Following a request last Friday for a ruling on the validity of the “Trial Slate Ban” introduced in Michaelmas 2018, the Union’s Returning Officer, Liam Frahm, has ruled that the trial ban is invalid.
In his ruling Frahm announced: “On Friday 1st February, Brendan McGrath, the Librarian, officially requested a Ruling into the validity of the trial ban on electoral pacts from MT18.”
“Having investigated the Librarian’s allegations, I can firstly confirm that the MT18 Motion was passed without either Rule 67(b)(iv) or Rule 67(b)(v) being invoked.”
He continued: “Having consulted the MT18 Standing Committee Minutes and unequivocally knowing that no requisition was posted, this Motion did not have special attention applied to it.
“Therefore, the Motion holds executive seniority of (3) as special attention applied to it. Therefore, the Motion holds executive seniority of (3) as outlined in Rule 73(A).”
He therefore concluded that “Having established a conflict in the rules, Rule 73 requires that precedence is granted to the rule with greater executive seniority.
“Therefore, as executive seniority is determined by the method by which the Rule is introduced and the HT15 rule was passed with greater seniority than the MT18 rules change, Rule 73 requires that the HT15 rules change take precedence over the MT18 private business motion that introduced rule 33e is ruled invalid.”
Rule 73 says: “In the event of a conflict over a decision concerning a particular policy or the implementation of a particular policy, or concerning amendments to the Rules or Standing Orders, and the Rules and Standing Orders are otherwise silent, the following shall take precedence in the following order of seniority:
(1) A Poll of Members as under Rule 47(f); (2) A Private Business Motion at a Public Business Meeting to which Rule 67(b)(iv) or Rule 67(b) (v) applies; (3) Other Private Business Motions at a Public Business Meeting or any Special Adjournment Motion, as under Rule 45; (4) A Private Business Motion at a Private Business Meeting; (5) The Returning Officer, for the purposes of their duty only, as defined in Rule 32(e) only; (6) A motion of an Ordinary or Emergency Standing Committee; (7) A motion of a Vacation Standing Committee.”
This means that the previous trial slate ban is no longer in place, and the changes made last term (including the provision for a poll of the members on getting rid of slates next term) are rendered invalid.
The Returning Officer also ruled that changes made to Rule 33 last term are also invalid, and that a number of rulings in response to the trial ban will now need to be reissued by the Returning Officer.
The Oxford Union and Liam Frahm were contacted for comment. Ray Williams and Brendan McGrath declined to comment.
The government’s Universities Minister, Chris Skidmore, and the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster David Lidington have announced new regulations requiring universities to publish a record of their efforts to tackle ethnic inequality in the university admissions.
The new measures, organised by the Office for Students (OfS), will also hold universities to account on how they improve outcomes for underrepresented students.
Amongst the data which universities must now publish publicly are statistics on admissions and attainment, broken down by ethnicity, gender, and socio-economic background. League table providers will also be encouraged to take this data into account in future university rankings.
According to the OfS’ Race Disparity Audit, although record numbers of BAME students are attending university, only 56% achieve a First or 2:1, compared to 80% of their white peers, and that black students were the most likely to drop out of university.
David Lidington said: “I am determined that nobody experiences a worse outcome solely on the grounds of their ethnicity, which is why the Government is making a clear and concerted effort, alongside higher education partners to tackle these injustices.”
Meanwhile Chris Skidmore said: “I fully expect access and participation plans, which universities will be drawing up this year for implementation in 2020-21, to contain ambitious and significant actions to make sure we are seeing material progress in this space in the next few years.
“It is one of my key priorities as the universities minister to ensure that I work with universities to highlight examples of best practice in widening not only access, but also that we redouble our efforts to tackle student dropout rates.”
The Office for Students, which was formed in January last year, has previously threatened Oxford with sanctions if they fail to improve their access outcomes, making them one of just three higher educational institutions to have conditions placed on their registration with the OfS.
