Tuesday 1st July 2025
Blog Page 378

Coming of age with Beanie Feldstein

0

All teenagers hit that age where they are suddenly on the verge of adulthood whilst still clinging onto what is left of their childhood. When it was my turn to encounter such “minor” identity questions, cinema was undergoing a similar sort of coming of age. Having long graduated from the overplayed boy meets girl narratives of the “Brat Pack” 80s, and tired of the batty, boyfriend-orientated chicks, central to Clueless and Wild Child in the 90s and 2000’s, Hollywood began to hold a more honest mirror up to coming-of-age of women. Beanie Feldstein was in the reflection.

The first time I experienced Feldstein on screen was on Mother’s Day in year 12. My sister was back from uni and we thought we’d be good daughters and treat my mum to a cinema trip to see the new film Ladybird. She would pay of course, in exchange for some quality time with us. However, by the end of the film it was clear that I was the one who had been treated. The quality time had been shared between me, myself and I; ninety-four minutes to reflect on growing up.

Ladybird is that angsty teen who wants to get as far away from her Catholic girl’s school, her neurotic mother and her hometown, Sacramento, as possible. Inevitably, she must leave home in order to realise how much she appreciates it. Of salient importance to me, however, was her organic friendship with Beanie Feldstein’s Julie. 

Beanie’s small-town character is in many ways a foil to Ladybird’s fiery rage, but their friendship is timeless. They lie in the bathroom of their school talking about masturbation, Julie accompanies Ladybird to see her sad-boy love interest Kyle (Timothy Chalemet) and his band, and when Ladybird tries to social climb it is Julie that brings her back down to earth. Julie is very much the observer in this friendship, but her loyalty demonstrates the timeless bond between neighbourhood best friends who have been through it all together. My mother and sister left the cinema with tears in their eyes due to the film’s relatability and attention to the human reminders of home that remain with you when you’ve outgrown all the rest of it. I was yet to truly live out this lesson. 

The next year, I took a break from A-level revision and gap year planning to watch Booksmart. In contrast to the timid character of Julie, Feldstein’s Molly steals centre stage as she embodies the try-hard Gen-Z teenager. She is focused on academic success, her role as class president and her best friend Amy. In a Superbad-esque framework, Amy and Molly realise that they have given up their social lives to get into Ivy Leagues whilst their partying peers have still somehow managed to score places at Yale.

As the film progresses, we are witnesses to what is basically a love affair between Feldstein’s uptight and controlling Molly and her kinder and sweeter friend Amy. The girls try to cram four years of fun into one night. It is as if, in this one night, we experience a lifelong friendship: they dance it out on the street before going to school, they have compliment wars before going to the party (“call the police because there has been a {beauty} emergency”), they fight at their first high school party, but the most poignant and most heart wrenching scene is when Molly says goodbye to Amy at the airport. Set to a backdrop of a breakup song we witness the dramatic parting of two soul mates, childhood best friends who separate in order to independently start the next chapter of their lives.

Having watched all three versions of A Cinderella story growing up, I thought it would be my Prince Charming who I’d be most sad to say goodbye to when I left home for my gap year. It was, in fact, the parting of paths with my own childhood best friend, my own Beanie Feldstein, that resulted in the true separation anxiety. For me, Feldstein represents that unconventional but yet oh so conventional friendship, she reveals how often cinema and society undercuts the true hardship of the end to a female friendship. It may not be romance but that is because it is something so much more. 

When I came back from my 12 months away from home, I watched Caitlin Moran’s almost autobiographical film How to Build a Woman, in which Beanie Feldstein plays 16-year-old working class girl from Wolverhampton, Johanna, who reinvents herself by becoming a journalist at a rock magazine. In this movie, Feldstein is as daring as Johanna’s black top-hat; she brings to life the fresh concept of a sexually empowered female character who has unconventional beauty and no sexual experiences. As teenagers, we are constantly, subconsciously reinventing ourselves until we find an identity that fits and for Johanna this, at times, meant wearing bin-bags and confessing her love to a rock star. Far more reflective of your everyday girl than most young-adult female leads, such as Elle in Clueless or Molly Ringwald in Pretty in Pink, Feldstein’s character is guided by her ambition and that alone. 

I see myself and my peers stealing bits and pieces from Beanie’s Feldstein’s varying portrayals of women coming of age. Whether it’s the timid, side-lined best friend Julie, or the dominant and ambitious Molly, Feldstein’s characters have expanded the definition of what it means to approach womanhood. They turn the typically sexualised female protagonist on its head and are sexually empowered without the direct involvement of any one man. With all three of Feldstein’s movies passing the Bechdel Test, they place value not on size or beauty or men but rather on character and the great power of human connection.

Feldstein’s women, however, did not come out of nowhere, they were written into existence by fantastic feminist artists such as Greta Gerwig and Caitlin Moran who are now taking back control of defining womanhood. Imagine that, women writing women has actually given birth to realistic portrayals women gasps. Not only did Beanie Feldstein help me come of age, she also helped Hollywood join me in adulthood, and join the 21st century. We live in a time when growing up is particularly hard, but without our soul sisters, the hormonal transition to womanhood would surely be much harder. 

