Friday 7th November 2025
Blog Page 5

Cowley Branch Line to reopen with two new stations

0

The Cowley Branch train line between the Oxford Rail Station and London Marylebone is set to reopen, with the first passenger trains expected in 2029. With trains every 30 minutes to London throughout the day, the new line will significantly improve links to the city centre.

Two additional stations, Oxford Cowley and Oxford Littlemore, will also be constructed, with a travel time of less than 10 minutes into central Oxford.

The reopening of the Cowley Branch was made possible by a £120 million investment announced by the Labour government on Thursday, as part of a broader £500 million package to boost infrastructure and housing between Oxford and Cambridge, to create a “European Silicon Valley”.

An additional £35 million has been announced by both city and county councils, as well as local businesses and commercial research centres, such as the Ellison Institute of Technology (EIT). The EIT is set to open in 2027 and has already announced a strategic partnership with Oxford University, with its main campus being a short walk away from the new Oxford Littlemore station. Both will be designed by Lord Norman Foster, who is the architect of the Gherkin, Millennium Bridge amongst others in London as well as the Apple Park in California.

Chancellor of the Exchequer, Rachel Reeves MP, stated: “This investment is a major vote of confidence in Oxford as a global hub for science and innovation and shows what can be achieved when government and world-class institutions like the Ellison Institute of Technology work together to deliver for our communities.”

The “European Silicon Valley” is a government initiative aiming to create and revitalise a corridor between Oxford and Cambridge focused on dynamic tech innovation by 2035, supported by major transport, housing, and research investments.

The Cowley Branch reopening is set to boost the local economy, attracting up to £10 billion in private investments – including expanding business and science parks like ARC, OSC, and the EIT – as well as housing developments, leading to the creation of up to 10,000 jobs in the local area.

Oxford University Vice-Chancellor Irene Tracey commented: “The Cowley Branch Line will stitch together our science parks, hospitals and new cultural spaces so that ideas, researchers and local residents can move more easily across our city – and out to London – every day.  As Oxford accelerates initiatives like the Oxfordshire Strategic Innovation Taskforce, today’s decision is a practical step toward the inclusive, sustainable and fair prosperity we want to see for our communities.”

The new train line will also help reduce congestion in central Oxford, and promote more sustainable means of travel. The line currently only serves BMW Mini freight trains from the Oxford plant, and had been shut to passenger rail service since 1963. Local Labour MP Annelise Dodds had been leading a campaign advocating for its reopening for several years, including a symbolic annual walk from Cowley to Oxford.

Dodds said: “I’m delighted that after years of campaigning for the reopening of the Cowley branch line, alongside local residents, this is finally going to become a reality! I’m grateful to everyone who has pushed for the line to be reopened for so many years. 

“The reopened branch line will make a massive difference to local residents, slashing travel times and reducing congestion. It will also open up many economic opportunities for local residents. I’m so pleased that the government has listened to Oxford today.”

Correction: An earlier version of this article stated that the reopening of the Cowley branch line would reduce travel times between Oxford and London. In fact, the journey time reductions apply only to new services between Cowley and London Marylebone (via Oxford). There are no planned changes to journey times on the existing Oxford-Marylebone route.

Famous pub frequented by Tolkien set for refurbishment

0

New plans have been unveiled by the Ellison Institute of Technology (EIT) for the renovation of The Eagle and Child, a famous Oxford pub. 

The historic pub, once frequented by C S Lewis and J R R Tolkien, has been closed since the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020. After the venue was bought by the EIT in 2023, it is now set to undergo extensive work to bring it back into use. The EIT was established by the world’s second richest man Larry Ellison, co-founder of the software company Oracle. 

Lewis and Tolkien were part of an informal group of writers known as The Inklings, who hosted regular meetings in the pub with other academics. The Rabbit Room, to the rear of the property, contains a small plaque commemorating the significance of the building.

The plans have been drawn up by world-renowned architects Foster + Partners, which has said that the “light-touch interventions” are designed to “revive and continue the legacy of the Grade II listed building”. The pub dates back to 1650, and has seen patchwork updates over the decades, many of which are set to be “retained and treated as part of the building’s evolving narrative”, with a “conservation-led approach”. 

A new dining room will also be added and the pub’s third parlour room will be reinstated, providing additional space. “The neighbouring 50 and 51 St. Giles’ Street will become a café that serves coffee and baked goods”, helping to transform The Eagle and Child into “an all-day destination”.

