Monday 13th April 2026
Blog Page 622

Welsh Independence and Brexit

Emily Reed
-
0
Welsh Independence and Brexit

In 1960 a bill sponsored by Liverpool City Council was brought before Parliament requesting to flood a Welsh village, Capel Celyn, to create a water reservoir for Liverpool. They did not require planning consent from the relevant Welsh local authorities, and despite the fact that 35 out of 36 Welsh MPs opposed the bill, it was passed. The members of the community fought for their rights for eight years, but were ultimately unsuccessful and removed from their homes. The valley was flooded and all local buildings and homes were destroyed, including a cemetery with the bodies of villager’s family members. The tag ‘Cofiwch Dryweryn’, ‘remember Tryweryn’, is still alive throughout Wales, graffiti-ed on many abandoned buildings and bridges. This moment gave rise to Welsh devolution and the creation of the National Assembly of Wales. Yet many people believe that devolution is not enough.

The first recorded use of the Welsh word for nationalism, cenedlaetholdeb, was recorded in 1858. The demand for Welsh independence has always existed, but in the past decade it has been on the rise. YouGov published a poll in September 2019 where 24% of participants said they would vote for an independent Wales if there was a referendum tomorrow.

Interestingly, Brexit changes this statistic. 41% of people backed an independent Wales if the rest of the UK leaves the EU. This is a significant rise from previous polls conducted in 2018 by Sky that suggested only 8% of Welsh people supported independence. Brexit, like Capel Celyn, has changed perspectives on the Westminster government and the union itself.

This push for independence has old roots. Since Wales was conquered by England, a cultural and linguistic cleansing took place. Despite the fact that Welsh is one of the oldest surviving Celtic languages, Parliamentary reports deemed it ‘evil’ and ‘morally inappropriate’, banning the use of Welsh in schools. Children were punished and often beaten in schools for speaking Welsh. There are reports that this took place until the 1930’s. As a result, many communities in Wales are predominantly English-speaking and unable to engage with elements of Welsh literary history and culture. Welsh people have been forced into an Anglicised cultural identity, and this has had an impact on the political relationship between England and Wales.

Wales has always had a fraught relationship with Westminster and the union. Despite being a culturally distinct region, due to Wales’s small population, Welsh MPs make up just 6% of the House of Commons, so their needs are often ignored. One in four Welsh people live in poverty and the public resources are lack funding. There are weak transport links between the north and south, with some Welsh towns being almost completely isolated. Many people blame this on systematic unde-rfunding and exploitation from Westminster and austerity.

Since Brexit there has been a huge surge in interest for Welsh independence. This May, there were nationwide marches, with thousands demonstrating in Cardiff alone. Numerous Welsh town councils have voted to declare their support for independence including Aberystwyth, Caernarfon, Caerphilly, Blaenavon and Machynlleth. Young people are expressing their activism over social media platforms. YesCymru, a Welsh independence organisation, has become increasingly present on the mainstream platforms, and the general election can no longer avoid the topic of Welsh independence.

Brexit is in the hands of a government that has repeatedly betrayed the Welsh people and refuses to acknowledge their mistakes. Wales voted 53% for Brexit in the 2016 election, which surprised many analysts. The professor Danny Dorling released data suggesting that the referendum result was in part due to English voters who live in Wales: border towns and areas of central Wales with large English communities had higher leave votes, whereas Welsh-speaking areas had high remain votes.

But pro-Brexit Welsh voters cannot be forgotten, and certainly many frustrations with governance resulted in a leave vote in communities. Despite the fact that Wales receives a higher amount of EU funding than the rest of the UK, voters felt disengaged and forgotten in struggling communities. However, Wales has not been mentioned once in any of the proposed Brexit bills, and a motion to require Welsh and Scottish legislature to approve of the final Brexit deal was rejected by both the left and right in Westminster. This is a poignant suggestion that both Remain and Leave voters in Wales have not been acknowledged in Brexit negotiations, and their attempts to bring power back into their communities has failed.