Cumin in from the Cold – Three Winter Warmers to Alleviate January Blues

0

Winter in the UK demands warm and comforting food – for those of us who are lucky, the holiday season also provides ample time to prepare it. It’s unsurprising that when the temperature drops, we crave piping hot dinners, whether it be Vietnamese pho, Swiss fondue, or throat-tingling curries laden with fragrant spices. Another thing that snow-time specials from cold regions across the world have in common is that they have to be flexible, given that produce from the peak growing season isn’t readily available. As a result, if you’re being mindful of your food’s air miles, winter is the time for canned goods, pickles, and long-lasting root vegetables to shine. Here are three adaptable (and veggie-friendly!) winter dishes that won’t only keep you warm but can also be made with things you might have tucked away in a cupboard. 

Noodle Soup for the Soul (2 hefty portions)

Umami: the 5th basic taste that is still mystifying many of us. Often translated from Japanese as “savouriness”, it is characteristic of broths and meats – perfect for a discussion of winter warmers!

Fermented products are a great source of umami, as well as something that can sit idly in a cupboard until you need it, and that’s where one of the star ingredients of this dish, miso paste, comes into play. This noodle soup uses vegetable stock (500ml) with miso paste (20g with 200ml boiling water) for its broth, but you could make this more traditionally by adding dashi powder – a key component in Japanese stocks.

First, sauté a diced onion with four cloves minced garlic, and a 3cm chunk of ginger, adding a stalk of lemongrass in half-cm slices last of all. Using lemongrass, whether fresh or as a paste, adds an aromatic freshness that will enhance the soup. Cook your broth for about 10 minutes, and then add veggies that need to be cooked through and your favourite noodles (I opted for udon here!), as many Serrano chilis as you can handle, and any vegetables rocking about in your fridge or freezer. Corn (baby or sweet) is a nice colourful addition, as are diced carrots and runner beans. Don’t forget to top with fresh coriander and spring onion. 

Star ingredients: yellow miso paste and fresh lemongrass stalks

A Nostalgic Kofta Curry 

This second dish is heavily inspired by Tejal Rao’s recipe for a vegetarian kofta curry. These koftas are made with a purée of garlic, ginger, and green chilis, added to a mixture of canned black beans, an egg, breadcrumbs, spring onions, and chopped mint and coriander. After you find a tin of beans hiding at the back of a cupboard, using a fork, mash the mixture together until it is almost smooth. To make this step easier, you could incorporate refried beans in the place of some black beans, before shaping the mixture into 1-inch balls.

Baking the koftas, a deviation that Rao makes from her grandfather’s recipe (as detailed in her article “I Think of My Grandfather Every Time I Make Kofta”), cooks them evenly and you can avoid the oiliness that might result from frying. They take 25 minutes in the oven at 200°C – this is your opportunity to prepare the spicy and comforting curry that the koftas will be sitting in, as well as a pot of rice to go alongside it. To craft the curry itself, fry sliced onions in a vegetable oil for a few minutes before adding 4-5 cloves of minced garlic and half an inch of ginger. Once the garlic and ginger are fragrant, add a tsp of turmeric, ground cumin, ground coriander, chilli powder, and garam masala to the pot. Before long, the aroma of these spices will be wafting out of the kitchen, revealing to your whole corridor what’s on the hob. Mix in a can of chopped tomatoes and 2 tablespoons of tomato puree, and season with salt and black pepper. Spoon this onto your plate, before arranging a few koftas in the curry and plating the rice. Finally, top with fresh mint and coriander.

Star ingredients: the spice mix and fresh coriander

Winter Veg Laksa Lemak 

Laksa lemak is a spicy soup popular in Malaysian-Singaporean fusion cuisine. There are two components that underpin this soup – it gets its creaminess from coconut milk (I chose to use light coconut milk, but both work) and its depth of flavour from a paste of spices called rempah. The rempah, a blend of garlic, ginger, lemongrass, red chilis, turmeric, cumin, and a shallot, is beautifully aromatic, and should be cooked at length on a low to medium heat to release maximum intensity of flavour. Rempah is wonderfully flexible. In Malaysia, tamarind or fermented shrimp paste might also be added, but a paste of suitable and available ingredients will make a delicious foundation for a unique bowl of comfort.

This dish comes together with the addition of rice noodles which should be swimming, not drowning, in the broth, winter vegetables such as sweet potatoes, celeriac, swede, or carrots, and other optional toppings – for example, crispy fried tofu or prawns for non-vegetarians. With a squeeze of lime and a garnish of spring onion, and coriander, this dish is a perfectly satisfying veggie meal. To add a bit more texture, you could also top the soup with beansprouts or halved cherry tomatoes.

