Friday 13th June 2025
Blog Page 345

Material girl: How the pandemic changed the way we shop

0

Almost 40 years later, Madonna’s words still ring through: “everybody’s living in a material world, and I am a material girl.” Guilty as charged, and mildly ashamed that pandemic me proved to be more materialistic than I would like to admit.

The reopening of non-essential retail marks a return to the throngs of shoppers on UK high streets, but when the first national lockdown greeted us, many bricks and mortar retailers were forced to open their virtual doors – and consumers flocked. 87% of British consumers started utilizing online retailers in 2020, increasing from 53% in 2008. Dependence on e-commerce peaked and the value of online sales reached £99.31 billion in the UK. For some, the pandemic came with the realisation of what is really important, and that, perhaps, life would go on without a new pair of shoes or the latest beauty supplies. For others, online purchases were a treat after a long week of working from home and with less social living expenses, they had more to spend on discretionary items.

When first faced with our new reality, even a trip to the supermarket, an armour of hand sanitiser, face masks, and gloves in tow, was no small feat, and for some, it was easier, safer and more convenient to buy groceries with a swipe and a click. But Tesco and Ocado were not the only delivery vans on the road. In April 2020, online retail experienced an increase of 15.8% and during the most recent lockdown in the UK, the proportion of online spending soared to 35.2%.

The periods of lockdown changed the state of online shopping and retailers were forced into drastic shifts in order to keep up with consumer behaviour. To navigate this new competitive reality, retailers adapted by extending their digital engagement, attempting to bring an ‘in-store’ feel to their online presence, improving their delivery services, investing in warehousing spaces, and simplifying the experience by reducing the number of clicks. Celine Pannuti, Head of European Staples and Beverages Research at J.P. Morgan, said: “In the past few years, some of the big players have invested a lot to be more digitally savvy, accelerating innovation and refocusing their portfolios. I think a few of these companies had come into the pandemic prepared to a certain degree, because they had prepared their company to change and pivot more online. We see retailers narrowing their product range, focusing on what matters more and mainstream brands and products, so the shift to e-commerce for big and small brands is key.”

The word ‘essential’ is difficult to define in a society where, for most, all the basic needs of Maslow’s pyramid are met. Non-essential retail shut but that didn’t stop non-essential purchases. In the midst of lockdown, boredom was rampant and buying online was safer. But deeper psychological theories underpin the online habits of pandemic buyers.

People took to the supermarkets in droves last March, even before a national lockdown was announced. Trollies overflowed with jumbo packs of toilet roll and enough dried pasta to feed the population of Italy. Upon entering a frightening abyss of uncertainty, people clasped at what control they had. Speaking to CNBC Paul Marsden, consumer psychologist at the University of the Arts London, said: “Panic buying can be understood as playing to our three fundamental psychology needs.” He explained that autonomy, relatedness, and competence, give people a sense that they are “smart shoppers”.

Among the top products that boomed during lockdown were jigsaws, to counteract boredom, computer accessories and furniture, to spruce up the home office,  and booze, well, to keep sane. Sales of activewear and casual clothes continued to rise throughout the year, but, as we sank deeper into lockdown funks, luxury apparel and accessories also started to rise. Why buy a Gucci handbag when you can’t flaunt it while out for brunch? The answer: because we could. For some, buying unnecessary items also provided hope for time when strutting down to the local pub in brand new loafers would be allowed.  

Online shopping enables a similar sense of control to panic buying. A 2013 study published in the Journal of Consumer Psychology found that shopping choices restored personal control and reduced residual sadness. The research was based on the fact that “sadness is strongly associated with a sense that situational forces control the outcomes in one’s life”. The concept of situational forces dictating the events of our lives – sounds vaguely familiar during a global pandemic. A year of turmoil wrought personal upheaval and a lack of individual control, resulting in consumers clinging to their power of consumption. When faced with an uncertain situation we tend to try whatever we can to feel like we have some control. And so, virtual retail therapy and comfort buying provided a sense of control at a time when we felt deprived of so much.

The sight of delivery drivers raised a smile during the height of lockdown when the thought of opening a package was the peak excitement of the day. However, the increase in home delivery had wider environmental impacts. But it’s not unusual to have to tear open a large box and unwrap multiple layers of plastic and cardboard before reaching a product that would fit in the palm of your hand.  Amazon’s sales in the UK soared to a record $26.5bn but even before the pandemic, a report from the nonprofit ocean advocacy organization Oceana estimated that Amazon was responsible for 465 million pounds of plastic packaging waste. In 2019, Amazon co-founded The Climate Pledge and committed to “making all Amazon shipments net zero carbon through Shipment Zero, with 50% of all shipments net zero carbon by 2030”.Senior air quality manager for Environmental Defense Fund Europe, Elizabeth Fonseca, told the Evening Standard:  “Air pollution is an unintended consequence of this rise, especially since most deliveries happen via diesel-fuelled vans that pump dangerous pollutants into the air we breathe.”

Henry David Thoreau once said that “The price of anything is the amount of life you exchange for it”. Judging by that account, I’ve given Asos much more than they deserve. Fast fashion brands were one of the few retail winners. Boohoo, for example, recorded an increase in its sales by 45% to £368m from March to May. While fewer clicks before being thanked for your purchase may help retailers stay afloat while also being convenient for consumers, for some passive shoppers (those whose go-to procrastination method is adding items to their wishlist), there is a dangerous lack of steps before their bank balance drops a few digits.