Gerard Evenden, Head of Studio at Foster + Partners, said: “The design preserves the unique character of The Eagle and Child and respects its many layers of history.

“The scheme is stitched together by a newly landscaped garden and restored passageway between the café and the pub – new social spaces that transition effortlessly from day to night.” 

With an estimated completion date of 2027 for the refurbishment of the pub, the development is the latest in a number of investments in Oxford from the EIT, including a  recent £890 million injection into Ellison’s technology institute at the Oxford Science Park and a £118 million pledge to fund an Oxford vaccine research project that aims to tackle pathogenic diseases using AI.

Having founded the American software company Oracle in 1977, Ellison has amassed a fortune worth almost $400 billion. The value of Oracle has burgeoned in the past year, as it has struck deals with companies, such as ChatGPT owner OpenAI, to build AI infrastructure and cloud computing capacity. Ellison has positioned himself as an ally of President Trump.

Ellison has also been in the process of building a new media empire, being at the forefront of a consortium of possible buyers for the US operations of TikTok and buying Paramount Global earlier this year, the owner of US news outlet CBS, through his media production company Skydance.

World Anti-Corruption Conference takes place in Oxford

0

The 2025 World Anti-Corruption Conference (WACC) took place in Oxford for the first time on Friday 24th October. Hosted at Rhodes House, the annual event brought together academics, policymakers, business and civil leaders, and members of Oxford University to formulate actionable proposals to combat corruption. 

WACC, which is organised by the International Strategy Institute (ISI), began in 2019 as the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Forum. After changing its name to the World Anti-Corruption Conference in 2023, the event expanded its scope to tackle corruption globally.  This year marks the first year WACC will be held at a venue outside of South East Asia. 

This year’s event, which is titled ‘United for Integrity: Innovation, Collaboration, and Accountability in the Fight Against Corruption’, featured topic discussions on subjects  such as corporate integrity, financial innovation and the empowerment of  future generations.

During the conference, there were speeches made by CY Cheah (Chairman of the ISI) and Dato’ Jamil, Director General of the National Anti-Financial Crime Centre in Malaysia, as well as multiple networking sessions. 

Before the event, Michał Pietrzak, a third-year student and former President of the Oxford Diplomatic Society, who attended the conference, and told Cherwell: “Although anti-corruption has never been my area of interest, it is an incredibly important aspect of any political endeavour, diplomatic or otherwise, and thus pertinent to all related fields. The conference is a great opportunity for me to learn more about efforts seeking to mitigate corruption through regulation and enforcement, and the monitoring processes used to determine their effectiveness.”

Pietrzak added that he is “particularly intrigued by the event’s inclusion of education and youth empowerment”, as well as the various networking opportunities. 

Through the 2025 conference, WACC aims to continue its mission of raising awareness of anti-corruption and promoting productive dialogue and “uniting global leaders to advance integrity, transparency, and accountability across sectors and borders.”

University and SU launch ‘Think Twice’ water safety campaign

0

The University of Oxford and the Oxford University Student Union (SU) have launched a campaign to improve water safety awareness in Oxford.

The ‘Think Twice’ campaign follows a Conference of Common Rooms (CCR) motion in Trinity, proposed by Brasenose JCR. It aims to make students aware of hazards around Oxford’s waterways and communicate ways to access help.

The campaign urges students to pay attention to the temperature of water, which can be fatally cold even on hot days, as well as water level, which can change rapidly. Students are urged not to jump straight into open water, nor to walk, run or cycle through water where they cannot see the bottom.

Hazardous items can also be beneath the water, from rocks, rubbish, and glass, to boat motors that could catch on clothing and cause serious injury.

It highlights the danger of going near areas of open water under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs, and urges students not to enter water wearing non-swimwear and/or footwear, even where swimming is usually allowed.

Open water can also be a risk to health due to poor water quality and pollution. Thames Water, who provide Oxford’s water, were fined £122.7m this year for breaching rules over sewage spills into the river, and were ranked the worst water supplier in England this week.

The initiative incorporates advice from the RNLI and the Royal Lifesaving Association, and will be communicated to students through common rooms.

Discussions of the motion last term saw various JCRs highlighting the danger of “pushing trashing and celebrations to more remote or less supervised locations”. 

Students currently face £150 fines for trashing, which the University’s ‘Celebrate SMART’ campaign warns against. A spokesperson for Think Twice told Cherwell that the SU will be working alongside the University to ensure “clear safety messaging” around water.