Star ingredients: rempah paste and the squeeze of lime 
This winter vegetable Laksa leak combines creamy coconut with aromatic rempah – check out @chefshreyasi for more colourful dishes and restaurant reviews

2021’s Newest Food Trends

0

Any keen follower of the gastronomic world knows that the start of the New Year beckons micro-analysed predictions for eating trends. As we are still within the early stages of 2021, let us look ahead to which foods we might expect to see flourish over the next twelve months. As is almost always the case with such guesses, many will likely be wrong (bugs as a meat replacement is still not a thing no matter how much it has been predicted!) but that will not deter us from speculating! As boring as it may sound, I enjoy looking back at the food forecast from previous years to see which predictions came true. It makes me titter to read the tentative descriptions of what became enormous food trends, such as the brilliantly vague evocation of hummus as a middle-eastern chickpea dip often accompanied by bread or crudités. With this in mind, I hope this article is just about accurate enough that people look back on it in a year and chuckle at its speculative tone. Failing that, just laugh at its hideous inaccuracy. 

Low-sugar chocolate 

The health benefits of dark chocolate have been widely proclaimed in recent years, leading to rising sales. The latest innovation in the branch of healthier chocolate has been ‘reduced sugar’ alternatives to existing products. Cadbury have released a 30% less sugar Dairy Milk as well as a DarkMilk bar to accommodate increasing demand for darker chocolate. Some say these new products are to slip around a sugar tax, but they could be part of the increasing trend for alternatives to traditional chocolate. First there was dairy-free chocolate; perhaps a sugar-free chocolate will hit the shelves one of these days.

Shopping unpacked 

Hats off to the Oxford Botley Road Waitrose store which was the first in the country to use a pick ‘n mix system. This new initiative allows customers to refill their own jars with many products including pasta and other dried foods, frozen vegetables, and beer. In fact, the sale of unpackaged products outsells their packet equivalents in this store (go Oxford!). Covid-depending, this trend is set to continue with an ever-increasing number of independent jar shops as well as Booths, the northern supermarket chain, planning to introduce a similar strategy to Waitrose. 

Pea milk

The recent increased popularity of milk alternatives needs no explanation, with milk aisles looking increasingly like an Alpro advert. The new kid on the block is pea milk made from yellow split peas, providing as much protein as cow’s milk with a much lower environmental cost. The Handlebar café on St Michael’s Street has already jumped on this trend with their coconut pancakes. If you haven’t already tried this dreamy stack, I cannot recommend them enough.

Frozen food  

The convenience of frozen food is hard to beat. An increasing number of food manufacturers have cottoned on, given the expanding quantity of frozen ready-meals, vegetables, and desserts found in supermarket freezers. But frozen food need not be something to be embarrassed about: gone are the days when eating from the freezer was synonymous with artery-clotting ready meals and ice cream. There are now so many healthy frozen meal companies such as Linda McCartney or supermarket own brand meals. What’s more, there is increasing scientific evidence to suggest that eating frozen vegetables may even be healthier than fresh due to the lock in of vitamins that occurs when a product is frozen. 

Rise in number of offers to students from BAME backgrounds

0

UCAS has published figures showing that the proportion of UK undergraduates from ethnic minority backgrounds admitted to Oxford has reached record highs.

In 2020, the number of students from a BAME background who were accepted rose to 684 (23.6% of total UK intake), compared to 558 (22%) the previous year. The number of Black students who gained a place has risen from 80 (3.2%) to 106 (3.7%).

Further analysis from the admissions body has also shown that after accounting for subject choice and predicted grades, Oxford is now more likely to make offers to students from disadvantaged areas, to students from an African and Caribbean background, and to students with mixed heritage.

In the most recent admissions cycle, Oxford made a total of 3,541 offers. Of these, 68.7% were made to state school students, a marginal decrease from last year’s 69.1%. However, the ratio between candidates from the most socially advantaged areas to the least has fallen considerably, decreasing from 2.8:1 to 2.7:1 as measured by ACORN. Meanwhile, for students from areas least likely to participate in higher education the ratio also fell from 7.6:1 to 6.3:1 according to the POLAR measurement. 

Both of these statistics are ahead of targets agreed upon by the University and the Office of Students. The Opportunity Oxford bridging scheme has made a large impact in just its second year of operation, with 167 students of its students receiving offers compared to 116 last year.

Target Oxbridge, a programme that aims to help UK students of Black heritage get into Oxford and Cambridge, has also announced an application to offer rate of over 40%. This is significantly higher than the average conversion rate for UK applicants.

The Director of Undergraduate Admissions and Outreach at Oxford, Dr Samina Khan, commented: “Last year’s record figures for offers to students from underrepresented groups was a significant step towards diversifying our student body, but to be able to make further advances for a second year during the COVID-19 pandemic is an achievement and testament to the hard work by many students in these difficult circumstances  The University has also worked hard to put much of its outreach and access activity online and we are delighted this helped keep us on track to boost the proportion of undergraduate student intake coming to Oxford from under-represented backgrounds.”

Scientists behind Oxford vaccine to publish book

0

Two of the scientists behind the Oxford-AstraZeneca coronavirus vaccine, Professor Sarah Gilbert and Dr Catherine Green, are set to publish a book entitled Vaxxers: The Inside Story of the Oxford Vaccine and the Race Against the Virus, on the 8th July 2021. 

The book concerns the development of the Oxford-AstraZeneca Covid-19 vaccine, notable amongst other approved vaccines for being particularly cheap and easy to store and distribute. The UK has currently ordered enough doses for 50 million people.