During the pandemic, people started to rely on the instant gratification of online shopping. Buying is just one click away. And for anyone with an overdraft, there’s no need to worry about having enough cash at hand. Many people add items to their basket and after finding themselves curious as to how much of a bill they have worked up, they end up confirming their purchase. The only roadblock is entering their card details giving them time to come to their senses and change their mind. But, thanks to autofill, your order is on its way! The ability of devices to save card information also means that all we have to remember is that three-digit CVV. Farnoosh Torabi, a personal finance coach, said: “Money is abstract as it is, and it’s why a lot of us have a hard time managing it. If you have to see money leave your wallet, overspending is harder.” 

After days confined to their homes, many people started to spend their time and their money differently. People spent less and saved more. Barclaycard found that overall consumer spending was down by 7.1%. The transition to a cashless society also gained momentum. Eric Leenders, managing director of personal finance at UK Finance, said: “September [2020] saw the proportion of contactless debit card payments hit a record high for the second month in a row, rising to 64% of total transactions in August. The value of overall contactless spending was also up by over 18% compared to the same period last year, as consumers made further use of the increased £45 contactless spending limit.”

Instantaneous access to money, the convenience of carrying only a thin card and no rattling sound of coins in the bottom of your pocket all sounds very appealing but the prospect of a cashless society also brings risks. Sweden has one of the world’s most aggressive policies to become cashless with cash accounting for less than 1% of total transactions compared to 23% in the UK. Many find it harder to control spending when they can’t see the physical cash leaving their hands, and if anything was to happen to your bank account, in a cashless society there are no alternative sources of finance. Diners are also less likely to leave tips when they haven’t got small change and, for children, there’ll be no spontaneous £5 notes from generous neighbours.

Despite the hike in retailers switching to digital sales, for certain stores, such as Primark, online retailing isn’t an option. The related logistics costs to online shopping means that delivery costs would exceed the value of many of its goods.  A recent report carried out by IMRG, found that 33% of retailers had to increase prices to cover the cost of returns.

The question now that non-essential retail has reopened and things are gradually returning to ‘normal’, is whether the shifts in online shopping, our attitude towards consuming and our conception of money, are here to stay. Sarah Hunter, Chief Australia Economist at BIS Oxford Economics, said: Australia is a really interesting case study on this as the pandemic is basically under control domestically which means that the majority of restrictions have been lifted.” She added: “We can see in the data that although online’s share of total retail spending has fallen back from its lockdown peak it’s a long way above where it was a year ago.”

According to Statista, online retail is forecasted to grow by 34% in the next three years but Celine Pannuti researcher at J.P. Morgan said: “In the next 12-24 months, consumers are going to be left with less money in their pocket. Many people will be left unemployed and will have less to spend. This will reinforce the trend for staying at home. We could also see some downtrading as consumers settle for more affordable options, though for now, we have seen consumers buying big brands and choosing household names overvalue or private label products.” 

Before I left home for Oxford last October, my dad told me that a significant number of delivery drivers were losing their jobs. Why? Because my leaving meant a huge drop in deliveries to the area. After that funny, but not so subtle, nudge, I realised that I may need to reexamine my online shopping habits. At least now, while I’m still a material girl, if I do splurge on a clothing haul, I’ll have somewhere to wear my new purchases, even if it’s only to my local beer garden!

Artwork by Rachel Jung 

Cher-ity Corner: KEEN Oxford

One of the most important lessons I have learnt, as I imagine many others have too from this pandemic, is the value of offering up our time to help others. Cher-ity Corner is a weekly column that highlights local Oxford charities that students can volunteer with and make a difference.

I spoke with Catherine Smith, Programme Manager of KEEN; discussing the origins of KEEN, the various opportunities they have for students and the rewarding nature of volunteering with them. Find out how you can get involved and more about their amazing work.

What’s KEEN?

KEEN can be traced back all the way to 1984, upon the arrival of a Rhodes Scholar who recognised the lack of sporting opportunities for those living with disabilities in Oxford – and wanted to do something about it. Initially what was a small tennis club for disabled individuals, is now 30 years later an international non-profit movement that serves hundreds of young people with disabilities each week in cities around the UK and US, training over 30,000 volunteers as a result (but… Oxford is still its flagship branch)!

KEEN’s mission is to create, support and promote inclusion for disabled children and young people. They exist because they believe everybody should be meaningfully included in their communities and have equal access to sports and recreational activities. Not only do KEEN run their own inclusive activities, but they do so much more work beyond that in trying to change perceptions of disability and working within the local community to make society a more inclusive place across the board.

“Working in partnership with other organisations, university clubs, and charities is so important to that side of our mission: we recently established Inclusive Oxfordshire with the aim of making Oxford fully inclusive place for disabled people by 2030.”

In normal times, KEEN run a regular weekly timetable filled with things like AllSorts (their flagship sports session), ZigZag (their creative session), KEEN Teens and GrEAT Social, as well as KEEN plus events which involve trips to museums, the theatre, bowling and so much more!

At the moment, they are operating a busy Virtual KEEN timetable over zoom which is a blast: you can do everything from yoga to talent shows, cooking to exercise classes, KEEN choir, Film Clubs and even just general chats. There have been up to 20 sessions weekly, with around 400 total sign-ins weekly. They have also been sending out weekly postal packs to families unable to access zoom since last March and have created our own YouTube Channel packed full of fun activities to complete. 