The Oxford Union’s Returning Officer, Liam Frahm, has announced that he will rule tomorrow on whether the trial slate ban passed last year is invalid.
At the end of the Standing Committee meeting on Monday 4th February, Frahm told the committee that, as per Rule 73 of the society’s “Rules and Standing Orders”, the ban could be superseded, as the initial motion to introduce slates in 2015 was of a higher seniority than the slate ban.
In an internal email seen by Cherwell, Frahm informed the initial proponent of the ban, Union Chief of Staff Ray Williams of the following: “As I am sure you have heard, I made an announcement in TSC of the following:
“Last Friday, Brendan McGrath, the Librarian, made an official request of a Ruling regarding the validity of your Slates Ban Motion. The basis of this request regards Rule 73.”
In the Rules and Standing Orders of the Society, №73 notes: “In the event of a conflict over a decision concerning a particular policy or the implementation of a particular policy, or concerning amendments to the Rules or Standing Orders, and the Rules and Standing Orders are otherwise silent, the following shall take precedence in the following order of seniority:
(1) A Poll of Members as under Rule 47(f);
(2) A Private Business Motion at a Public Business Meeting to which Rule 67(b)(iv) or Rule 67(b) (v) applies;
(3) Other Private Business Motions at a Public Business Meeting or any Special Adjournment Motion, as under Rule 45;
(4) A Private Business Motion at a Private Business Meeting;
(5) The Returning Officer, for the purposes of their duty only, as defined in Rule 32(e) only;
(6) A motion of an Ordinary or Emergency Standing Committee;
(7) A motion of a Vacation Standing Committee.”
As the trial slate ban was passed by a Private Business Motion at a Public Business Meeting, the earlier “Special Attention” which granted the introduction of slates would take precedence on any overlapping decisions made by the two votes under this technicality. This means the later ban could be rendered invalid.
The rules changed by the Special Attention can only be changed by another Special Attention or a poll of the members.
The Oxford Union, Liam Frahm were contacted for comment. Ray Williams and Brendan McGrath declined to comment.
Corsets are tangled in a variety of associations, bringing to mind anything from archaic eras of fashion to bondage fetishes. Personally, the story of my great-great-grandmother comes to mind. According to family myth, her hatred of wearing corsets drove her to embrace pregnancy as an almost permanent state of being – it was only during pregnancy that she was officially dismissed from wearing it. This tactic resulted in her having twelve children and these are just the pregnancies that she carried to term. Imagine the risks of childbirth at the time!
Can wearing a corset really be this awful? The generations of women after my great-great-grandmother were united in saying, ‘Yes!’
Early women’s rights activists with the backing of doctors began to campaign against the corset during the nineteenth century. Their success transformed corsets into a symbol of female oppression. The corset was displaced by bralettes, step-ins and other alternatives by the 1920s, and ‘casting off the corset’ as since denoted a turn towards liberated, healthier and independent women.
But fashion is a long way from fully abandoning corsets. Dior’s uber-feminine ‘new look’ dresses from 1947 evoked a silhouette of tiny waists and accentuated hips thanks to their underbust corset with attached petticoats. The feminist movement of the sixties then swept the corseted waist out of mainstream aesthetic once again. But from the 1990s onwards, the likes of Gaultier’s corset-inspired outfits for Madonna’s Blonde Ambition Tour and evening gowns by McQueen or Mugler have created the base for a twenty-first century corset revival.
As corsets lost their place in everyday wear, they gained creative potential, Nowadays, they can be underwear or outerwear, inspiration or construction, accessory or medical necessity. And they have certainly not stopped being fashion.
In the 90s Gaultier first sent his famous corset dress on the runway. In 1995, McQueen’s The Bird Spring/Summer Collection featured an appearance from Mr Pearl, a lacer and corsetiere who was sent down the runway in an extremely tailored blazer. Thierry Muggler used real, steel-boned corsets as a shaping part underneath a couture dress. These methods are far from outdated, and the legacy of the corset remains subtly present in fashion today: just look at modern wedding dresses with semi-functional lacing, or evening dresses with suggested boning channels. They all use visual elements that were originally part of the construction of a corset.