So, where does this leave Welsh voters in the 2019 December Election?

Wales typically has been a Labour heartland, only once in recent history has it voted Conservative, in the 2009 EU Parliament elections. But Brexit, and now the rise of Welsh Independence, has fragmented the Labour vote.

Welsh Labour, who on the whole do not support Welsh Independence, have struggled to maintain their support in the Welsh Assembly, as they are viewed as being too supportive of Westminster. However, if Labour seats begin to switch to Plaid Cymru, or even have their vote diluted because of it, there will be problems for the party’s potential for a majority in the House of Commons. This has already happened in Scottish seats, where Labour lost an unprecedented amount of seats to SNP due to the rise of support for Scottish independence.

In the general election, Welsh voters will be forced to choose between their political allegiance and desire for independence. It is a choice that surely cannot be seen as democratic, and it further dilutes the voice Welsh votes have in Westminster. It suggests that Wales needs a referendum on Independence in the next decade.

Only a referendum will allow voters to accurately voice their opinions on Welsh independence and the future they see for Wales, particularly in the context of Brexit. If Welsh Labour do not acknowledge this, they risk disenfranchising many Welsh voters. Plaid Cymru’s result in this coming election is therefore no indicator of the true demand for Welsh independence, and the democratic necessity of a referendum should not fall on Plaid Cymru’s shoulders.

Welsh independence does not exist in a vacuum; it is part of a wider cultural turn away from British imperial power and domination. It is a call to hold Westminster responsible for the damage it has caused communities and the destruction of Welsh culture. It also is a representation of the ways that austerity, and now Brexit, are failing the UK people. Many of the problems that Wales faces economically and politically are present in other deprived communities of England that feel like they have been abandoned and ignored by Westminster politics.

A push towards Welsh independence must be aware of this and become a movement not just for Welsh people. Instead, it should be a movement that fights for the better democratic governance of England. Westminster must learn from its mistakes it has made in Wales and implement changes in the way it governs communities with unique social, cultural and economic needs.

Whether Wales sees a referendum in the next decade, and regardless of its outcome, these are the lessons that need to be learnt from the call for independence. It has never been more clear that the union is not working for the people, and no matter how tired Welsh voters are, they seem ready for the fight.

Counting Blues

Svetlana Narty
-
0
Counting Blues

I guess being a fresher means that week 5 blues hit you the hardest. I was sitting in a lecture the other day, a lecture on counting, funny because – I study English – but nonetheless… counting.

What struck me most was 1.) I wasn’t counting down the minutes left of the lecture, as some force you to. It was actually interesting. And 2.) the lecturer spoke about poets manipulating counting to lure one into a sense of security; the type that humans tend to get from being able to quantify things (deep, I know).

I now draw your attention back to the blues, the blues that do indeed come in week five. Funny that we use that word blues, blues like the music, I guess. Often poetry is made somewhat synonymous with music.

The characteristics of blues music include: blues shuffles or walking bass that reinforces the rhythm and form, a repetitive effect known as the groove. And early traditional blues verses consisted of a single line repeated four times. Our terms being eight weeks, perhaps mimics a blues-like verse that has been repeated twice.

The repetition associated with the ‘groove’ in blues is perhaps also reflected in the mundane rituals of university life. In fact, according to the un-detestable bible that is Google, blues music was ‘started by former African slaves from spirituals, praise songs, and chants.’

As much as one might find there to be nothing more thrilling than a night at Bridge or Park End, the harsh reality is that we are the slaves driven out of our home every morning by the unavoidable nine a.m. lecture.  

Speaking of nine a.m.’s. Time, itself, is a mode of counting. Week five blues indicates that we are, in fact, in week five (I dare to say it), out of an eight-week term – that is to say we have three weeks left.

A friend of mine said to me this Sunday: “once we get through this week, there are only two weeks left on term.” From a rational perspective, I laughed at this comment, replying “so you mean we have three weeks left.” In actuality, neither of us were wrong.