How can students get involved?

“KEEN simply couldn’t function without our absolutely brilliant team of student volunteers. I can’t speak highly of them enough – they truly make KEEN as wonderful as it is.”

Many students get involved by coming along as a “Session Buddy” to in-person or virtual activities, offering support and getting stuck in themselves. Many volunteers also run the sessions, so get to decide what activities KEEN do on a week-to-week basis. “It’s a fab way to escape the student bubble and release your inner child!” – Catherine

KEEN also have a very committed Student Committee working behind the scenes on an operational level who run KEEN’s social media, help produce accessible resources and so much more. “We’re a sociable bunch and welcome absolutely anybody to get involved.” – Catherine

Why should you get involved?

“It’s a joy to watch as young people develop and grow in confidence and build relationships – we have participants who at first barely say a word and then start performing at KEENs Got Talent every week or showing everybody a stretch in yoga, and who wave like mad when they see their friend join the call.”

KEEN is driven by inclusivity: it helps make the world a friendlier, more equal and more accessible place.

“A parent recently told me how grateful they were for ‘adding so much colour’ to their child’s life; a volunteer told me KEEN had been a lifeline over lockdown – it’s little things like this that encapsulate how rewarding this work is.”

Want to get involved?

You can get in touch with the Programme Manager (Catherine) at [email protected]. Their website and socials also have useful information:

https://www.keenoxford.org

Instagram

Facebook

Twitter

The Undercurrent: Fun – a vital ingredient for optimising your performance?

I’ve got hundreds of questions for the University, but the overarching one is fairly simple: how have they kept a straight face as they stitch-up their students at every turn? How did they resist the temptation to add a cheeky ‘lol’ to the emails that rejected student residency in favour of letting tourists roam the grounds? Which wannabe comedian came up with the idea of adding a line about the importance of student well-being to the end of emails announcing measures that make student well-being immeasurably worse?

Every email that comes into my inbox from a University or college email at the moment displays a breath-taking lack of self-awareness. I recently got one with the line “remember to have fun” near the end. I held my breath, beside myself at the idea that someone in college might actually value my social life. Imagine my disappointment when I read the next words: “fun is a vital ingredient for optimising your performance.” In Oxford, that’s what passes for a message of encouragement. To anyone else, it’s the sort of phrase you’d see on a billboard in a dystopian future where humans are kept as pets by robot overlords.

The pandemic has laid bare the tutors’ predilection for viewing every aspect of student life through a magnifying lens of academic achievement, which they seem to have placed firmly between food and water on their warped idea of a student hierarchy of needs. During the pandemic they’ve turned this magnifying glass on students to devastating effect, frying us like ants in the summer sun. Without wanting to sound needy, it would be lovely to hear from someone at the University who cares about my well-being regardless of whether it improves my essays.

You can’t even escape to social media for a break from it all. Take the official University Twitter account, which recently published a video on the benefits of walking that included the (unironic) line “if you get a really bad email from your boss or a frustrating message from your sister, go out and stretch your legs.” If I went for a stroll every time I got a “really bad email” from the University, I’d be able to drop out altogether and pursue a career as an Olympic walker. If the frequency of these “really bad emails” continues when everyone comes back I worry that Cornmarket might start to erode.

Another shining example of this total inability to read the room came in their tweet urging the student population not to trash each other because of the practice’s “negative social, financial and personal impacts on the whole Oxford community.” I’m all for a bit of well-placed environmentalism, but being lectured about the social impact of shaving cream by an institution that is perfectly happy to support arms companies leaves a distinctly bitter taste in one’s mouth. God forbid the sound of celebrating students disturb the researchers hard-at-work on Britain’s next for-profit death machine.

Now, this would all be very funny if these messages weren’t coming straight from the people that have been assessing our mental health claims for the last six months. The delicious irony of being asked the reasons for my mental health issues by the institution that has caused almost every problem in my life for the last two years has not been lost on me. 

Only Oxford could turn the delicate process of divulging a mental health issue into a sick version of Britain’s Got Talent that’s all sob-story and no singing. And, to be honest, if I was choosing whom to divulge the intimate details of my home life to, I’d rather Simon Cowell than a panel of tutors whose combined insight into mental illness is that it disappears when you go for a bloody walk.

Art by Justin Lim.

Greed is nothing new in football

0

News of a proposed European Super League, including the so-called ‘big six’ English Premier League teams, broke on Sunday to much shock and dismay within the football and sporting world. But, almost as quickly and suddenly as this news broke, all six English teams involved confirmed that they were pulling out of the Super League after sustained fan pressure and a grassroots campaign against the proposals.

The European Super League would have involved a selection of 20 elite men’s football teams (12 of which were publicly confirmed) competing in a season long European league competition, as opposed to the existing knock-out UEFA Champions League. Crucially, the founding 15 clubs would not have had to qualify for the Super League through domestic footballing leagues, as they do with the Champions League. Manchester United, Real Madrid, Barcelona, Liverpool and more were among the teams who had put their names to the Super League proposal, launching a wave of criticism and claims that the spirit of the game has been lost. Though many of the teams implicated have listened to these claims, the reality is that the spirit of football was lost long ago. The elitist and greed-driven plans for the European Super League shouldn’t surprise us.