Professor Gilbert has led the Oxford vaccine project since January 2020 and is also a professor of vaccinology at the Jenner Institute and Nuffield Department of Clinical Medicine. She has recently commented publicly on the jab’s efficiency against new coronavirus variants, suggesting the vaccine should still prevent the most severe cases of the disease.

Dr Green is the head of Oxford University’s Clinical Biomanufacturing Facility and played a critical part in producing doses for medical trials. She is also an associate professor of chromosome dynamics at the Wellcome Centre for Human Genetics.

In their book, Gilbert and Green seek to reveal “the heart-stopping moments in the eye of the storm” and “separate fact from fiction”. 

“As we wait for vaccinations to release us from lockdown, Vaxxers will invite us into the lab to find out how science will save us from this pandemic, and how we can prepare for the inevitable next one”, explains the book’s synopsis.

“With vaccination now being rolled out, we are one step closer to bringing an end to the devastation caused by Covid-19,” Gilbert said, speaking in The Bookseller. “There was so much teamwork involved behind the scenes in the rapid, yet safe, development of this vaccine. We decided to write this book to tell our personal story, to reveal how we made this vaccine as ordinary people in extraordinary circumstances and how it will benefit the whole world.”

The book will be published by Hodder and Stoughton with Anna Baty as senior commissioning editor and will be available in hardback, e-book, and audiobook format.

Professor Gilbert and Dr Green have been contacted for further comment.

Guide to impeachments at the Oxford Union

Motions of impeachment have been brought against the President and Librarian of the Oxford Union by a former Treasurer. While the motions have failed, with neither receiving the required 150 signatures, the impeachment procedures – especially in a remote term – can be unclear.

In a letter, the Returning Officer stated:

“Motions of impeachment against the President and Librarian were affixed to the noticeboard at 00:02 on Sunday 7th February. Neither motion gained the required 150 signatures by the deadline at 00:02 today, Tuesday 9th February, and so are not considered moved under Rule 43.”

“No verification process for signatures was required as neither online form for impeachment signatures received 150 responses.”

The impeachment process is set out in the Rules, Standing Orders, and Special Schedules of the Oxford Union Society.

Ordinarily, once motions have been submitted to the Returning Officer, they are displayed on the Union noticeboard. The date and time at which the articles had been posted is also displayed, since 150 verified signatures need to be collected for the motion to proceed to a debate.

Due to the pandemic, the motions are available to sign as Google forms. After being posted at 0:02 on the morning of February 7th, there is a 48 hour window in which members can sign. A spokesperson from the Union told Cherwell: “the Union does not publicise motions and it is up to the member who submitted it to collect signatures”.

If an impeachment motion receives the required 150 signatures, members will be able to vote on the motion four days later. This period exists to allow “free and open debate to occur” about whether the officers in question should be impeached and removed from office.

Impeachment motions require a supermajority of two thirds to be passed. The number of votes to impeach the officer must be higher that 150.

A candidate who has been impeached “shall be considered to have resigned from their office”. Impeached officers may run for office in the Union in the future. However, the Returning Officer is required to make the fact that the candidate has been impeached to members of the Union, describing the candidate as “Ex-Officer (impeached)”.

There are special cases under which impeachment proceedings would be suspended, such as if the officer resigns. This happened in 2019 when former Union President Brendan McGrath resigned his post after Ebenezer Azamati, a blind postgraduate student, was ejected from the debate chamber and banned from the Union for two terms. The events drew widespread scrutiny and condemnation from the international media and press, and prompted an impeachment motion to be brought against Mr McGrath.

In this specific instance, the articles accused Union President James Price and Librarian Chengkai Xie of attending a party which is alleged to have taken place in the Union in December. The Union’s solicitor has previously said that “to suggest that an illegal party was hosted would be untrue and defamatory. It is also untrue to say the police were called.”

Mr Xie is also accused of failing to interview all candidates for the Union’s Appointed Committee, which the former Treasurer claims contributed to “spirit of nepotism and exclusivity that is remiss of a society that serves the members rather than those in power”. Mr Price is accused of allowing this to take place by delegating this process to Mr Xie.

The motions also highlight that both officers were involved in putting together a term card which has drawn criticism because of comments made by invited speakers which have caused controversy. The Oxford SU Disabilities and LGBTQ+ Campaigns both criticised the invitation of the Canadian neuroscientist Deborah Soh, who they accused of transphobia and denying “autistic trans people – and autistic people as a whole – agency over their lives.”

Mr Price, Mr Xie and the Union have been approached for comment.

Image credit to US Department of State / Wikimedia Commons

An Illustration of Human Memory with Inside Out

Have you ever wondered how your memory works? Where it is in your brain? How memories are made? All will be explained, with a little help from the film Inside Out.

Inside Out is one of the most imaginative films in Pixar’s catalogue. The stage is inside the brain of a girl called Riley and the characters are her emotions – Joy, Sadness, Anger, Fear, and Disgust. The plot revolves around retrieving important ‘core memories’ that have been lost. Memories are represented as globes stacked on shelves in the brain, tinted by colours that match those of the accompanying emotions.

How accurate is this depiction of memory? It turns out Inside Out is a lot more reliable than you might think.