Rory McGlade, the proposer of the water safety motion and Brasenose JCR President, told Cherwell that “with continued advocacy, [common room leaders] hope to encourage colleges across Oxford to permit celebrations to occur on site”. 

Allowing post-exam celebrations to take place in college grounds would mean that students “aren’t pushed out to the edges of Oxford near waterways, but are brought back into the fold in central Oxford, where the risks are lower”.

Speaking about the risks of many Oxford ‘traditions’, McGlade expressed his hope that Think Twice is a strong starting point for water safety at Oxford, rather than being an end goal. He explained that “the initiative will evolve throughout the year, following input and debate by common room leaders”.

The SU will report back on the progress of the campaign to CCR throughout the year.

Katrina Mulligan on AI, security, and the race to the future

0

Katrina Mulligan, Head of National Security Partnerships at OpenAI, spoke at the Blavatnik School of Government last week about the relationship between artificial intelligence (AI) and global security, warning that “everything you know about AI is already out of date”.

Before joining OpenAI, Mulligan held numerous senior roles in the US government and launched the travelling press corps for Barack Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign. She explained that after years in public service, she realised that “sometimes smart and well-intentioned people don’t always make the right decisions”, motivating her to join OpenAI and work on the frontlines of a technology she believes will shape some of the world’s most consequential choices.

Mulligan described OpenAI’s commitment to developing “technology for good” and discussed the frameworks the company has built to determine when and how AI should be deployed. She highlighted ChatGPT’s rapid growth, reaching 100 million users within two months of its launch, as evidence of how quickly the technology has entered everyday life.

To counter misconceptions, she noted that many common beliefs about AI, including views that it’s “not that good”, a “black box”, or “too risky”, are already outdated. Comparing AI to electricity, she said that while the technology may still appear dangerous or unpredictable, it will eventually become as essential to modern life as power itself.

Mulligan traced the evolution of OpenAI’s models, explaining that earlier versions performed at a “junior high school level” while current reasoning models now exceed PhD-level understanding. These newer systems “take time to think,” shifting the focus of scaling from data and computing power to deliberation and reasoning.

Encouraging the audience to experiment directly with AI tools, she remarked: “You do not get fit by reading about working out.”

She observed a growing disparity between generations and regions in how AI is perceived and used. People over 40, she said, tend to use ChatGPT as a replacement for search engines, while those under 30 increasingly rely on it as an operating system for daily life. Meanwhile, Western countries are far more focused on risk and regulation, whereas China and many developing nations prioritise rapid adoption.

When asked what concerns her most, Mulligan identified “mass surveillance”, “removing humans from decision-making”, and “weapon development”. She stressed that “no one company should dominate on this technology” and that international cooperation will be vital, since every country has “land, energy, and power” to contribute to the global AI ecosystem.

Reflecting on the accelerating pace of technological progress, Mulligan remarked that “the world is looking at a calendar, OpenAI is looking at a watch”. Despite her two decades in national security, she said her belief in “the good of humanity” continues to guide her work in ensuring AI’s development remains responsible and inclusive.

Student voices must be heard

0

As students, our voices can be powerful. They can strengthen human rights movements, achieve University divestments, and bring down political careers. But all too often our voices are held captive by those who ought to be listening. We’re dismissed as naive, foolish, and immature. We’re overlooked because, after all, what would we know, we’re only young? The truth, however, is that today’s youth are tomorrow’s future. Our voices matter, and the government should do more to listen.

A few weeks ago, the Cherwell team and I were working on a story about Oxford offer holders stranded in Gaza. We’d written on this topic previously and this time I was particularly keen to get a comment from the Home Office – here began my ‘battle’ with His Majesty’s Government.

Over the course of two weeks, I was spun through a messy web of mis-truths. It all started with my first phone call to the Home Office where a press officer emphasised that it wasn’t policy to speak with students, saying that I should write: “The Home Office declined to comment”. So I did just that. But our conversation piqued my interest. I wanted to know why he wouldn’t speak to a student journalist.

I went back and forth several times with press officers from the Home Office and the Department for Education. After countless phone calls I was left frustrated, annoyed and, most crucially, ignored. Frustrated because I’d been lied to (in reality, no such policy existed); annoyed because I’d been messed around; and ignored because my questions remained unanswered.