But why is the steel-boned corset experiencing a renaissance now?
Third wave feminism encourages individual expression like never before, combined with an unapologetic celebration of femininity. While our mothers burned their bras, we can reclaim and redefine the aesthetic of a patriarchal and heteronormative society. Red lipstick, push-up bras, all-over pink, or corsets. As long as it’s your choice, anything goes.
As subcultures like burlesque and drag gain recognition, corsets are returning into the spotlight. World-famous burlesque dancer Dita von Teese started performing in corsets in the 1990s. Drag performers and female impersonators have long used corsets for a more feminine appearance. Thanks to the popular American TV show ‘Ru’Paul’s Drag Race’ their art now has a growing audience all over the world. When Violet Chachki shows off her tiny 18-inch corseted waist, who is not holding their breath in amazement (or maybe solidarity)?
New techniques in the design process has reshaped the corset: current corsetieres are not simply continuing a tradition but are actively reinventing it. Laser-cutting allows for greater precision than a tailor could ever manage with scissors. Computer simulation allows perfect fittings, even with complicated designs and materials. Artificial whale boning made from plastic provides the same elasticity without harming animals.
Curiosity led me down a path of experimental fashion archaeology and I tried wearing a corset myself. I was immensely fascinated with my new look, examining the outline of my corseted waist in a series of pictures. Other people’s reactions were interesting. Some assumed this was a new kink, whilst others were concerned I had back problems. Well, neither reason applies! My great-great-grandmother could only escape the corset with medical reasons not to wear one, but today it appears that people expect an external reason to justify wearing one. But they couldn’t be more wrong. Modern corsets are worn for one and one reason alone: because the wearer wants to do so.
International opera singer Iestyn Davies, has had a glittering career to date; I speak to him as he is about to sing Messiah at Saffron Hall as part of his season as Artist in Residence for 2018-19. He has recently given solo recitals to great acclaim at Wigmore Hall, Milton Court at the Barbican, and King’s Place. He rounded off his 2018 season with performances at the BBC Proms, Boston Symphony Hall, and Carnegie Hall.
I was first privileged to hear Iestyn sing in Handel’s Saul at Glyndebourne, and he has also starred in operas both ancient and modern at the Metropolitan Opera, Royal Opera House, and La Scala. He collaborates with contemporary composers such as Thomas Àdes, George Benjamin and Michael Nyman, and sung the title role in Claire van Kampen’s new play, Farinelli and the King, which also starred Mark Rylance, and transferred to Broadway from the Globe in late 2017, which earned him an Olivier Award nomination. Iestyn is a countertenor; he sings in his falsetto range above his regular speaking pitch.
You were a choral scholar at St John’s College Cambridge. Why did you decide to be a chorister instead of going straight to music college?
Being in a choir wasn’t new to me because I had been a boy chorister, also at St John’s – it felt like part of the DNA to go back there. I really wasn’t sure that I’d get in. When I applied to St John’s aged 18 to be a choral scholar, I was singing to the choir master who had been the choir director when I was a boy – Christopher Robinson – and so it was much more intimidating because I thought they would think “this isn’t the treble we remember from five years ago”.
I thought that if I can’t get into St John’s then maybe it’s a sign that the adult singer life wasn’t for me. I was quite straight-forward about it. If I don’t get in, I’ll go somewhere else and do Archeology. I applied to do music at Cambridge because I thought it showed interest, but when I got to Cambridge I changed to Archaeology anyway.