In the brain, memories are thought to be initially stored in the hippocampus – a small, curved region located deep within the brain, just above the level of the ear on each side. The surrounding regions also contribute to memory. Over time, some of these ‘short-term’ memories become ‘long-term memories’, which are stored as connections with the cerebral cortex (the large, outer layer of the brain).

When Riley goes to sleep, Joy watches as the memories rattle out of their initial storage in headquarters and are flung across the night sky like shooting stars. They streak down and land across a vast landscape of dense curves and folds. It’s a clever and stylish representation of the storage of the memories across the cerebral cortex. This moment in the film is an amalgamation of several different processes in the brain, so it’s worth unpicking these.

The temporary storage of facts in working memory only lasts up to 30 seconds. The transfer to long-term memory happens almost immediately, not during sleep as the film shows. 

There is a role for sleep and dreams in memory, but this is actually in the consolidation of long-term memories. A better representation of this phenomenon in the film would be if the globes in long-term memory were to glow brighter and become organised, so that related memories are stored together. 

One of the other main features of the film is how the memories are entwined with the emotions. This is well-established in psychology – the emotions affect how we record memories, but also how we remember them. It is much easier to recall memories from your life that matches your mood, and we tend to find positive memories easier to remember than negative ones as a rule. 

Finally, onto the substance of the memories themselves. Unlike in the film, these are not stored as a single ‘video clip’ – the information from our senses is stored in different regions of the brain, so that we can recall what someone said or what they looked like when they were saying it, or both at the same time.

The fundamental unit of memory is called an engram – the group of connected neurons that encode a single ‘unit’ of information. The hypothesis of an engram has been around since the 1920s, but in the last two decades we have been able to directly observe these neurons and manipulate them. In one such experiment in 2012, researchers were able to directly induce recall of a memory. Using a technique called optogenetics, they activated a population of neurons in mice which had been active during learning of a fear response, causing the mice to ‘remember’ the fear response and freeze. 

Overall, the view of the human memory we get from Inside Out is not one from the inside out, but from the top down. A little more research is needed for the curious viewer to find out exactly what makes up a memory. This is no criticism of the film, though – Pixar can hardly be blamed for not animating an engram. It succeeds in capturing lots of important concepts about the human memory without ever feeling didactic, conveying them not with words but with images. And, best of all, the science is being used to tell a story. What setting for a story could possibly be as interesting as the human brain?

Image credit: Jetiveri/ Pixabay

The diverse challenges of energy transitions worldwide

0

Energy transition is a critical issue that requires close international cooperation. There is no doubt that energy systems are set to evolve on a global scale to prevent detrimental climate consequences. Yet, it is often neglected that energy transition can have vastly different definitions and comes with different sets of constraints and challenges for countries worldwide.

When debating who bears more responsibility in curbing carbon emission, emerging economies are often portrayed as uncooperative partners that lack commitment in their environmental agendas. However, a closer look highlights that the high carbon emission in some developing countries can be attributable to the goods and services they export to the developed world. For example, even though the UK greenhouse gas emission fell by 27% between 1990 and 2008, its ‘consumption-base’ emissions increased by 20% due to import goods. Simply put, the switch in emissions in some specific sectors is simply a manifestation of carbon intensive industries being moved to regions with a comparative economic advantage, namely the ability to provide cheaper labour and reduce the overall production cost. Not to mention, the developed world would not have achieved its current development stage without substantial carbon-intensive economic activities in the past.

That is not to say that developed countries do not face challenges in pursuing sustainable development pathways but to highlight that energy transition’s key barriers are different for countries worldwide. Various considerations and approaches need to be adopted when thinking about energy development globally. Local contexts such as resource endowment and stage of economic development are just some of the critical considerations that need to be acknowledged when thinking about energy transition in a different region. There is no one size fit all solution when it comes to complex issues such as energy.

For many countries in the developed world, the transition is about fuel substitution, and its pace is strongly correlated to government commitments and corporate strategies. Ensuring businesses remain profitable while pursuing a cleaner future is critical for the transition towards a low-carbon future. As much as this seems like an excuse for companies to distance themselves from sustainability commitments, one should ponder the economic and social consequences of enormous unemployment and government tax revenue reduction if corporates cannot sustain their operations and remain competitive in the global market.

Besides, the developed world’s stranded assets should not be neglected when discussing challenges regarding energy transition. On the societal level, changing vehicles and appliances to low-carbon alternatives can be unaffordable and is not an immediate option for many low-to-middle income households. An overly hasty push towards zero-carbon without considering the bigger picture could result in economic hardship, causing social and political instability. Therefore, having a comprehensive framework that provides a clear transition pathway is vital for these countries.

On the other hand, the energy transition is a very different story for the developing world. Achieving net-zero emission can be significantly more challenging for some developing countries where a rapid increase in energy demand is expected. In short, many of these countries are still in the phase of fuel addition instead of fuel substitution. This is especially true since as these economies develop and living standards improve, the lower income communities will gain increased access to energy service demand such as mobility as well as higher quality heating and cooling. There is an intense dilemma between going green and providing immediate, affordable energy to meet the growing demand. Many poor communities in these countries still do not have access to sufficient energy for equitable living conditions. Attempting to leapfrog to renewable fuels to meet the growing demand can be challenging. Besides, many of these countries also have other pressing national priorities such as universal access to education and clean water, while the financial resources are limited.