Speaking a few hours after the news broke on Sunday 18th April, former Manchester United defender and Sky Sports pundit, Gary Neville, claimed he was “absolutely disgusted”, particularly with Manchester United and Liverpool for betraying their working class roots. In making these comments, Neville drew on the long tradition of football as ‘the people’s game’ – a game created by and for the working classes. A number of northern industrial towns were the sites of the first football teams that would later grow into Premier League giants and billion-pound conglomerates. Sheffield FC, recognised as the world’s oldest football club, was founded in 1857 by a group of men who sought to formalise the “kickabouts” that had been enjoyed by a number of locals. As Neville discussed, his own team, Manchester United, was “born out of workers”. Originally founded as Newton Heath, the club was established by railway workers in Lancashire in 1878, acting as a sort of workers club that used football to create a community. Most Premier League teams have a similar heritage centred on working class solidarity and community. And yet, in today’s game, these working class legacies have been lost.

Neville went on to criticise the teams who had joined the Super League as motivated by “pure greed”. However, it seems fair to say that greed is now embedded within every area of the modern game, from transfer fees and sponsorship deals to ticket pricing and broadcast rights. Greed has driven the profit and money involved in football to quite unbelievable heights and has corrupted what was once – but is no longer – the people’s game.

The inflation of transfer fees is just one example of such greed, which can clearly be observed through glancing back over the past few decades. Back in 1979, Trevor Francis became the first million pound transfer in English footballing history when he joined Birmingham City from Nottingham Forrest. Just weeks before, the record transfer fee had already been broken, when David Mills signed for West Bromwich Albion from Middlesbrough for £500,000. Francis’ signing smashed that record only a short while later, marking a turning point in football history. The current record signing now dramatically overshadows the £1 million paid for Francis. The most expensive player bought by a Premier League team, Paul Pogba, came to Manchester United for 89 times what Birmingham City paid for Francis, and across European football, the record for the most expensive signing is held by Neymar Jr., who joined Paris Saint Germain for €222 million.

Competition to sign players for record fees and world-firsts overshadows the fact that the game is becoming increasingly inaccessible to a number of fans. With clubs raking in ever more money through transfer fees, shirt sales and sponsorship deals, ticket prices do not seem to be decreasing. Rather, the opposite is happening. To take just one example of ticket prices, The Football Supporters Association, FSA, highlights “the acceleration in the rise in ticket prices well beyond the rate of inflation” which has meant that game has become “unaffordable to large swathes of its traditional fan base”. One Liverpool fan group estimated in 2013 that ticket prices had increased by an astonishing 716% since 1989. Similar patterns can be observed across the ticket prices of other clubs, and there is evidence that younger fans, especially, are being priced out of watching the game. So, even as clubs are splurging plainly ridiculous fees to sign and pay their players, fans have been forgotten and left behind, expected to meet ever more costly demands.

Serious and distressing concerns have also been raised around the source of money being mined into Premier League and European football clubs. Manchester City is, for example, currently owned by Sheikh Mansour, the deputy prime minister of the United Arab Emirates, UAE, a state which Human Rights organisation Amnesty International describes as continuing to “restrict freedom of expression”, conducting “unfair trials” and failing to change laws which made “women…unequal with men”. More recently, during the latest international break, the German, Norwegian and Netherlands national men’s teams took a stand against the 2022 World Cup in Qatar.

The upcoming contest has been shrouded in distressing reports of human rights violations, exploitation and maltreatment of workers involved in constructing stadiums. Concerns over forced labour, appalling living, working conditions and exploitation have been voiced for several years and yet, as it stands the World Cup in 2022 is going ahead. Games will be played in the same stadiums where migrant workers died and footballing authorities will enrich themselves off of the suffering and abuse of others. What is more, last year’s UEFA Champion’s League finalists Paris Saint Germain are owned by Qatar Sports Investments, a state-owned shareholding organisation dominated by the rulers of Qatar. This makes PSG, along with Manchester City, the only two state-owned clubs in the world, both of whom are funded and owned by states with poor records on Human Rights. Such concerns (which go well-beyond just Manchester City and PSG), coupled with the mostly tacit acceptance of the Qatar World Cup, paint a fairly terrifying picture of the state of modern football. Human Rights should not be a price we have to pay for football: they are non-negotiable. Football has become complicit in Human Rights abuse. That horrifying truth shows how far the game and its original values have been distorted. 

Football clubs are no longer what they were established for. They are businesses and are not governed in the interests of the fans and of the game. Some of these businesses are complicit in awful crimes and violations across the world. Guided by profit, gain and greed, clubs act as capitalist corporations; football itself has become a secondary concern. Banners reading: ‘Created by the poor, Stolen by the rich’ were unveiled at EPL stadiums across England in protest of the plans for the Super League. This aptly captures what has happened to the game since its inception: football has been gentrified. It has been appropriated by the elite and commercialised to the point that fans, who football teams were originally set up by and for, have been left behind.