See, either way, simply stating ‘three,’ or ‘two plus one’ arrives at the same result – we have three weeks left. However, what is interesting about this, is that her version sounded much better. It seems that the same point the lecturer was driving at, was the one displayed here.

What may be comforting to some, during these times of fifth-week hardship, is in fact counting down until the end of term. Whether that is by saying there is just under a month left until the end of term, twenty days left until the end of term, three weeks left until the end of term, or even two weekends left until the end of term – we gain comfort in quantifying the time left until blissful release.

My advice would therefore be, to pick the intervals that best comfort you – regardless of them ultimately being on a uniform number line. Your tutors (as mine did) may suggest for you to eat “comfort food” and “rest” (of course that is after they have sent you a hefty word document of the weekly reading list, which includes Middlemarch).

We all know it will ultimately result in a sense of self hatred and disappointment if we start to count calories or those smashing nights out we have missed at the Oxford clubs. Therefore why not quantify something more malleable into a form that is more bearable to endure. Why not count time?

Review: The Lovely Bones

William Atkinson
-
0
Review: The Lovely Bones

Readers, I must declare an interest in this production of The Lovely Bones. It’s a rather simple one: the lead is played by my old drama teacher. I’m therefore very biased. Sorry about that. Not that I should need to apologise: this production is brilliant. Though, ahem, I would say that, wouldn’t I?

Nevertheless, there’s more behind my effusive praise for this play than the fact it stars a lady who once directed me the titular as James from the Roald Dahl’s story about the Giant Peach. Melly Still’s production, adapted from the iconic novel by Alice Sebold- if you haven’t heard of it, ask your Mum -has been touring Britain for the last year. Whether you know the story or not, it’s a play that strikes the audience before it’s even begun. This is because the stage has a giant mirror hanging at the back of it, which in a space as somewhat squashed as the Oxford Playhouse means it dominates the space.  In some ways, this was a blessing, since I had great fun making faces in it before the show had started. It’s a clever piece of design by Ana Ines Jabares-Pita which Still’s direction uses to its full. We see figures reflected in it, which provides different perspectives on the action and gives a unique way of looking at the play. Seeing, for instance, chalk lines on the stage that would be usually be constrained, or the edge of the stage, gave a sense of the lead’s confinement which otherwise would have been far less apparent. Somewhat unsettlingly, actors occasional pass by behind the glass. This is especially terrifying when it’s the villain of the piece, Nicholas Khan’s Mr Harvey, and I’ll testify to being rather frightened by his spectral presence at times. I’m only 19. 

The plot of the play follows that of the book (and later Peter Jackson film) tightly. I’d always had an idea of what the opening was like but it’s very effective. The murder and rape of 14-year-old Susie Salmon and her arrival in her personal Heaven is fast and shocking: it’s something that could so easily fall into being schlocky, but instead comes across as tragically, disturbingly tender. From her place in the afterlife Susie watches her family and friends grew up without her, whilst she tries hard to push them in the direction of her killer Harvey. It’s a story that balances the tragic with the comical, and it’s all done with a deftness that is by turns laugh out loud funny and nail-bitingly tense. A scene where Susie’s sister sneaks Lindsey into Harvey’s house is particularly frightening. 

I obviously think Charlie Beaumont is great as the Susie, as I was as James from James and the Giant Peach, but she is aided by a talented and multifarious cast. Jack Sandle and Caitrin Arson are a powerful pairing as Susie’s parents, conveying two very different ways of dealing with their daughter’s death.  Fanta Barrie was engaging as Lindsey and Leigh Lothian shone in the equally odd roles of Ruth Connors’, a would-be poet and mystical contactee of Susie’s ghost, and Buckley, her brother. Avita Jay also stood out for me as Susie’s companion in the afterlife, Franny: by turns spooky and reassuring, there are worse St Peters to hope for when we’ve kicked the bucket. 