Singing in a choir, for a countertenor of that age, was the best thing I could have done – for me, my voice took time to settle in; it wasn’t something that came naturally to me when my voice broke. My natural speaking voice is bass, and I didn’t ever plan to be a countertenor. All I knew was choral music, so countertenors weren’t unfamiliar to me but singing countertenor as a professional job was something I hadn’t come across. When you’re singing in a choir every day, you learn so much musically anyway. My dad’s a cellist and he played in a string quartet for most of his career – he always said that chamber music is the best preparation for being a soloist and it’s the same for singing. If you sing in a choir which requires high-level listening skills, being able to sight-read, and perform consistently every night of the week – at St John’s where we had a high turnover of repertoire it was considered to be somewhere where you can’t do it by halves – it’s all or nothing.
I said to my singing teacher, David Lowe, that I wanted to apply to music college and he said he wasn’t sure about the idea, but I applied anyway against his better judgement and got in. Three years at Cambridge and then three years at music college gave me a chance to learn a lot rather than just show off as a singer – many young singers have naturally good voices but haven’t been particularly challenged so they don’t capitalise on their voices or push the limits of what they can do. It was always a bit of a struggle for me, so I always tried to prove myself. The choral scholar thing really helped some singers get annoyed about choral scholars becoming opera singers because they think we’re stuck in choir ways and don’t know how to act, but I think that’s nonsense. If that person wants to do it, they’ll find a way of taking everything that they’ve learned and applying it in a new way.
What’s the difference between opera singers who went straight to music college and those who were choristers?
In the early stages of music college, I was around people who had never really done any singing, apart from on their own in a room with a teacher. There’s lots of good things about that because they come at it from a technical point of view, but as a professional singer, you quickly realise that it’s like any job – it’s about getting on with people. If you’ve got good technique and you can look after yourself when you’re travelling, it’s great. It means you can focus on expressing yourself. Singing, whether it’s in an opera or recital, is about communication. If it’s not about communication, it’s just a beautiful noise which is what you can do standing in a choir singing polyphony and going “aah”. Lots of people like that, but it’s not necessarily communicating – if you listen to lots of choirs, they all sound the same.
I’m 39 now and I’ve done it for about 15 years and I think I’ve now got the choral scholar thing out of my system. Then you start to think it’s not much of an advantage being able to do things quickly and actually taking time to work on acting, on character, is much more crucial.
I saw you in two modern operas, Written on Skin (Benjamin) and The Exterminating Angel (Ades). How is contemporary opera different to singing Handel or Purcell?
People come to it thinking it’s really hard, but actually it’s kind of the opposite. It’s hard because you don’t know it that well but if you set out being scared of it, then it’s very difficult to get into it. If you go into it with the attitude that “I’m the only person that knows how this goes”, especially if the role has been written for you, and that there is only one way to go which is the way the composer’s written it, then it’s very freeing.
The Ades was like learning a new language.
Tom explains how he writes music: he starts off with a note on the page vibrating, going somewhere. Once you learn the grammar of it, it completely makes sense; you don’t go “that’s weird”, you go “that’s weird but it completely works”. If you walked up to me now and sung me a line, I could probably sing the rest of the opera to you. Much like reading a map, you learn to know the route.
But some contemporary opera isn’t like that, it’s much more about the subject; I’ve just done Nico Mulhy’s Marnie at the Met which is totally different; you can call it post-modern minimalism or whatever you want, it’s Nico’s music, but in a way it’s more baroque. For my part anyway, I had nice tunes, and that is more disarming; it’s harder to learn because his music has less variance in terms of tempo etc, so you found things like remembering how many rests there were between your two phrases much harder – there’s nothing telling you why it should be six beats instead of five beats. It’s disarmingly hard whereas with very difficult music there’s only one way to sing it.
Why is baroque music on the rise?
You’re not the only person to ask that question. To my mind it’s not something that’s recent – the resurgence of baroque music has been something that was happening well into the second half of the 20th century – if anything, when I was starting out ten years ago, there was a lot more. I think the popularity of baroque music has always been there, in terms of audiences in opera houses, and opera houses trying to put one on every year.