Bright green and gold scarves became the emblem of angered Manchester United fans who sought to reject the takeover of the club by the Glazer family. In purchasing the club, Malcolm Glazer unloaded £525 million of debt on the club (and the club has remained in debt since the takeover, accumulating an extra £140 million of debt in the single financial year between 2018-19). This garnered criticism for the manner in which the club has been run for personal profit and with little regard for the game. Green and gold, as the colours worn by Manchester United’s ancestor club, Newton Heath, represented the opposition of the fan base to the take over and a desire to return the club to the fans, as Newton Heath had been. The breakaway club FC United of Manchester was established to do just that, spawned in the aftermath of the Glazer takeover for Manchester United fans disillusioned by the commercialisation of football. It claims to provide “authentic, supporter-owned, community-focused football for supporters who are tired of modern football’s constant pursuit of further riches at the expense of…the fans”. Such statements clearly carry the spirit of the founding football teams and the workers who came together to carry Newton Heath, centering on community and the fans having a stake in the game.

German clubs also provide an admirable model of how the game can stay within the grasp and control of the fans. The so-called 50+1 model dictates that fans must have a 51% stake in football clubs and thus majority of voting rights and decision-making powers. The Bundesliga website explains that “this means that private investors cannot take over clubs and…prioritise profit over the wishes of supporters”. German teams were historically “not-for-profit organisations run by members associations”, given that German law forbade ownership by private organisations up until 1998. The rule has been credited with the stable and relatively affordable price of most Bundesliga tickets and keeping German clubs out of the high levels of debt that have smothered other European teams. In keeping clubs firmly in the control of fans, German teams have managed to resist the profit-driven capitalist takeovers to which English clubs have fallen prey.

The 50+1 model has been praised around the world for ensuring the sustainability and democratic ownership of football clubs and touted as a system that offers fans far more control over the game than any other place in the world. A future in which this model was adopted in England seems more remote than ever, but it is equally clear that football clubs cannot be left in the hands of greedy and unrestrained capitalists. Listening to fans involves bringing them directly into decision-making and the governance of the club, ensuring that football stays relevant and true to its roots. The German 50+1 model could be a way of effectively protecting it from the spiralling corruption increasingly engulfing the game.

Effective controls on the increasingly ridiculous levels of spending that have come to characterise the modern game are also severely lacking. UEFA Financial Fair Play rules have shown themselves to be flimsy and ineffective – indeed, one may validly question the extent to which this really promotes ‘fair play’ and a ‘fair’ level of spending given that clubs are still permitted to spend hundreds of millions, up to €5 million over their earnings. Football exists in a very unusual and yet unique echo chamber, whereby money and monetary values seem to bounce around until they increase to ludicrous levels. Against a backdrop of economic uncertainty and downturn, money in football seems unaffected and continues to reach ridiculous heights, underpinned – always – by greed.

If human rights and human lives can be sacrificed supposedly in the name of football, something has gone seriously wrong and the game has been warped. If the supporters who built the clubs and continue to provide their life source count for nothing, a serious reconsideration of the way football is run is desperately needed.

Greed has sadly become an integral part of the modern game, woven into its very fabric. The European Super League is an attack on football. But the groundwork for it was laid a long time ago. Football needs to heal; dismantling the Super League will not be enough to undo the corruption that has become embedded in the game. It will take more than just defeating these proposals for the game to truly heal. Decision-making needs to be more transparent, the football echo chamber needs to be smashed and the game must be returned to the fans.

Fighting the Super League was just the tip of the iceberg. The reality is, that with spiralling ticket prices, rocketing transfer fees and profit-oriented governance, the game has not belonged to the fans for some time. The Super League was merely the latest iteration of greed-driven corporate capitalist interests attempting to corrupt the game. But the principles behind the campaign against it still apply and should live on. Football fans should not wait for the next European Super League-style proposal; they should demand action and ownership of their clubs now.

Magdalen College reopens to tourists despite delayed student returns

0

Magdalen College, Oxford has reopened to tourists, despite the fact that not all students will return to the college grounds until mid-May. Under current government guidelines, “outdoor hospitality venues” and “outdoor attractions” have been allowed to open from 12 April. Meanwhile, the government stipulates that “[higher education] providers should not ask students to return if their course can reasonably be continued online” and that students on non-practical courses “should continue to learn remotely and remain where they’re living until in-person teaching starts again, wherever possible”.

Magdalen College advertised that they were “open to visitors” on 12 April,  while their students on non-practical courses were not informed of return dates until the following day. Writing on Facebook, Magdalen college advertised that the first 20 visitors would receive a “free Magdalen calendar”. 

Visitors can explore the grounds of the college, including its deer park, for a reduced price of £6 for adults and £5 for Over 65s, children and students from other institutions. Oxford students can visit for free. 

Magdalen is currently the only Oxford college to reopen to the public. Christ Church remains closed to visitors “at least until the end of the academic year”, although they have advertised the opening of their new takeaway café on 1 May, as well as their shop which is currently open. 

King’s College, Cambridge, is also accepting visitors during timed slots. Writing on their website, the College said they were “delighted” to open parts of their grounds from 13 April. For a reduced price of £5, members of the public can visit the wildflower meadow and the Xu Zhimo garden. The College also plans to open their Chapel to tourists from 17 May.

On 13 April, the government announced that in-person teaching for students on non-practical courses would resume “no earlier than 17 May” giving universities just over a month to prepare for this change. Meanwhile, the government’s original roadmap out of lockdown, detailing provisional “unlocking” dates for other sectors, including 12 April for outdoor hospitality and attractions, was announced on 22 February, giving such sectors more time to prepare. 

Students and university leaders have previously expressed frustration at higher education’s omission from the original roadmap. Many were further disheartened by the 17 May date. In response to the announcement that Magdalen would reopen to tourists, Abigail Howe, a Second Year English Literature student at the college, told The Telegraph: “The roadmap has been done in such a way that university students’ return has been prioritised below people having a walk in the college grounds.” 