Collectively, a talented cast, is bolstered by a well-adapted script and very inventive direction. The soundtrack is also a blast, though I’m not sure the prudish lady in the seat next to me appreciated my bopping along to Bowie. Between upsetting her, bumping into the bloke next to me and obscuring the view of the older chap behind me with my standing ovation at the end, I’m not sure I made myself a very popular theatregoer. Oh well. I, at least, had a blast. Yes, I probably was always going to, and yes, I was hardly going to be rude about someone I know. But I came out of the show buzzing: for a show about death, this lively, funny and innovative little production is remarkably life-affirming. It’s now left Oxford, but if you ever get a chance to catch it elsewhere, it really is a must. I’m almost dying to go again. 

Review: F*@king Hell

Tasmin Sandford Smith
-
0
Review: F*@king Hell

Tasha Saunders’s biting new comedy F*@king Hell is set in an imaginary world (perhaps not all that far from this one) where hapless politicians stage a public referendum about whether or not Britain should leave… Britain. The plight of a country in ‘flux’ is all too familiar, and it is both impressive and alarming that the hour-long show can begin and end without anyone ever explaining what on earth is going on, or what ‘Breparture’ actually means. It turns out that even the politicians – especially the politicians – don’t have a clue.

The play opens with an infuriatingly useless and deeply funny speech by the ‘Prime Minister’ (Daniel Ergas), but chaos really descends as the plays moves to the Westminster offices where decisions are made, and alliances are formed and broken. F*@king Hell embraces its role as farce. Political planning takes place around a table built of giant alphabet blocks, and the infantile behaviour of ‘Bart Bonson’, as he entices voters with promises of free socks and unlimited bananas, are all too familiar. The political parallels to reality in Saunders’s script range from the sublime to the ridiculous. Highlights include a political rally disrupted by a gorilla, memorable egg-throwing, and the unveiling of a ‘campaign cart’. Comedy is supported and heightened throughout by clever soundtrack choices. A special mention must also go to the scene-stealing performance of Ergas’s PM, eating Oreos on the floor of the office, as Westminster power play quite literally goes on over his head. Having said that, the acting work of the cast as a whole was extremely strong. Each of the six members could claim to have got the biggest laugh of the night, and there were also moments of poignancy, particularly in the relationship between Mick (Alexander Grassam-Rowe) and Terry (Pip Lang).

‘F*@king Hell’ is at its strongest when it is directly satirising political events that the audience are familiar with. An intimate rapport is established that allows us to be party to in-jokes, between actors and spectators who have all experienced ‘Breparture’’s real life counterpart. Particularly unnerving is Bart (Luke Richardson)’s transformation from a hapless political fall guy to an increasingly ambitious and ruthless campaign leader. Nevertheless, as Bart proceeded to become a murderous and maniacal supervillain, the comedy did slightly begin to lose its snappiness. The jarring transition from farce to tragedy was achieved, but events like the arrival of two comedy policemen prevented the third act of the play from becoming truly sinister. Bart’s monstrous transformation meant that we lost his human side, and the funniest parts of the play are when the audience see the ‘real people’ behind political madness – even when those people are hidden by a gorilla mask! Unexpected comedy in the Epilogue, and the deeply satisfying enactment of theatrical retribution meant that the production ended on a high note. The audience, however, is left wondering what will happen in the real-world, where reaching a moral conclusion is rarely so straightforward.

Having skipped the ITV Election debate in order to watch F*@king Hell, I didn’t know whether I had altered my evening by simply swapping one bleak political landscape for another. But Saunders’s witty satire and the work of an energised ensemble cast manage to make Brexit the most interesting it has been for years.

Review: Radiant Vermin

Allyson Obber
-
0
Review: Radiant Vermin

The lengths you can go in the middle of the housing crisis! Ollie and Jill have done some terrible, despicable things to get their dream home: one could say getting a good, functioning house might have to be paid in blood. Now that they have it, they want you to understand why they did what they did. They’re telling you their story, constantly alternating between past and present. They would say for their son: but they are the narrators of the entire story, and, after all, narrators aren’t always trustworthy.