Due to the many challenges that developing countries face simultaneously, the energy mix should not focus solely on environmental sustainability. The choice of energy sources must not neglect energy security and energy affordability. Although solar panels’ price has decreased drastically over the past few years, the capital investment required for renewable energy projects is still significant for many developing countries. Furthermore, many developing countries do not have a mature renewable energy industry and will need to rely on the developed world for renewable technologies.

Hence, understanding the diverse underlying challenges in the global energy transition, it is time to stop the blame game and recognise the need for international cooperation to achieve energy transition and collectively mitigate climate change.

Image credit: Science in HD/Unsplash

In Praise of the UK’s Vaccine Rollout

0

Last month in an interview with the Times, Oxford’s own Regius professor of Medicine John Bell claimed that “The NHS has the theoretical capacity to immunise everybody in five days.” What was the doctor’s diagnosis for their inability to do this? Lack of motivation.

Far be it for me, an undergraduate student (and a Classics BA, at that), to question the expert medical advice of a Professor – but five days seems a little bit ambitious. Leaving aside the fact the UK currently has neither the 48 million or so doses for the entire adult population, nor the certainty that everyone will decide to take the vaccine, it would be a logistical nightmare to vaccinate everyone in the UK in only five days; a feat that even a perfect healthcare system could never accomplish.

“What about Israel?” Professor Bell might retort, “they have had a far more effective vaccine campaign than the UK.” While this claim is no doubt true, it would be disingenuous to say that it proves that the UK could vaccinate the adult population in less than a week. Firstly, although Israel has nearly vaccinated 59% of their population – not the entire adult population – and they have had more than five days to do so since the beginning of their programme on December 20th.

Moreover, Israel is a special case regarding the vaccine roll-out, with the government having offered an increased sum to Pfizer. Furthermore, the country is smaller than the UK, both geographically and in terms of population size, meaning that fewer doses are required to vaccinate a greater percentage of the population. Israel’s particularly efficient public health system (with its strengths in health data and digitisation), is also accelerating the roll-out, making them the perfect frontrunner in the race for the vaccine distribution. Interestingly, the next-best vaccination schemes in the UAE and Bahrain have similar factors which make their per capita vaccination statistics dwarf most Western nations.

To ground this back in the UK; what about the question of whether the NHS Bureaucracy is slowing Britain’s vaccine roll-out? To answer this, a distinction must be drawn between stifling over-regulation (or ‘red tape,’ as it is sometimes called) and bureaucracy. They are often linked, insofar that a bad bureaucracy will have unnecessary rules leading to high employment requirements and restrictive procedures which hinder important processes. Some restrictions, however, are imperative. Even though time is of the essence in the fight against the pandemic, to suggest that urgency means all regulation and employment checks should be waived would be lunacy. Whilst the idea that all vaccinators need to be bilingual, and go through a language learning course if not, would be an example of excessive red tape, even the staunchest anti-bureaucrat doesn’t want anyone off the street whacking needles in people’s arms.

Public health in the UK is a notoriously bureaucratic system. But this is not as bad as it sounds. Counterintuitively, it actually leads to less red tape. The reason our health system must be classed as ‘bureaucratic’ is that there are more UK governmental health bodies than PPE students at Oxford. Firstly, there is the Department of Health, headed by everyone’s favourite, Matt Hancock, which oversees the budget and direction of other bodies. This body needs to be multiplied by four for the devolved administrations of Wales, England, Scotland, and Northern Ireland. There is also Public Health England, (or Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland) which oversees the general health of the nation; the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, which provides national guidance for Healthcare, and the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency, which focuses on regulating medications and similar products. Then, we arrive at the main organisation we think of when we hear “NHS”: the NHS Confederation. This consists of four executive bodies which run each nation’s healthcare trusts. Each trust runs a set of hospitals, but since the Health and Social Care Act of 2012, they were united under the Confederation, a separate body which represents the trusts to the NHS of the respective nation. The NHS, in turn, represents their interests back up the chain to the Department of Health at Whitehall. If that isn’t enough, there is also a separate body called ‘NHS Improvement’, created to make this process more efficient.

From the outside, healthcare in the UK is complicated and opaque, the system seemingly clogged up with superfluous middle-managers. This can lead to outrageous cases of wastefulness, such as the disastrous NHS Test and Trace programme which, despite costing £10 billion, saw no real success. Such superfluity was also at fault for the PPE scandal earlier in the pandemic where £10.5 billion worth of personal protective equipment was bought without the correct competitive tender processes. With a reputation like this, surely we can assume that the UK health bureaucracy will be too slow to effectively roll-out the vaccine?

I disagree, and in fact, I would go on to argue that the vaccine rollout has been one of the few British successes to quietly emerge from the pandemic, primarily as the government has taken a step back and left it to non-partisan public bodies to head the process. The problems of the UK Health Bureaucracy revolve around under-regulation and political cronyism as opposed to stifling red tape and bloated public organisations. The cause of the PPE scandal was the awarding of public contracts to Tory party donors rather than accredited providers. Indeed, a similar oversight led to the failure of NHS Test and Trace, the scheme headed by former McKinsey consultant Dido Harding who paid over £500,000 in consulting fees to her former company. In these cases, it is a lack of regulation that seems to be the problem, as opposed to over-regulation.