The reality is that the press officers that I spoke to didn’t take me seriously because I was young. They didn’t get back to me because they didn’t think it mattered. But it does matter – it should matter. Not only because I was writing about a hugely important issue, offer holders stranded in Gaza, but because Cherwell matters, students matter, young people matter.

We might be a student paper, but that’s not to say that we write about trivial issues. Our readership comprises some of the country’s greatest minds.

The great plague of politics is that today’s decisions don’t just impact the here and now, they impact the world for many generations to come. So when our voices are ignored by governments, when we are held captive by those who are meant to listen, we lose out on an opportunity to shape policies which will profoundly affect our futures.

Some weeks after my ‘battle’ a new society emerged on Oxford’s political scene. Founded by students Esme Thompson and Callum Turnbull, the ‘Your Party Society’ was inspired by Jeremy Corbyn and Zara Sultana’s alliance. It was founded because of a feeling that the Oxford Labour Club hadn’t done a good enough job of holding the government accountable. I reached out to Your Party, as well as other Oxford political societies, to better understand their thoughts on the value of young voices. Callum was the only one kind enough to respond. 

He told me that “people look at what’s going on in Oxford very closely”, adding that “there’s a strong understanding that student voices do have power, but I think that’s treated with fear more so than respect. There’s more of an attitude of ‘we need to control what’s being said’ rather than an attitude of ‘we need to listen and have a dialogue’”.

Hearing Callum’s perspective was fascinating, not only because he’s deeply involved in student politics, but because, unlike me, he was so positive about the opportunity facing young people. Our conversation covered everything from lowering the voting age, which Callum told me was a purely “political move”, to Warwickshire’s 19 year-old Council Leader, George Finch.

Reflecting on young people in politics – including Keir Mather MP, the youngest Minister since William Gladstone – Callum said: “I do think there’s space now for young people across the political spectrum to be listened to and voted for, because there’s a lot of anger about how young people have been treated over the last ten, fifteen years. 

“Whether that pulls you to Reform, or whether that pulls you to the left, it all stems from that same anger. There’s anger from young people because they want to get involved, because they want to change things.”

Someone who shares this anger is ‘Anna’ (not her real name), a student activist and member of Oxford Action for Palestine (OA4P). I asked if she thought her activism was taken seriously. “Somewhat,” she said. “I think the University and the government see us as a nuisance and less of a threat. If we were taken seriously I feel some change would have happened already.

“I say somewhat because I think together they do see us as a threat but it takes a lot for a large group to consistently organise and rise together.”

Similar to my conversation with Callum, I was curious whether Anna felt the government cared about the voices of young people. She said yes, “theoretically” the government “cares about young people and their futures and opinions. However, when you look at their response to any dissent or criticism, the government’s response is careless and hostile.” She added that “a prime reason for consistent protests and direct action is to get the government to listen.”

When I asked her if she felt respected, Anna said “I feel neither respected nor heard, but that doesn’t matter. It’s not the goal. The goal is to hold the government and institutions accountable irrespective of how they feel about me or fellow student activists.”

Anna might be right. Perhaps the goal isn’t merely being heard, but exercising our right to speak up for what we believe in – to speak truth to power, to better our futures, and to hold institutions to account. But even still, that doesn’t mean that we should be overlooked. 

As young people, our votes and our voices matter. We might be young, but we’re not stupid. Callum doesn’t believe we’re ignored, but controlled. Anna doesn’t protest for attention but for action. And I don’t write stories for fun, but because I believe in the truth. Our voices matter, and the government ought to do more to listen.

That starts with dialogue instead of fear, respect instead of apathy, and honesty instead of lies. Today’s youth are tomorrow’s future. It’s about time we were treated as such.

Newly approved off-licence sparks widespread complaints

0

An off-licence store at 67 Botley Road has been granted permission to sell alcohol despite over 100 complaints from local residents. The site of the shop was previously the Pickle and Lime, a traditional greengrocer which closed down due to ongoing road closures in the Botley area.

Pihu Enterprises Ltd., owned by Mansi and Tapan Chowdhry, applied for a license to sell alcohol in their shop from Monday to Sunday between 5am and 11pm. Their application described the premises as a “ground floor retail shop” which would sell general groceries, alcohol, tobacco, and vapes.

Over 100 locals lodged complaints to Oxford City Council in opposition to the shop’s application to sell alcohol. One individual on Hill View Road wrote that they were concerned about protecting children from harm given how close the premises is to West Oxford Community Primary School and the risk of children taking up vaping.