Philip Ridley’s plays are darkly satirical and comically gruesome at the same time, and Radiant Vermin is no exception. The rapid tonal shifts are not jarring when dissonance is part of the theme itself. It makes every reaction feel wrong. The horrible does not feel as it should: in its absurdist context, it’s almost funny. Laughter is always slightly uncomfortable. It’s never too serious, never too light – it brings you in another world, where different rules apply. 

This sense of distorted reality is well-transposed in the Something Punchy Productions’ show. Samuel Morley’s lighting is often surrealistic but manages to disappear behind the scene often enough that it is not disturbing. Django Pinter, who is also the director, uses sounds wisely – not too often to be distracting, but enough that they do not seem out of place. They helped in creating and maintaining tension in scenes that would have otherwise appeared quite commonplace.

There are only three actors and each holds up a tremendous amount of characters that are often in scenes at the same time. They change mannerisms and voices so quickly that the fact alone that they did it is impressive. Moreover, they did it well. Imogen Front played the mysterious Miss Dee and the homeless girl Kay, she was particularly disturbing as the former, doing exactly what was intended. She also managed to make some sense of the latter, easily the weakest plot point of Ridley’s script. 

Catty Tucker and James Akka as Ollie and Jill were convincing as a married couple – just maybe not as a married couple in love. They had great voice acting and were just a joy to see as they switched between characters. The way they portrayed everyone, even though recurring at stereotypes that were easily recognisable by the audience, they made every character on stage feel quite unique. Their quippy and sarcastic dialogue flowed as naturally as a real conversation with much smarter people than usual would. 

In a few moments one is left wondering why Jill and Ollie are even in love with each other. Perhaps lingering on this theme could have more firmly established the complications of their romantic relationship. Although, that said, they manage to make the awkwardness quite charming.

All in all, I would definitely recommend Radiant Vermin. It’s witty and fast, provocative in its theme and dark at the appropriate moments. It’s dizzying and fascinating to watch.

Acting Union President calls for review

Tilly Walters
-
3
Acting Union President calls for review

Sara Dube, Acting President of the Oxford Union, has called an emergency committee meeting looking into the controversy surrounding the last few weeks at the Union. 

In a notice posted to members on Wednesday morning, Dube wrote that the Standing Committee would on Thursday morning be looking into:

  1. Meetings with disability advisory services
  2. Professional review of staff and training
  3. Equality training for staff and committee
  4. Complaints process

President Brendan McGrath resigned on Tuesday evening, after being widely condemned for his treatment of Ebenezer Azamati, a blind postgraduate student, with the events attracting scrutiny by international media and numerous politicians.

As a result of McGrath’s resignation the President-Elect Sara Dube is appointed as Acting President, and will continue for the remainder of Michaelmas and into Hilary term. Dube has yet to make a public statement on the ongoing events, and how she wishes to address the controversy in her tenure as President.

Hatwell and Nwamaka Ogbonna, President of the Oxford University Africa Society, told Cherwell: “We are glad that the President, Mr Brendan McGrath, has made the right decision to resign.

“We are aware there is still much more work to be done. The Union has still not publicly apologised for the incident or arranged for an investigation.

“The new Acting President, Sara Dube, must immediately do so. We will continue to push for meaningful reform and look forward to discussing this with the Acting President.”

Helen Mountfield, a QC and Principal of Mansfield College, has been representing Azamati in the ongoing proceedings. She commented that there were still ‘failings’ that needed to be addressed. Mountfield and Azamati have yet to announce whether they will pursue legal action against the society.

Union President resigns

Lois Heslop
-
0
Union President resigns

Oxford Union president Brendan McGrath resigned on Tuesday evening, issuing a public statement. McGrath was widely condemned for his treatment of Ebenezer Azamati, a blind postgraduate student, with the events attracting scrutiny by international media and numerous politicians.

McGrath’s resignation comes after the resignation of the Secretary, Chengkai Xie, the Director of Press, the Director of Operations, the Chief of Staff, two members of Standing Committee and a member of the Secretary’s Committee, amid calls to resign from the incumbent Librarian and Treasurer. A motion of impeachment against McGrath on Tuesday morning reached the required 150 signatures needed for an vote in a matter of hours.