However, recently the music has found its groove and as a result it has opened people’s minds as to how they can be staged. Saul, who would have thought of staging that, it’s an oratorio! I think Glyndebourne staging Theodora back in 1998 gave everyone the green light. With this type of music you can choose, as a director, what the piece is trying to say, whereas with more traditional operas, like Wagner or Rossini, the story and music are intertwined much more strongly. It’s very difficult to divorce the material from the narrative, whereas with Handel it’s much more open to interpretation. In the 18th century, they would have been presented in a much more abstract, more allegorical way relating to politics of the time.
Directors and producers are trying to find reasons why opera is still valid and if you’ve got something that offers a much more modern interpretation or modern take or modern connection with the audience, then it goes a long way.
Why has acting and storytelling improved somuch in opera recently?
It’s a lot to do with the modernisation of opera direction – finding directors who haven’t just worked in opera or aren’t just designers. People have been scared of opera because they think of it as being dominated by the music, dominated by the power of singers. But look at Richard Jones, Deborah Warner, Barrie [Kosky]. People who have worked a lot in theatre come along and look incredulous that people would just stand still and sing. Music colleges also have a lot to do with that. They don’t train their singers as actors – they do a bit of acting in the college but really it’s still a time when your voice is forming and you’re learning technique. It’s down to your own ingenuity to be relaxed enough to work with a director who’s going to push you.
What advice would you give your teenage self?
I had a really great time at Cambridge, but I didn’t do much work – I did enough to get a 2:1, but I wish looking back I would have been more organised. I talked to the Master of St John’s and he said that because students at school are under much more pressure now because of exams and getting into Oxbridge, they are all very good at being organised and doing revision, and often forget to enjoy themselves.
I suppose I enjoyed myself and got everything out of it that I could have done, but some people were more mature than me when they turned up to university, and I kind of felt like I knew it all because I’d been to school at St John’s. I watched people work really hard and I felt like they were missing out, so I suppose it’s ironic to say “be more organised” because I also want people to relax a bit, but they are the best years of your life.
Live every day fully at university because it goes so quickly. Also structure your day: if you’ve got work to do, do it, but also set yourself aside enough time to go out to the pub, sing, have fun.
Once it’s gone, you do miss the structure of “I have to go to the university library”. It’s funny that ten years later it only seems like yesterday that I left, and I would change a lot: I would be more organised, try and get loads more out of it, because there’s so much on your doorstep there that you’re not necessarily required to do. Get everything out of Oxford that you can, make every day really long and enjoyable – don’t spend days in bed.
Be hungover but also get up! Look around you and seize every opportunity that you get, because it goes so quickly.
I still remember my first experience of hearing classical music live. Amongst other local schools, my class was invited to a summer music festival at Hellens Manor in rural Herefordshire. The Schubert Ensemble performed Dvorak ’s ‘Piano Quartet in E flat’ that evening, and I remember being transfixed. The music was beautiful, and they seemed to play so effortlessly, as though it was something natural within them.
Around me, the audience was immovable, attentive, and lost deep within their own memories and fantasy, as we shared this dream-like, collective experience of live music. Amongst many other moments, I recall that evening as one which affirmed my love of music and, before the onset of the harsher realities of growing up, I used to dream of becoming a concert pianist – a dream which has long since been abandoned at the realisation of sheer impossibility…especially given my aversion to practicing.
On the surface, it is easy to see the allure of classical music performance: the concert hall, the dazzling soloists, and the incredible talent, passion and enjoyment of those who have ‘made it’ – who have succeeded to make a career out of something they love. What we perhaps don’t see, beneath the surface of a polished performance, is the mundane, or even darker side to this: the gruelling hours spent alone in a practice room, the frequent auditions and rejections, perfectionism, self-criticism, crippling performance anxiety, and the intense competition of the industry.
As with many other things in life, we prefer to focus on illusory, surface-level beauty, and ignore what lurks beneath.