In relation to Magdalen’s policy under the new University guidance, Ms Howe told Cherwell: “Magdalen’s returns policy has been really sympathetic and considerate to my knowledge. However, the fact they are legally able to take in tourists before all students can return does highlight the absurdity of the government’s roadmap and the way students have been consistently disregarded by the government.”

A spokesperson for the Department for Education told Cherwell: “All university students who have not yet returned to campus and in-person teaching will be able to do so alongside 17 May, at the earliest. The timing aligns with Step 3 of the Government’s roadmap, where restrictions on social contact and indoor mixing will be further eased and aims to limit potential public health risks associated with student populations moving across the country.”

The Department did not provide comment on the specific reopening of colleges to the public.

Magdalen College has been contacted for comment.

Image Credit: Ed Webster / CC-BY-2.0

Everyone’s Invited: Oxford University mentioned 57 times

0

CW: Sexual assualt and rape

More than 80 UK universities have been named on Everyone’s Invited ‘rape culture’ website where students have been reporting accounts of sexual harassment, abuse, misogyny and assault. The website has collated nearly 15,000 anonymous accounts thus far and claims are now being extended to testimonies from university students. The data was released both to highlight the problem on campuses and expose sexual abuse in further education.

Receiving over 1000 new testimonies related to universities within a week, Everyone’s Invited has so far mentioned eighty-four institutions in total. Some universities are mentioned dozens of times, including around 50 mentions each for some elite universities. Oxford University (57 times) along with University of Exeter (65) and University College London (48) fall into this category. Seventeen UK universities have more than five mentions and 15 of these qualify as Russell Group universities – traditionally among the most prestigious in the country.

When asked to explain the correlation between elite universities and the increased number of mentions, Soma Sara, founder of the Everyone’s Invited website, said: “There are logical reasons for this bias. The platform is still new, and it has grown through word of mouth, with friends sharing it with friends. I went to a private school and then a university in London. As a result, we received an abundance of testimonies from certain areas and groups.”

A Russell Group spokesperson said “No student should feel unsafe or have to tolerate harassment or sexual misconduct in any circumstance. Our universities take this issue incredibly seriously and provide a range of support to help students feel supported and safe. Where a crime has been committed it should be reported to the police. The testimonies highlighted via the Everyone’s Invited website show the need for us all to take this issue seriously.”

A University of Exeter spokesperson has said: “The safety, security and wellbeing of our students is, and always will be, our primary concern”, adding that it had a “zero tolerance for sexual harassment, abuse or assault”. Similarly, a Leeds University spokesperson also spoke of a zero-tolerance approach. A University of Edinburgh statement said all complaints would be treated seriously and with sensitivity. Oxford University are yet to provide a statement in response to the institution’s several mentions on the website.

Image Credit: Janeb13/pixabay.com

Climate change makes repaying COVID-19 debt harder

0

In an article for Nature, the Oxford Sustainable Law Programme (OSLP) warned that 77% of sovereign-bonds in 2020 did not adequately disclose climate risk. As global temperatures and sea levels rise, OSLP predicts that countries might face lower production, as well as be at increased risk of one-off weather disasters. As sovereign-bonds issued during the Covid-19 pandemic mature over the next 30 or even 100 years, governments will “either have to invest to mitigate climate change as part of their commitments under the Paris climate agreement — or face the costs of global warming directly”, according to the report. 

OSLP calls a scenario where countries fail to understand the economic risks concurrent with climate change a “climate crash.” 

The news comes as the International Monetary Fund and World Bank convene their spring meetings where environmental issues are featured on the agenda. OSLP has some solutions of its own to propose. In their three-step framework, OSLP’s report first recommends that researchers create better tools for funds to understand climate risk as they take on investors. 

Secondly, governments should use credit from their Covid-19 funds to prioritise greening their economies by increasing spending on clean energy which will create jobs in the process. 

Thirdly, richer countries (and their finance development institutions) should buy back debt from poorer countries on the condition that poorer countries use the money to invest in their climate resilience, as seen in the debt-for-nature swap in the Seychelles.

Out of all the countries OSLP looked at, only three (Bermuda, the Dominican Republic and El Salvador) acknowledged a risk of more frequent natural disasters in their sovereign-bond prospectuses. Only two (Bulgaria and United Arab Emirates) identified risks in their transition to greener economies. 

Despite Boris Johnson’s initial promise to “plan a green recovery,” OSLP reports that the UK has so far failed to capitalise on the opportunity to utilise Covid-19 credit to build a more environmentally resilient economy.   

Image Credit: Marcus Spiske via unsplash.com

Cyclists and Liberal Democrats protest against closure of cycle route on Parks Road

0

A protest was held on Tuesday, 20th April by a group of local cyclists and Liberal Democrat activists to oppose the temporary closure of a cycle path outside the Oxford University Museum of Natural History. The group feel that the closure of the path adds a greater element of risk to their journey along the road and wished to convey their opinion on this to the University and Oxford County Council.

The cycle path has been closed to allow for repair works on the two-storey basement under the Museum Lawn, along Parks Road. Temporary cycle barriers have been installed so that cyclists do not mix with pedestrians on the narrow path. Instead they are asked to dismount or divert onto the carriageway.