In his resignation statement, released on Tuesday evening, McGrath said: “Fundamentally, it is the President’s job to ensure that every Member feels welcome at the Oxford Union. This is a goal I have manifestly failed to reach. For all my shortcomings, and all of my mistakes, I apologise profusely and unqualifiedly.

“From start to finish, managing the response to Mr Azamati’s eviction from the No Confidence debate has been the most difficult thing I’ve ever been charged with. I was asked, on the basis of accounts from those present, to bring a disciplinary complaint against Mr Azamati on behalf of a member of staff. I was advised that this was my responsibility as President: to represent the staff in an area in which they cannot represent themselves. This obligation to the Union’s staff is integral to my Office, but I should have recognised a wider obligation.

“The right response would not have begun with prosecution and apportioning blame, it would have been addressed immediately in the extreme distress of all involved, and pursued constructive solutions to the institutional problems highlighted.

“I can only hope that my relative public silence is not interpreted as being uncaring, or taking the matter lightly. My priorities have always been to make this right, as far as that is possible, in Mr Azamati’s eyes; to address his concerns personally; and to ensure that the Union body understands what has happened, and takes comprehensive action to make the Union a society which its Members can be proud of. I have not wanted to make a statement which would endanger those ongoing discussions with Mr Azamati.

“The measures I have proposed include a full, public, and independent review of the Union’s policies in respect of disability, to be conducted with the assistance of the Disability Advisory Service. We as the Standing Committee have taken immediate action to publicise a disability policy, but we must recognise that this problem requires intensive and expert review. I have proposed a professional review of how the Union trains its staff, particularly whether the current security system is fit for the purpose of a student society. I have proposed regular equalities training, on a termly basis, for the Union’s staff and committee, with the aim of fostering a culture of respect and inclusion.

“The society cannot recover with one resignation. I trust that you, and future members of the Standing Committee, will follow through on these measures earnestly.”

Harry Hatwell, who raised a Point of Order immediately after the incident to ask for an investigation and also recently gave evidence in defence of Mr Azamati, brought the impeachment motion to members. Hatwell and Nwamaka Ogbonna, President of the Oxford University Africa Society, told Cherwell: “We are glad that the President, Mr Brendan McGrath, has made the right decision to resign. The fact that nearly 300 students signed the impeachment motion today shows how important these issues are to the Union’s membership.

“We are aware there is still much more work to be done. The Union has still not publicly apologised for the incident or arranged for an investigation.

“The new Acting President, Sara Dube, must immediately do so. We will continue to push for meaningful reform and look forward to discussing this with the Acting President.”

This is a breaking news story: more to follow

Union members to be polled on President’s impeachment after petition reaches threshold

Ben van der Merwe
-
0
Union members to be polled on President’s impeachment after petition reaches threshold

Union members will be polled this Saturday on whether to impeach the society’s President, Brendan McGrath, after 150 members signed a petition in support of the motion. If two thirds vote in favour of impeachment, McGrath will be removed from office.

The motion had 48 hours to reach 150 signatures, but reached the threshold in just six.

Harry Hatwell, the member who brought the motion of impeachment and Nwamaka Ogbonna, President of Oxford University Africa Society today released a joint statement: “We are glad that so many people took the time today to sign the impeachment motion and would also like to thank the Union committee members who have resigned in order to support our demands.

“There will now be a poll of impeachment htis Saturday at the Oxford Union. If 2.3rd of voters support impeachment, the President will immediately be removed from Office.

“Our demands remain:

  • The immediate resignation of Brendan McGrath as President;
  • An unreserved public apology to Mr. Azamati by the Oxford Union;
  • Adequate punishment of the security personnel who assaulted Mr Azamati;
  • Adequate compensation agreed with Mr. Azamati.”