It will come as no surprise that classical music has an access problem. Learning an instrument costs a great deal of money and with current cuts to government funding, many state schools are sadly forced to remove music from the curriculum. Despite numerous benefits to the wellbeing and education of children, it just isn’t seen as a priority. Of course, there are many admirable efforts to widen access to classical music. Many outreach initiatives of major orchestras and charities have worked tirelessly to make classical music available to those who wouldn’t otherwise be able to engage with it. There is still a long way to go. To many people, concert hall culture is perceived as an elitist tradition, restricted to wealthy (usually elderly) people who might sneer at you if you say something wrong or fail to sit in complete silence during the performance – heaven forbid you should clap between movements!
The way we think about classical music still very much subscribes to the romantic cult-like idea of an isolated creative genius (think of Beethoven as he gradually became deaf), driven relentlessly forward by the conviction that their artistry must be heard. The idea of a classical ‘canon’ that encompasses a list of unquestionable ‘masterworks’ (by Mozart, Haydn, Beethoven and so on) and the concept of ‘high art’ itself is problematic and hegemonic; it pushes women, minorities, non-Western cultures, and other genres to the margins, while pretending its values are universal and that ‘pure’ music is not connected to issues of gender, sexuality, politics, and privilege. These ideas have all been challenged in recent music scholarship, but it will take a long time to see change. For example, even today, although there are many talented, living female composers, they are frequently ignored when it comes to programming concerts.
Of course, classical music isn’t all negative. Despite what some may think, it’s still a dynamic, living tradition with exciting works being premiered all the time. While it’s true that careers in classical music are notoriously precarious, this is surely true of all artistic pursuits; worthwhile things in life are rarely easy to attain. This is no reason to give up. Seen from a different perspective, disillusionment with classical music is actually a good thing! Like enlightenment, disillusionment means being set free from untruth, it means seeing through a façade of pretence. Illusions hide the truth, but the truth brings to light all the things which need to be changed, and from that we can move forward. Just please, whatever you do, try not to clap between movements.
“I might end it on ‘wankers’” – not quite the directorial call I was expecting to preface this preview. It’s not a phrase I would connect with plays about the English monarchy, but – as I’m soon to find out – this isn’t quite the conventional retelling anyway.
It seems the primary challenge in Omelette Productions’ telling of Henry IV has been convincing the audience this isn’t the Shakespearean play of nearly identical name (though this has largely been avoided through some very effective marketing, playing card kings in sunglasses abound). The short preview I’m granted reveals it to be a very different beast – a Stoppard translation of a 1920s Pirandello play, itself based upon the medieval king. As might be expected, this makes tackling the script no easy task – both for the actors and the audience. The director, Dominic Weatherby, says that it can help to read the synopsis beforehand – although, as I note while watching it, not quite understanding every intricacy of the plot doesn’t detract from the performance before me. The overarching premise is fairly simple – a mad man believes he’s a king, others try to break him out of his delusion – but what I find particularly interesting are the subtle underlying tensions which are made so apparent.
In an effort to showcase the most characters I’m launched straight into Act 2, taking place somewhere between the lengthy exposition of Act 1 (comprising roughly half the run-time) and what I’m informed is a startling denouement. There’s a wonderful quasi-Shakespearean lyricism to the speech (despite the rather more modern profanities) – each actor takes their time over the language, and there’s never a sense of rushing or talking-over, even in a scene with so many underlying disagreements. Some wonderfully meta lines jump out at me – “how wonderful to have history on your side” – which are handled with remarkable subtlety; the lengthy philosophising of the doctor (Luke Malone) is declaimed clearly without coming across as pretentious or unnatural.
Each actor conveys themselves with a sense of regality, in keeping with their positions (I’m informed that everyone will be wearing full period costumes as their in-play disguises – a prospect which I find quite exciting). What I’m most in awe with is how, even without the preceding exposition, subtle tensions are conveyed so effectively. Lucy Mae Humphries as Matilda conveys one of the most convincing performances, displaying the minutae of emotion in wonderful expression, body language, and mumbling (I almost wish I could lipread); there’s a fantastic, horrible dynamic between herself and her husband, Belcredi (Sunny Ramamurthy), who fears he is becoming a “bit-part character” in the entire farce.