In contrast to these missteps, our current vaccine programme has already delivered over ten million first doses of the vaccine, and is fourth in the world for vaccines delivered per head. Indeed, one of the aforementioned public health bodies, the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency, was the first to approve the use of a vaccine without ignoring any of the regulatory steps. Whilst I will not echo the tone of Gavin Williamson and turn the issues of vaccinations into a national competition, it must be emphasised that the UK has vaccinated more people than any nation in Europe and our average daily output is significantly higher than our Continental counterparts.   Another strong point of the UK vaccination programme is that it is done by age cohort, meaning that over-80s, frontline workers, and elderly care home workers have been prioritised. Given that Covid-19 death rates increase with age, it makes sense that these groups receive the vaccine first, unlike the in the USA, where wealthier individuals seem to be at the front of the queue.

The NHS (trusts and main body) and the Vaccine task force have been crucial in enabling this huge programme. By creating new vaccination centres, adapting hospital hubs and using pharmacies, they have ensured that everyone is within ten miles of a testing centre. Furthermore, there is little regulation for patients wishing to receive the jab, requiring only a phone call to organise the appointment. This is a stark contrast to France, for example, where the receiver of the jab has to get a GP meeting five days before and must receive written consent.

Professor Bell’s claim that the UK roll-out has been hindered by red tape was centred around the revelation that GPs were being forced to fill out 7 unnecessary forms in order to join the taskforce. Whilst this was a legitimate grievance, there has been no evidence of vaccination centres being understaffed, the NHS showing that it has the ability to deliver more vaccinations than are currently available. Indeed, the minor red tape of the 7-form requirement has now been slashed, and I suspect this was an earnest mistake as opposed to lack of motivation.

Another sign of the UK health bureaucracy’s success is the PR management of the vaccine rollout and the effort against misinformation. Although certain state actors have endeavoured to spread disinformation about the effectiveness of the vaccines, a recent YouGov poll on the issue indicated that 68% of Britons have confidence in the jabs, with only 9% saying they are not confident at all. In fact, this trust increases amongst the over-60s, with 81% of this age group expressing confidence in the effectiveness of the vaccine. The government is behind this public trust, with effective steps including a specific inquiry into the cause of misinformation, and with the media coverage of the vaccinations of public figures including David Attenborough and the Queen. Furthermore, the government has cooperated with social media companies to filter any false information or questionable sources to scientific authorities including NHS England. Non-governmental actors also engaged in this effort, with Imams helping combat the recent spread of disinformation to members of the South Asian community in Britain by highlighting the dangers of dishonesty in their Friday sermons, many even informing their mosque-goers that the vaccine was halal. There seems to be collective (although sadly not universal) opposition to the disinformation on vaccines which could be a greater national obstacle to getting out of the pandemic. Of course, there is always room to improve, and events suggest that the roll-out will be slowed by pharmaceutical companies (what a surprise!), rather than NHS bureaucracy. However, I think in what has been a terrible year for all of us and especially governmental agencies, we should give credit where credit is due, rather than call them “lazy” for minor errors.

Image credits: U.S. Secretary of Defense

Students, societies and colleges respond to Ken Loach event

0

CW: antisemitism, racism.

Groups across and beyond Oxford have responded to the decision of St Peter’s College to host Ken Loach after numerous organisations called for the event to be cancelled due to Loach’s record of antisemitic behaviour. The event went ahead as planned; Professor Buchanan did not mention antisemitism in the talk or directly reference any of the allegations of antisemitism levelled against Ken Loach in her short explanation as to why the talk was not cancelled.

Loach, who graduated from St Peter’s in 1957 and then became a filmmaker, has made numerous comments which are antisemitic under the IHRA definition. Loach has claimed that a rise in antisemitism in Europe following Israel’s operation in Gaza was “perfectly understandable because Israel feeds feelings of anti-Semitism“. In response to questions about Holocaust denial, he has previously stated: “History is for all of us to discuss. All history is our common heritage to discuss and analyse. The founding of the State of Israel, for example, based on ethnic cleansing, is there for us to discuss… So don’t try to subvert that by false stories of antisemitism.” Loach has also criticised accusations of antisemitism within the Labour Party under Jeremy Corbyn’s leadership, claiming that “their aim is to destabilise Jeremy’s leadership… there is no validity whatsoever.” The October 2020 report by the Equality and Human Rights Commission found that the Labour Party had breached the Equality Act in three systemic instances.

The Oxford University Jewish Society – or JSoc – released a statement before the event, expressing their concerns and disappointment. Their statement in full reads:

“Oxford University Jewish Society is deeply disappointed by the decision of Professor Judith Buchanan, Master of St Peter’s College, to host an event with filmmaker Ken Loach. On numerous occasions, Loach has made remarks that are antisemitic under the IHRA definition, which was recently adopted by the University of Oxford.

