad levels, as well as across the divisions. It is important to me that the grades students get in 2022 accurately reflect the challenges they’ve faced throughout the pandemic and how this has affected all of our learning and assessments.” 

Image Credit: Ham / CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons

North Oxford developers meet with St John’s MCR to discuss environmental standards

Estelle Atkinson
-
0
North Oxford developers meet with St John’s MCR to discuss environmental standards

Thomas White Oxford, the development company of St John’s College, is currently managing  a development project which will turn a college-owned meadow into a new office, laboratory, and residential space.

The ongoing project has attracted protest from the local and student community, with Wolvercote residents campaigning outside of St John’s College. Several key issues that have been raised include biodiversity, traffic and pollution, and affordability of homes.

St John’s MCR’s Environment and Ethics officers recently met with William Donger, director of Thomas White Oxford; Olivia Lane-Nott of Spacecraft Consulting, who is managing Oxford North’s community relations; Rob Linnell of Savillis, who was managing the planning applications; and Zoe Hancock, principal bursar of St. John’s, to enquire about these particular issues. Cherwell has seen an email to members of St John’s MCR.

In the email, the E&E reps highlighted that they asked how Oxford North intends to achieve the net 5% biodiversity gain as required by law for new developments. This question was asked in light of offsetting measures already planned at Cutteslowe park, yet these measures would only account for around half of the biodiversity loss caused by the development of Oxford North as assessed by an environmental consultancy. Donger assured that the legal target would be met through biodiversity gain within the main site as the project continues. 

The email went on to state that in regards to traffic and pollution, Linnell cited previous and planned improvements to the A34, A40, and A44 around the premises and Wolvercote roundabout as being able to mitigate any issues. The development is set to have private car parking at a lower level than is standard for such a business park, intended to reduce any traffic into the site. Linnell explained that modeling on the impact of deliveries and commuters coming in off the A40 had been done to a level satisfactory for planning and permission purposes. However, Linnell offered no exact figure for the expected change to traffic levels in the area. 

Regarding traffic and pollution during the construction phase, Lane-Nott cited the creation of a community liaison group available for nearby residents to report their issues and concerns. 

Another concern held by residents is the affordability of the new homes on the site.  The plan is for 480 homes to be built, with the 35% quota for affordable housing perhaps being increased to 50% subject to the financial viability of the site as is council requirement, explained Donger. Of the 35% of affordable housing, 80% will be available for rent with an income cap in place and 20% will be sold at affordable prices (80% of free market value). The remaining 65% of homes will enter the free market probably to be sold. Donger explained that the ideal outcome for the site will be a contained community, with workers living and working within Oxford North. 

Spacecraft Consulting say Oxford North’s Red Hall will provide an “innovation centre” for around 300 start-up companies. Image: Spacecraft Consulting

Spacecraft Consulting later told Cherwell that this “contained community” should look like a “24/7 vibrant and connected district for people to live, work, play, learn and visit and enjoy – a place that people want to visit with open spaces, three new parks, public art and culture and children’s play areas.

“We have a Section 106 agreement with Oxford City Council, and Oxfordshire County Council as highways authority. It means we are legally bound to deliver more than 40 commitments to which we have agreed so that Oxford North is a strong, vibrant and sustainable community.” 

Some of these commitments include “reducing car dominance,” “a commitment to use materials from within the local area to minimise travel distance,” “a Soil Re-source Plan to ensure minimal amounts of soil are taken off-site,” “outreach to local schools,” with “jobs being offered to local people,” “boost the economy of circa £150 million,” and “enable gross jobs circa 4,500.”

The E&E officers stated in their email that “clearly there are some open questions left after this meeting, many of which will only be answered as the project progresses. [Thomas White Oxford] was adamant to stress throughout our conversation that, at all stages of the project, all requirements towards the council were fulfilled. It will be important for the St John’s student community to keep an eye out for how these assurances are delivered on as the project progresses.”

In a later consultation between Cherwell and Oxford North’s community relations manager, it was clarified that the net 10% biodiversity gain will be reached through off-site meadows to improve Cutteslowe Park biodiversity and on site measures through significant tree and shrub planting with “circa 1,000 new trees to create a more diverse habitat across the site, pollinator-friendly plants to benefit insects and the whole food chain.” 