The “disruption of residents” due to the long opening hours of the off-licence was another concern raised by a resident on Alexandra Road, as was “public nuisance” regarding the sale of alcohol.

In response to these complaints, Mansi Chowdhry insisted on the reliability of their business in response to the backlash, saying that they “genuinely respect and value the views of the local community”. 

The business owners focused on 80% of items on sale being groceries, bakery items and “day-to-day essentials” and further addressed the points of concern with their intentions and plans to combat potential issues regarding the sale of alcohol and vapes.

Conditions were also agreed to in the original paperwork, including the need to show identification if customers appear under the age of 30. The “training of staff” and being “careful of noise” were also detailed in the agreement. 

The shop’s licence has since been approved, with the opening hour amended to 7am instead of the original 5am opening hour requested in the initial application.

Has Gaming Finally Earned a Seat at the Academic Table?

Not that long ago, video games were considered the cultural equivalent of fast food: lowbrow, overstimulating, and best left in a packed lunch. They were something your 12-year-old cousin yelled about during Christmas, not something you’d bring up in an essay about postmodern narrative structure. Fast forward to 2025, and now the same people writing dissertations on Mrs Dalloway are also clocking 80 hours in Disco Elysium and calling it “research.”

The question is no longer should gaming be taken seriously – it’s how seriously are we prepared to go? Whether you like it or not, gaming has crawled out of the basement and into the seminar room.

Academia Has Entered the Chat

Universities have started offering actual modules on game theory, digital storytelling, and ludonarrative dissonance (a fancy way of saying “why does the story say one thing while the game makes me commit war crimes?”). Students are analysing level design like it’s architecture. Some even argue Minecraft should be on the syllabus next to Brave New World, which makes sense when you realise both involve dystopia and extensive resource gathering.

And yes, before anyone says it, gaming still has its lowbrow reputation, but you can’t deny its growing narrative sophistication. Games now explore grief, identity, civilization collapse, and late capitalism. That’s more depth than most Victorian novels that end with a marriage and tuberculosis.

Breaking the Stigma

There’s still this lingering belief, especially among people who keep Proust on their nightstand for clout, that video games are all guns and gore. The idea that games can tackle real, messy emotions still makes some critics squint. But they do. And not in a token “one sad character in a cutscene” way. Full narratives are built around depression, anxiety, grief, and identity crises.

Subscription services like Game Pas Core are filled with games like Celeste strap a metaphor for mental illness to your back and make you climb a mountain with it. Night in the Woods drops you into a dead-end hometown full of capitalist despair and talking animals with unresolved trauma, and somehow it all feels way too familiar.

Cultural Legitimacy: Now Loading

Of course, the old guard still scoffs. They see gaming as unserious – flashy, addictive, emotionally shallow. But let’s be honest: the same argument was made about novels in the 18th century, film in the 20th, and literally every medium that’s ever had the audacity to be popular and enjoyable.

Gaming is how a generation is learning to understand the world – through boss fights, dialogue trees, and morally grey decisions that have real consequences. It teaches logic, empathy, ethics, and how to keep going under pressure.  Playing Dark Souls isn’t just punishing; it’s become therapy for many. Games are already doing the emotional heavy lifting, whether some consider them a lesser form of art or not.

So, has gaming finally earned a seat at the academic table? Maybe. It’s still showing up in jeans and a graphic tee while everyone else wears tweed, but at least it’s here – and probably holding a surprisingly articulate opinion on Hegelian dialectics in The Witcher 3.

And if nothing else, it’s giving students a break from essays, lectures, and the crushing weight of existential dread. Which, frankly, might be the most educational experience of all.

It’s time we stopped fussing over university rankings

0

Oxford recently made headlines by dropping to fourth place in the Times Good University Guide. Should we worry that Oxford is losing its way? A closer look at the factors defining the ranking reveals several flawed measurements, some of which are in direct contradiction with each other. More fundamentally, by combining every possible factor into an aggregate, it obscures the fact that different people value different things in a university. Rigorous measurement of universities’ performance can be very useful in holding institutions to account and helping students choose where to apply – unfortunately, this ranking does neither. 

It ought to go without saying that a ranking table is only as valuable as the criteria behind it. This is no small quibble. Just look at the variation in between The Times’ UK and international rankings: this year Oxford came first in the world, but fourth at home; the LSE was top in Britain and 52nd in the world. 