The organiser of the protest, James Cox, the Liberal Democrat candidate for University Parks told Cherwell: “We’ve had weeks if not months of this barrier being up on Parks Road…this was an active cycle path up to this point on a really dangerous road. We quite often just up the road see flowers and memorials for incidents that have happened here in the past.

“For the University and the County Council to be passing the blame to each other, not coming to a constructive solution, meaning that cyclists are having to drive straight into quite busy traffic a lot of the time, putting their safety and concerns at the bottom of the pile – it’s just unacceptable.” 

In response to how he wanted the County Council to respond to the issues cyclists face in the city more generally, Mr Cox commented:

“It’s about ensuring there are facilities that make people feel cycling is safe and accessible to them, so having those cycle lanes separated from busy roads so that people don’t feel they’re taking their life into their hands every time they go out on their bikes

“It’s for us about improving cycling facilities, promoting cycling and active travel as a real alternative for getting around Oxford, and to protect cyclists when they’re out on the road or in segregated cycle lanes and putting the concerns and safety of cyclists much higher up the agenda than it has been”

Local cyclist Joanne Bowlt also added: “My biggest concern is the lack of priority given to cyclists and pedestrians…I feel this is the wrong way round and we ought to be looking at the priorities of road users the correct way – the way of the future: pedestrians, cyclists and then cars. That’s not what’s being demonstrated by a decision like this and on other junctions further up the same national cycle route

“Cyclists are just being pushed straight onto the road in front of traffic, plenty of children use this route to cycle to school and I think it’s incredibly dangerous. This was already a dangerous junction.

“The University is limited in what it can do, but there are options like opening a route through University Parks as a temporary trial option, given that they can’t keep this cycle route open. I appreciate this is a courtesy cycle route, but it is a national cycle route.”

Benjamin Nicholson, another local cyclist said:

“I have never really liked this part of the road here, it’s so much worse when you have to go onto the road because drivers don’t look…a lot of people just assume that it’s safe and they won’t look, and that’s when accidents happen.”

In response, a spokesperson for the University told Cherwell: “The change in the bike lanes is due to the redevelopment but it was done for cyclists’ safety and it is temporary and only live until December 2021.
 
“There has been a lot of communication about the changes – there are boards up to the north and south of the cycle way diversion that indicates the diversion as a temporary condition to enable the essential maintenance works.”
 
A spokesperson for the County Council also added: “Due to the nature of the work by Oxford University to repair and waterproof the two-storey basement beneath the Museum Lawn along Parks Road, it has not been possible to do anything other than stop cyclists from using this section of the footway/cycleway. It is too narrow to be safely shared by the high volume of cyclists and pedestrians that use it.
 

“The section is owned by Oxford University and leased by Oxfordshire County Council, but both parties have been working closely together to find a solution for cyclists who have to use the road while the work takes place.

“The suggestion to use University Parks as an alternative cycle route during this period would be a matter for Oxford University, as would the possibility of encouraging cyclists travelling from Parks Road to South Parks Road to follow the internal site access routes through the Science area campus. These options though do not cater for people wanting to cycle along Parks Road into the city centre.”

Image Credit: Matt Schaffel

 

Police and Crime Commissioner candidates share views on ‘Kill the Bill’

0

Police and Crime Commissioner candidates for Thames Valley have published their manifestos for elections on 6 May. Cherwell asked them for their views on the new Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill and ‘Kill the Bill’ protests.

The bill seeks to place greater restrictions on protests and gives police the power to place constraints on demonstrations, including their time span and noise levels. It seeks to increase sentences for serious criminals and sexual offenders.

Since it passed its second reading there have been ‘Kill the Bill’ protests across England which demand the government drop the bill. Protestors argue the bill targets Black Lives Matter activists, the Gypsy Roma Traveller community, and activists for women’s rights.

Clashes with police at a peaceful vigil for the murdered Sarah Everard has sparked opposition to increased police powers by the Labour and Liberal Democrat parties. No Labour MPs voted in favour of the bill at its second reading. Labour party leader, Kier Starmer, has said the bill would have a severe impact on Black communities which is “real cause for concern.”

Matthew Barber, the current Deputy Police & Crime Commissioner for the Thames Valley and Conservative Party candidate, welcomes the bill. He believes the “new legislation will be a big step towards ensuring punishments fit the severity of the crime.”

Barber is “particularly pleased to see the introduction of long awaited measures to help the police deal with illegal encampments that can cause harm, disruption and distress to our local communities.”

Laetisia Carter, the Labour Party candidate, states she is “wholeheartedly [opposed] the police bill” and is “against it for so many reasons. It takes the country in a worrying anti democracy direction”. Carter urges the electorate to “remember this is not the police’s bill” in a Facebook statement.

John Howson, candidate for the Liberal Democrats, has voiced opposition to the bill. He believes new protests restrictions “are part of the Conservative Government’s anti-democratic attempts to silence any opposition to its policies, and the Liberal Democrats will fiercely resist them.”

Howson states the policing of ‘Kill the Bill’ protests “should not be to raise tensions. Police forces should debrief to learn from outcomes for management of future protests.”

Alan Robinson, an Independent candidate, states that his “concern is with the brave officers who were trying to police a very difficult situation” following violent ‘Kill the Bill’ protests.

“It is long overdue for people to realise that officers are people [too], and deserve exactly the same courtesy as everyone else. Just because they are in uniform doesn’t give anyone the right to be abusive towards another person.”