Featured Image: Spacecraft Consulting

Shortlisted names for University College kitten announced

Charlie Hancock
-
0
Shortlisted names for University College kitten announced

After over 200 names were submitted for the new kitten at University College, the College has narrowed the suggestions down to a shortlist of five.

The College has revealed that “Catty McCatface” was among the suggestions, a reference to the infamous “Boaty McBoatface”. The naming format became a meme after “Boaty McBoatface” became the most popular suggestion for the name of a $287 million research ship in 2016.

Other names the College received included “Logic Lion”, “The Witch-Queen of Agmar”, “Kitten Kong”, and “John Wick”.

However, only the five most popular suggestions could go through to a public vote. They are:

• Clawkins

• Lyra – a reference to the protagonist from Philip Pullman’s His Dark Materials

• Martlet – a mythical footless bird in heraldry, several of which appear on University College’s crest

• Mary

• Shelley

People can vote for their favourite name on the College website. Voting will close at midnight on September 16th, and the final name will be announced on September 17th.

Image: The Library, University College Oxford

The Changing Face of Olympic Sport

Rebecca Walker
-
0
The Changing Face of Olympic Sport

We all know the classic sports of the Olympics: athletics, swimming, gymnastics, amongst others. These are sports that we’ve seen on the TV every year. But the Olympics is constantly updating itself, and sports are vying for a chance to make their competitors Olympic athletes. Tokyo 2020 (+1) was the opportunity for five new sports: skateboarding, sport climbing, surfing, karate, and softball/baseball. In addition, more events were included, such as BMX freestyle, and mixed gender relays in swimming and triathlon. So how successful were these new events?

The International Olympic Committee (IOC) decides whether a sport can become part of the Games. Firstly, a sport must have an international federation. Information about gender equity, global participation, passion by fans (measured by TV audiences, social media and event attendance) and the cost of venues is then considered.

It was a big moment for the new sports to have the opportunity to be in the Tokyo Olympic Games, offering unprecedented global exposure. Shauna Coxsey, the only GB athlete to compete in the sport climbing event, recognised the significance of competing at the Olympics: “It’s a monumental time for our sport. It is going to be seen by so many more people. If someone sees climbing and goes and finds something that they absolutely love and have a passion for, that’s huge to that individual.” The Games can inspire people around the globe, and with climbing walls already in more than 140 countries and over 35 million climbers, the interest in the sport is rising. The Olympics can encourage many to start a new sport.

One of the IOC’s key motivations in introducing five new sports was a “focus on youth”, with a hope that sports like skateboarding and surfing would draw in a wider audience to the Olympics and demonstrate it was modernising with the times.

One of the IOC’s key motivations in introducing five new sports was a “focus on youth”, with a hope that sports like skateboarding and surfing would draw in a wider audience to the Olympics and demonstrate that it was modernising with the times. Skateboarding certainly captured the interest of the youth, for the competitors themselves were some of the youngest in the Games. Britain’s 13 year-old bronze medallist Sky Brown joined 19 year-old Sakura Yosozumi and 12 year-old Kokona Hiraki on the podium in the women’s park skateboarding. While its athletes were not quite so young, climbing had an average age of just 21, with 18 year-old Spaniard Alberto Gines Lopez winning men’s gold and twenty-two year-old Slovenian Janja Garnbret women’s gold. Both sports were certainly marketed towards a young generation of athletes.

But did they manage to attract viewers? Both sports proved to be a virtual spectacle for audiences. With spectators in the parks not allowed due to COVID, all had to be watched on TV. And skateboarding and climbing fared well with TV audiences around the world. During its opening day of competition, climbing was the top trending Olympic sport on Google Search. The demonstration of skill and the excitement of new sports attracted viewers to these events. They gave a modern outlook to the Olympics that reflects sports that are enjoyed throughout the world.

In contrast to some of the rivalries of more established Olympic sports, viewers also delighted in the camaraderie of the athletes in many of the new sports. Regardless of country affiliation, skateboarders were seen enjoying each other’s company and supporting one another. Similar scenes were seen in the climbing and BMX freestyle events, with competitors cheering each other on. The atmosphere created in these sports is something that can hopefully be replicated across the board. This presented a symbol of unity between athletes from different countries, which after a trying year globally, was a joy to see.