Earlier today, the Charities Commission became involved in the scandal being contacted by writer and broadcaster Afua Hirsch. The Commission wrote to Hirsch on Twitter: “Oxford Union is not a charity, but we have contacted the connected charity Oxford Literary and Debating Union Charitable Trust and issued the trustees with advice on what we exppect them to consider in their handling of this distressing incident.”

The action is being brought against McGrath for his failure to investigate Mr Azamati’s case, for continuing to prosecute him for nearly a month, and for failing to publicly apologise for the incident.

The motion states: “The President has failed in his duty to uphold the principles of equity and fairness, failed to deal with ableism and racism in the Union, and failed to listen to the voices of the Union’s members. He is not fit for office.”

Union Librarian and Secretary call for President’s resignation

Lois Heslop
-
0
Union Librarian and Secretary call for President’s resignation

Oxford Union Librarian Mahi Joshi has released a statement today condemning the behaviour of President Brendan McGrath over the treatment of blind postgraduate student Ebenezer Azamati. Azamati was forcibly removed from the No-Confidence Debate earlier this term and stripped of his membership.

In a statement calling for the President’s resignation, Mahi Joshi told Cherwell: “Today an impeachment motion was called against the President of the Union, Brendan McGrath. The treatment of Ebenezer Azamati before the No Confidence Debate last month was shocking and the Union’s conduct in the aftermath was shameful and inexcusable.

“Brendan should resign to avoid deepening the crisis, and to take responsibility for this egregious mismanagement. I personally, deeply condemn the way in which Mr Azamati was treated by the Union. It breaks my heart that someone should have been made to feel unwelcome in the Union, let alone in the country, on the basis of who they are.

“Last year, a number of us supported Brendan for President in the belief that he would make the Union a more welcoming and friendly place. Despite his efforts, his position has become untenable. The committee has worked very hard to ensure our members are well-served, and we have failed terribly.

“What took place was a terrible failure of empathy, and it is something for which we all share the blame. In light of the impeachment motion, the President needs to resign.”

This statement comes amidst several committee resignations over Mr Azamati’s treatment, including the Secretary Chengkai Xie, members of Standing Committee Arjun Bhardwaj and Jeremy Mbararia, and the Director of Operations, Director of Press, and Chief of Staff.

Secretary Chengkai Xie also addressed McGrath in a statement of resignation, stating: “Your actions and those of the officers who supported you fall short of any standard of human decency.

“I imprudently took your word when you promised to treat Mr. Ebenezer Azamati and the members of the committee with respect. You locked us out of the decisionmaking process and pursued a course of action that was deeply humiliating and unfair to Mr. Azamati. As a result, I find myself left with no choice but to tender my resignation as an officer of the Oxford Union, and to call upon you to do the same.

“I hope that one day you recognise your mistakes, and that we as a Union can make amends for the pain and injustice we have caused.”

Shining Zhao, the current Treasurer, called for McGrath to resign while retaining his own position.

In a statement on Facebook, he said: “When the previous impeachment campaign was launched against Brendan, I was reluctant to take a side and eventually chose to vote “No” to impeaching Brendan, on the grounds of both good faith and belief that he would be able to help make the Union a better and cleaner environment.

“I come from a non-English-speaking educational background in China, and it has always been difficult putting thoughts into English words, particularly in ways that are not open to misinterpretation or twisting. To hear my accent, my speech mocked by those who speak English better than I do is a painful experience that I have always associated with racism – so I could only imagine the pain Mr. Azamati must have felt as he was violently dragged out of the Union, of the chamber where speech is supposedly free for all. I cannot, in good faith, stand by the Union’s inaction and lack of response to Mr. Azamati’s treatment.

“In particular, the President’s handling of this matter has been frankly appalling.”

“I will remain to serve the rest of the Union membership in my place as Treasurer of this society. Yet I will not hesitate to assume collective responsibility and acknowledge that as senior officers, we are all at fault here. I vow to fight my tooth and claw to represent the voices of underrepresented members in the Standing Committee of this society. If this means political isolation and badmouthing are coming my way, then so be it. But it would be ludicrous for me to not take a stance, and speak my mind over this matter.