The election for the Police and Crime Commissioner takes place on 6 May. You must register to vote to take part.

Image Credit: Lawrence OP / CC BY-NC 2.0

“Well-Behaved Women Seldom Make History”: Freedom Fighting, Queen Jezebel and India

Christina Rossetti’s poetry is often coloured with feminist insights, as she handles conditions ranging from that of the unmarried Victorian women to so-called ‘fallen women’ with remarkable sensitivity. Yet there is one fallen woman who even under Rossetti’s pen cannot escape traditional sexist and racist narratives: Rani (Queen) Lakshmibai of Jhansi, hailed by British colonialists, such as Thomas Lowe, as the “Jezebel of India”. 

Rani Lakshmibai’s infamy in British narratives is closely linked to her involvement in the Sepoy Mutiny of 1857 against colonial rule by the British East India Company. The mutiny began with rebels from the 12th Bengal Native Infantry, who were enraged after 85 Hindu and Muslim soldiers were sentenced to 10 years of hard labour and imprisonment for refusing to fire rifle cartridges they believed to be contaminated with pork and beef (offensive to both religions). Rossetti’s portrayal of the mutiny in her poem In the Round Tower at Jhansi reflects typical British contemporary narratives of the rebellion in numerous Indian cities. She focuses on two lovers forced to kill themselves before they are slaughtered by the rebels: 

‘A hundred, a thousand to one; even so;

Not a hope in the world remained,

The swarming, howling wretches below

Gained and gained and gained’

Indeed, the rebellion was a brutal affair, as rebels killed many wives and children of officers in the city of Meerut. When the rebels approached Lakshmibai’s city of Jhansi, however, the Rani assured the British that no harm would befall them under her watch. Nonetheless, a violent massacre of the British at Jhansi did ensue, as portrayed in Rossetti’s poem. Despite the Rani assuring the British that these rebel sepoys did not answer to her, and writing to two British officials that she hoped they would ‘go straight to hell for their deeds’, her title as Jezebel of India was confirmed. The Rani and the sepoy rebels were homogenised as the animalistic other: Rossetti’s ‘swarming, howling, wretches’.  

History has not been kind to Rani Laskhmibai of Jhansi, yet it is a serious disservice to conflate her story with the violence of one group of sepoys. The Rani was not born into royalty, but married Maharaja Gandaghar Rao, ruler of Jhansi. 

She was ahead of her times in more than one way, having learned to ride and fight by her teenage years and refusing to abide by norms of purdah, in which women were veiled from public view. Instead, she spoke to British and Indian advisers alike face to face.

The Maharaja and Rani gave birth to one child, who died in infancy. Still keen for an heir, they adopted a 5-year-old son. When the Maharaja died, it seemed as though the kingdom of Jhansi was in good hands as the Rani was more than capable of ruling due to her progressive, self-styled education, and she had an heir to pass her skills onto. 

However, the East India Company, hoping to consolidate their grip on Jhansi and expel traditional rulers (however effective Lakshmibai was) in favour of British officials, hailed the obscure Doctrine of Lapse, giving them the right to control any territory without a natural born male heir. They offered the Rani a generous sum of 60,000 rupees to give up her kingdom, but she remained resolute in the face of their political manoeuvring, speaking words which have become immortalised as poetic resonances of freedom in Indian history: Meri Jhansi nahi doongi (I will not give up my kingdom). 

Soon after Lakshmibai refused to give up her kingdom under the Doctrine of Lapse, the violence of the Sepoy Mutiny began to sweep through her kingdom. Grouping her with the rebels, the British laid siege to her fortress at Jhansi and she was left with no choice but to fight back and eventually escape with her son. The British spared nobody over 16 in Jhansi, and the beloved Indian Rani was forced out. 

Lakshmibai, realising she had no British allies and would be blamed for the mutiny at Jhansi, decided to take up the cause of freedom against the British empire from the neighbouring town of Gwalior. During the failed siege before this, the Rani had already demonstrated her commitment to egalitarianism; according to Rejected Princesses (2016) she had coats made for a thousand of the poorest soldiers and enlisted both men and women for the fight. When she escaped the siege with her son and fought in a number of battles against the British in Gwalior, she fought her last battle dressed like a man in a turban, and her fatal adversary, General Rose, paid tribute to her, saying that ‘the Indian mutiny produced one man, and that man was a woman’

Rani Lakshmibai and her words ‘Meri Jhansi nahi doongi’, have become integral in teaching about her in modern-day India, as she is hailed as one of the country’s first and most courageous freedom fighters. If Rossetti is to be on the A-level English British curriculum, it is high time that narratives such as Lakshmibai’s begin to appear on the History syllabus. The implications of her narrative about working against institutional power and gender structures are vast: Rani Lakshmibai may not have been able to save Jhansi from the British East India Company, but her actions can still help save us from failing to engage with a complex imperial past where there are always two sides to a story too often portrayed as one dimensional.  

Labelling her as Jezebel, homogenising her as one of a number of ‘wretches’ or, worst of all, forgetting her entirely, robs, not only Lakshimbai but, history of its richness. The Rani must be recognised as someone engaged in violence yet not for violence’s sake, a freedom fighter championing local over colonial power structures and a woman who often had to assume the guise of a man to do as she wished. 

Artwork by Emma Hewlett