In many Olympic sports, but in particular skateboarding, BMXing, climbing and surfing, rather than enjoying a celebrity-like status, athletes are from a variety of different backgrounds. Seeing this representation in sport sends a positive message for the hopeful athletes of the future. In interviews, there are a variety of accents to be heard from all around the UK, from Scottish to northern to southern. Charlotte Worthington, who won gold in the BMX park freestyle, was a full time chef before deciding to focus on the Olympics. From working over 40 hours a week in the kitchen to earning an Olympic gold, Worthington demonstrated that with hard work and dedication, it is possible to take a passion and turn it into a world-class skill.

Most importantly, the new sports are some of the most accessible in the Olympics. BMX silver medallist Kye Whyte has become known as the “Prince of Peckham” and hopes that his sport can “help kids come off the streets and get into BMX, no matter where they’re from”. There are skate parks around the country, giving those the chance to get into sports that they had never imagined. Hanging out in the skate park from a young age could end up being a career in BMXing or skateboarding. The new sports at the Olympics can provide inspiration and open up opportunities in a way that other, more traditional sports have been unable to do.

32% of Britain’s medallists in Rio 2016 were privately educated, and 36% in London 2012. In rowing, half of the medal winners in Rio came from fee-paying schools. It is unsurprising that this is the case, as well-funded private schools are able to have top-quality sports facilities with qualified coaches. Millfield is a co-educational independent school, and has an Olympic-sized swimming pool and an equestrian centre. At the Rio Games, 8 former pupils took part in the Olympics, bringing home 4 medals. With only 7% of the country being privately educated, these statistics are wildly out of proportion and highlight the elitism that is still prevalent in Team GB. This is why the introduction of new sports, which give an opportunity to more people from state school backgrounds who did not have access to such high-level facilities, is so important. Sport should be something for everyone, no matter whether they pay for school or not.

Crucial to success at the Olympics and supporting a career in sport is funding. UK Sport is responsible for deciding which sports receive funding and how much. It funds the best performing sports to try to guarantee more medals, and thus a sport will lose its funding if they do not feel it has medal potential. After UK Sport announced they would only support male BMX racers in Tokyo after no British women qualified for Rio 2016, Beth Shriever created her own programme and crowdfunded £50,000 in order to reach her Olympic goal. To enable athletes from different backgrounds to view the Olympics as a viable dream, funding is necessary, or they will need to work or go into debt to compete.

The future looks hopeful for the funding of these new and accessible sports. The success of the sports this year in terms of audience enjoyment will mean that they are able to retain their place in the Olympics. And the achievements of the GB teams, with a skateboarding bronze, BMX freestyle park gold and bronze and BMX race gold and silver, will undoubtedly mean that they will receive more funding.

Now is the time for more people, no matter their background, to be able to get involved in elite sport.

Image credit: pxhere.com (CC0).

Blood money: A cry against London’s ‘festival of violence’

Sofia Cotterill
-
0
Blood money: A cry against London’s ‘festival of violence’

CW: Violence

You’d be forgiven for thinking that it was an after-work social event for overzealous, middle-aged wellbeing enthusiasts. An event that promises to ‘power progress’ while providing ‘valuable opportunities for networking’, live-action demonstrations, and the opportunity to explore ‘innovative solutions’, ‘reinforce existing relationships’ and engage with ‘relevant, timely and productive’ topics.

Not so, I’m afraid; if you were looking for avocado superfood smoothies and fitness mums exploring their auras, you’d be very disappointed. Instead, from 14th-17th September, the London Docklands will be transformed into one of the most deadly places in the world, a ‘festival of violence’ as Caroline Lucas put it. Mutating into an exhibition of lethal weaponry and torture devices, the fair will provide a social hub for both perversely proud designers and hungry human rights abusers eager to buy their wares.

The Defence and Security Equipment International (DSEI) Arms Fair is one of the world’s largest arms fairs, taking place at the London ExCeL Centre every two years. The event, supported by the UK Ministry of Defence and the Department for International Trade, sees the bringing together of 1,600 exhibitors and 30,000 attendees active in the arms industry, including many attending from countries known for their human rights abuses such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Thailand.