“Brendan McGrath, in my honest opinion, is ill-suited to serve as President of this society. He should resign with immediate effect.”

Resignations as impeachment proceedings begin against Union President

Rachel Cordery
-
1
Resignations as impeachment proceedings begin against Union President

Official impeachment proceedings against the President of the Oxford Union are being launched this morning over the treatment of Ebenezer Azamati, a blind postgraduate student, in a case which has received widespread national attention and condemnation from MPs.

Last night, the Union’s Director of Press, Chief of Staff and two members of the Standing Committee and Secretary’s Committee, the Union’s governing body, announced their resignations in protest at Mr Azamati’s treatment.

Standing Committee member Jeremy Mbararia issued a statement of resignation, telling Mr McGrath: “Every action that you have taken in responding to the incident, from bringing a disciplinary action against Ebenezer, to failing to issue an unconditional apology until being pressured to do so, has showed me that you are unable to put aside your political ambition for basic decency.

“I entered the Committee thinking that perhaps the warnings were not entirely true. I feel that not only as a fellow person of colour and African, but as an individual with a sense of morality, I can no longer remain within an institution such as this, so long as you remain in office… I cannot and will not serve such a President. I stand with Ebenezer.”

Secretary’s Committee member, Simon van Teutem, also addressed Mr McGrath in a public statement: “I wish that you were able to take a step back from your personal interests and consider the impact that this has had on Mr Azamati. This is more than the political games you have grown accustomed to.

“Not only was Mr Azamati humiliated by the staff at the debate, you insisted on amplifying his humiliation by attempting to strip him of his membership for a disciplinary offence which he did not commit. I am ashamed that I ever served a President who was capable of such indecent, disrespectful, and vindictive conduct. Although it is your resignation that the Members deserve, it is the resignation of the more junior members that they will have to accept as a token of our apology and shame for the incident. Mine is not the first, and will not be the last.”

Chengkai Xie, Arjun Bhardwaj, and the Director of Operations have also resigned from their positions.

A witness to the initial incident, Harry Hatwell will pin a motion for the impeachment of Brendan McGrath on the Union’s noticeboard at 10:00am. The motion of impeachment is fully supported by Oxford University Africa Society (AfriSoc), who protested the Union last Friday. Mr Azamati is Ghanaian.

The motion reads: “For better or for worse, being President of the Oxford Union is seen as a stepping-stone to high office (our current Prime Minister as a case in point); being President of the Union matters.

“The Union holds itself to be a bastion of democratic debate and liberty, but it is hard to see such values have been upheld here. The actions of the Union and the impunity with which our elected representatives have acted cannot go unchallenged. The President has chosen not to do the brave, courageous, and responsible thing and stand down from his position; we have faith that Union members will make him accountable.”

Having pinned the motion, members of the Union have 48 hours to sign it in support. If 150 members do so in this time, there will be a poll of all members. If two thirds of voters in this poll support impeachment, the President will be immediately removed from office.

The University of Oxford condemned the treatment of Mr Azamati: “We share the widespread outrage regarding the unacceptable treatment of Ebenezer Azamati, a member of our University community, at the Oxford Union. Ebenezer’s college and the University are working to fully support him.

“The Union is an entirely independent club not governed by the University, but this student’s treatment goes against our culture of inclusivity and tolerance – we are pressing the Union for answers on how they plan to remedy the issue and ensure this does not happen in the future.”

The action is being brought against McGrath for his failure to investigate Mr Azamati’s case, for continuing to prosecute him for nearly a month, and for failing to publicly apologise for the incident.

The motion states: “The President has failed in his duty to uphold the principles of equity and fairness, failed to deal with ableism and racism in the Union, and failed to listen to the voices of the Union’s members. He is not fit for office.”

Hatwell raised a Point of Order immediately after the incident to ask for an investigation and also recently gave evidence in defence of Mr Azamati.

1...621622623...2,577Page 622 of 2,577

Support Student Journalism

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

Donate

Explore

Follow us

More

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

Website by Jamie Ashley