Let’s examine what data goes into the mix. According to The Times, there are seven umbrella categories: teaching quality, student satisfaction, graduate job prospects, research quality (all weighted at 1.5); entry standards, percentage of students getting a 1st or 2.1, completion rate (weighted at 1); ‘people and planet’ (weighted at 0.5). 

There is an issue with almost all these metrics.

The first is that teaching quality is based on student surveys: there is no universal or objective standard against which it is measured. Even if we accept that graduating students are the best judges of teaching quality – and how many people have disliked a teacher, only to realise later how valuable they were? – this measure remains unreliable. Some students might judge relative to their expectations of the university. Others may be influenced by past experience: if you are lucky enough to have gone to an excellent school, you may be nonplussed by the teaching at Oxford, whereas those less fortunate may be in awe of the same teaching. I appreciate that it is difficult to design a more objective measure of quality, but this suggests a deeper flaw in a guide purporting to rank each university in minute detail. 

Student satisfaction is a questionable metric. Of the top ten universities, Oxford and Cambridge come last here. Could it be a case of the highest expectations being the hardest please? Or do those universities which demand the most of their students – presumably a positive on the other criteria – have the least satisfied students?

Entry grades are a flawed measure too. They measure how academically successful the average student was prior to arriving, rather than the quality of the work they produce and the teaching they receive at university. This measure shows where the highest performing schoolchildren choose to go, which is likely based on reputation as much as reality – hardly a useful standard for a ranking designed to dispel preconceptions about universities. 

Perhaps the most glaringly flawed statistic is the proportion getting a 1st or 2.1. If I were to be facetious, I would suggest the lower the percentage the better! This is simply a reward for grade inflation; it punishes the universities with the most rigorous exams – the very ones that push students to achieve their best and are most valued by employers. Similarly, dropout rates could be determined as much by the rigour of the course as by the support given by institutions. 

Finally, we move to the suspiciously named “people and planet” section, on which Oxford scores particularly poorly. It turns out to be measured by peopleandplanet.org, an organisation which, amongst many activist aims, wants to abolish all national borders. Universities are ranked on factors ranging from how much waste is recycled to the nakedly political – divesting from the ‘border industry’, ending relationships between career services and the mining sector. There may be good arguments for doing these things, but people should be aware that factors unrelated to education influence the ranking. Related to this is the ‘social inclusion’ score. It includes things like state-school admissions (tellingly excluding grammar schools), and comparing drop out rates between different groups of students. These may be important considerations. The Times does not actually say how this influences the rankings, but, if it does at all, it contradicts the entry grades score: since universities cannot influence the quality of schooling, the easiest way to increase representation of disadvantaged groups is to reduce entry requirements. 

For all of the complaints I have made about the metrics, each one may well be important to an individual person: some care very deeply about recycling; some will feel that being in a good research environment will be beneficial even as undergraduates; some will be worried about dropout rates. For the simple reason that everyone has different strengths and weaknesses, aspirations and preferences, not everyone will benefit from the same thing at university.  For what is the purpose of the ranking? Is it to help prospective students choose where to apply? If so, to some the most important consideration might be that Imperial graduates appear to have the best job prospects, and that St Andrews has the best teaching as rated by students – not that Imperial came sixth and St Andrews second. If it is to help employers assess applicants, the rigour of exams might be the most relevant. For academics it might be the research quality, or staff satisfaction. To combine all the factors that might influence someone’s decision-making into an aggregate score – even if they directly contradict each other – obscures as much as it illuminates.  

I would argue that Oxford (and Cambridge) is attractive because of the tutorial system, because of the confluence of extraordinarily talented individuals meeting outside their degree, and because of the beautiful surroundings, both architectural and natural. To others these may not appeal, regardless of The Times’ ranking. Rather than worrying about the league table, we should focus on preserving what makes Oxford so brilliant – and, not incidentally, so attractive to applicants. 

Cherwell Mini Cryptic #5 – Tapped Out

0
Made by Zoë McGuire with the free cross word maker from Amuse Labs

If you’re thinking “brother, I need more puzzles”, last week’s mini cryptic has you covered.

Not quite gathered the magic of cryptics? Why not try this week’s mini crossword.

Follow the Cherwell Instagram for updates on our online puzzles.

For even more crosswords and other puzzles, pick up a Cherwell print issue from your JCR or porters’ lodge!