As one of the industries that thrives the most on death, destruction and suffering, the arms industry is the most obnoxious and reprehensible manifestation of capitalism and cold human cruelty. The more bullets that are fired and the more wars that continue, the more the industry gains. The more armed drones that fly and haunt the skies, the more the bonuses of its nefarious CEOs grow. As the population in Yemen is starved and bombed and children in Gaza die, the blood money of arms companies and their shareholders is raked in to the tune of billions, with the largest 25 arms companies selling $361 billion worth of arms and services in 2019 alone.

We are far from strangers to the images of pain and despair recorded by photojournalists in the wake of war: snapshots of grisly mutilated bodies, little children washed up on beaches, and blood-stained surfaces that appear occasionally in our newspapers and on our TVs when showing them takes the media’s fancy. These realities are of course hidden by DSEI, who present a highly refined image of respectability – showing off and promoting their killing machines in pretty packages with their exhibitors clothed in Savile Row suits and loathsome smiles. This is taken to extremes in the form of the 2019 DSEI highlights video which rolls slickly on like some sick, grotesque Hollywood movie or video game trailer, eroticising and glorifying the violent implements of war and torture, and entirely camouflaging their lethal reality.

‘ExCel London is 100% committed to tackling the challenges of sustainable development and operating as a responsible corporate entity’, agreeing that ‘businesses have a responsibility to respect human rights and act in accordance with internationally applicable standards, such as the UN Declaration of Human Rights.’ It would be laughable if it wasn’t so sickening.

Just a few months ago the ExCeL Centre was still being used (albeit incredibly unsuccessfully) as an NHS hospital site, intended to save lives (and to boost the power and profits of the private sector). How things have changed. It seems that we are yet again inexcusably plagued by our perpetual blindness, displaying our limitless tendency to care only for those who are in physical proximity to us or directly involved in our lives as we continually ignore the suffering that we are not only complicit in but actively help to cause. How can it be that we allow this arms fair to happen? How can it be that we permit the precursor to the destruction of families, lives and livelihoods to happen in our capital city?  

The support of DSEI by the government alludes to the wider problem of the UK’s sustained support of the arms industry, with the UK being the second biggest arms exporter in the world. The problem is set to get even worse. This year the DSEI organisers have shamelessly urged exhibitors to attend the event so that they can take advantage of increased opportunities to sell as a result of the UK government’s commitment to increase its defence budget by £16.5 billion, the largest increase in 30 years. The increase, introduced by the Conservatives and backed by the Labour Party, wrecked and spineless under its current leadership, demonstrates the two-faced nature of the UK: although the government may talk of compassion and a concern for human rights and dignity, again and again they make apparent how hollow this rhetoric is through their support for and upholding of one of the most despicable industries in the world.

All over the globe, people are being forced to flee and suffer as a result of the actions of the arms industry – the willing lackey of destruction. In many cases, the suffering starts in London as bonds are forged and contracts signed between Janus-faced governments and businesspeople. Instead of continuing and expanding our commitment to arms, the UK should use the little international influence that it has to take a stand against this repugnant industry and in solidarity with all those who are victims of war, torture, and violence worldwide. No more can we allow there to be profit in death, no more can we welcome the brutal cronies of the arms industry with open arms, and no more can we allow the power to kill to serve as a currency that can be traded for political gravity and wealth across the world.

Stop the Arms Fair is protesting against DSEI outside the ExCeL Centre between Monday 6th and Friday 17th September 2021 ‘with talks, music, art, workshops, actions and more’ taking place. For more information see their website and Facebook event.

Image Credit: David Mirzoeff/Global Justice Now / CC BY-NC 2.0 via flickr

1...322323324...2,519Page 323 of 2,519

Support Student Journalism

Cherwell is Oxford’s oldest independent newspaper, established in 1920. We are entirely student-run. By supporting us, you will contribute to keeping our paper in print and online. Every donation makes a difference.

Donate

Explore

Follow us

More

Oxford Student Publications Limited © 2025 - All Rights Reserved | Privacy Policy

Website by James Ashley