Over the weekend, Jewish students at St Peter’s met with Professor Buchanan to express their upset and dismay at the event’s happening. In spite of this, Ken Loach is still due to speak this evening, a decision which we condemn.

The Jewish Society will always do its utmost to protect the welfare of Jewish Students in Oxford. It is concerning that on this occasion, the leadership at St Peter’s College has not shared this sentiment.”

Shortly after the event, ‘Artists for Palestine UK’ released a statement, saying: “We are deeply troubled to learn of a McCarthyite campaign demanding Oxford University cancel a public event with director Ken Loach discussing his distinguished career in film. The campaign to silence a world-renowned artist, which has been active behind the scenes and which became public at the last minute, is using the controversial IHRA definition of antisemitism to try to prevent a cultural event from taking place”. Signatories include Judith Butler, Maxine Peake (who in an interview with the Independent said that Labour supporters who didn’t back Jeremy Corbyn should “hang their heads in shame” and inaccurately claimed that police in America who knelt on George Floyd’s neck had learned the tactic from “seminars with Israeli secret services”), Mark Rylance and Roger Waters (who has endorsed the BDS movement, deemed to be antisemitic by Germany and the US). Roger Waters later shared JSoc’s statement directly on his personal Facebook and Twitter. His caption – which appears to violate the IHRA definition of antisemitism – read: “Don’t let the Israeli Lobby rewrite our dictionaries with this McCarthyite, racist, claptrap… We know what anti-Semitism is, and being anti-Israeli apartheid ain’t any part of it”. Many comments under Waters’ posts were antisemitic in nature and, as a result, JSoc has received numerous instances of antisemitic abuse on their Facebook and Twitter. JSoc’s statement did not reference Loach’s views on Palestine.

The Board of Deputies of British Jews stood with JSoc, condemning the decision that the event should go ahead. The President, Marie van der Zyl, wrote: “That an Oxford college would not conduct its due diligence and allow Ken Loach to address students is entirely unacceptable. Higher education institutions have a duty of care to their students, which must include a zero tolerance policy to antisemitism and those who minimise or deny it. We have been in touch with Jewish students in Oxford and wholeheartedly support their condemnation of the event. This event should not take place.”

The Union of Jewish Students echoed this, arguing that “St Peter’s College, University of Oxford, should not be platforming a person who has repeatedly been accused of and has been an apologist for antisemitism. Just last summer, the University of Oxford stated they were committed to addressing systemic racism wherever it may be found, including within their own community. We do not see how this event can be reconciled with that statement.

It is an outrage that St Peter’s College has ignored the concerns of it’s [sic] Jewish students and we urge Judith Buchanan, Master of St Peter’s College, to remove this speaker from the event. UJS are offering support to the Jewish Society.”

The Oxford Student Union Campaign for Racial Awareness and Equality has also released a statement, condemning the event and highlighting that “the rightful outrage of Jewish students has been dismissed repeatedly, despite the emotional burden that was placed upon them to bring this issue to the college. We are dissatisfied with the thoughtlessness and callousness that went into this decision and we are concerned about the impact that it will have on the college’s Jewish community, especially given that the college did not mark Holocaust Memorial Day”.

Within college communities, St Peter’s JCR has passed a motion which urged all students to boycott the event “as not to lend credence and authority to the views of a noted antisemite, and to prevent their further dissemination”, as well as condemning the College leadership’s decision to go ahead with the event after students expressed their concerns. They described the response of the College and Master as “inconsiderate and insensitive”, citing that the College’s leadership “claimed to be unaware of Loach’s past comments, despite their being widely reported in the media and widely accessible online… sought to downplay the prospect of Loach’s invitation being actively harmful to the college community, suggesting that the event featuring him would ‘set aside’ the controversy… asked Jewish Peterites not to view College as a place hostile to Jewish students since this would result in more discomfort… pushed Jewish Peterites to explain why downplaying the Holocaust is ‘always’ unequivocally antisemitic… put the burden of proving Loach’s antisemitism onto Jewish Peterites when this is a matter of record, not opinion… suggested that St Peter’s did not have a problem with antisemitism on account of the previous Master being Jewish… refused to disinvite Loach lest a PR fallout occur… [and] refused to commit to taking any concrete steps to minimise the hurt that his invitation would inevitably cause”.

They also noted that “St Peter’s College, unlike many other colleges, failed to mark Holocaust Remembrance Day this year”. St Peter’s JCR further offered “its most sincere apologies on behalf of the College to all Jewish students”, called on the College to draw up a “concrete plan on fighting antisemitism”, including a report to investigate how this , and pledged its support and solidarity with Jewish students across the University – as a result of this incident and more broadly.

On 9th February, the Wadham SU will hold an emergency meeting where they will decide whether they wish to “formally condemn the actions of St Peter’s College and Professor Judith Buchanan in this incident”, along with “demand[ing] a full and sincere apology from St Peter’s College” and “stand[ing] in solidarity with Jewish students” as well as committing to uphold both a zero-tolerance policy against antisemitism and to improve understanding of antisemitism and Jewish identity within the College, as well as working to provide welfare resources for students who are impacted.

Image Credit: Steve Daniels. License: CC BY-SA 2.0.