What I’m particularly pleased to see is an influx of fresh blood – around half the cast are first years. Being a second year himself, Weatherby notes this to have been a particular point of contention in his own experience, and it’s a hopeful shift in a dramatic landscape notoriously difficult to navigate. There’s also a good amount of gender-swapping, including of the eponymous king himself (Kathryn Cussons), who was so good in audition she was cast on the spot. It’s a challenging role – “I arrive once an act and talk for six straight pages” – but wonderfully enacted. Appearing towards the end of my preview, Cussons commands the stage with the absolute mastery needed for the role, a ‘king’ at once wavering and commanding.
I’m also particularly enamoured with the staging – the BT Studio provides the perfect setting to an intimate ‘court’ life, with the audience on three sides and up close and personal with the actors. The entire space is used effectively throughout – no actors getting bunched together in a single corner – and it’s clear an incredible amount of attention has gone into how it looks. I’d be interested to watch the performance from another side of the audience, just to see if the whole scene were still as powerful as that presented to me here.
With the St Peter’s rehearsal room not allowing for the full vision, I’m given an incredibly detailed account of the scene before we start – throne at one end, table at the other, a portrait of the king and would-be queen – which is incorporated convincingly into the performance. The portrait is gestured to despite its absence, presenting a model of royalty which certain characters both imitate and aspire to. Even the table, already littered with an interesting collection of knick-knacks and wax candles, is said to be incomplete, but already (so close I’m practically sat at the table with them) makes me feel like I’m there. I’m impressed with the clear vision which this team holds, and excited to see how it will be brought to life when it reaches its home in the BT.
The National Union of Students (NUS) has proposed a series of cuts under the threat of bankruptcy, including selling or renting out the NUS London building and pausing funding for the posts of Trans Officer and International Officer.
The NUS’s proposal for the 2019/2020 year has drawn sharp public criticism from the NUS International and NUS Trans Campaigns.
NUS International, which represents international students living in the UK, tweeted: “we are extremely concerned about @nusuk Trustee Board’s decision of defunding NUS International Students’ Campaign.”
The NUS leadership has defended their decision to undergo “a transition year which re- quires extraordinary action to ensure solvency and deliver a degree of financial stability.”
Responding to the cuts, the NUS LGBTQ+ Campaign issued a statement on the 21st January, stating: “the secrecy with which NUS has chosen to conduct the process of deciding which officer position is worthy of funding suggests that this is a political rather than a financial choice.
“We believe it was wrong for the UK Board to make this decision, as the Trustee Board should not be setting the political direction of the organisation. There is simply nothing democratic or liberatory about this decision happening without a single conversation with a trans student or representative, especially as the VP Union Development is a member of the Turnaround Board.
“We believe that trans students deserve to know how and why this decision was made”.
Speaking to Cherwell, a spokesperson for NUS Transform said: “At the Joint Boards meeting, the NUS UK Board voted to defund the trans campaign.
“We believe that this was politically motivated, not necessarily because there was an anti-trans agenda, but because the decision to defund trans officer as opposed to other officers is an inherently political decision made by a body that is not designed to make those decisions.
“It would have been more appropriate for the UK Board to decide the number of officers and NUS NEC to decide which ones, as a body that is elected by students. Instead the decision was taken in a closed meeting with no consultation from trans students.”
The NUS International Campaign also released a statement on the issue, writing: “Defunding the NUS International Students’ Campaign compounds the concerns of those students who naturally feel reticent about raising issues individually in a country in which they are not citizens, and such a move would have both long-term and short-term implications.
“To lose our voice and visibility in an organisation that claims to speak for all students would be devastating, and there is no confidence that those who do not share our experience could command trust and speak for us on our issues, no matter how well meaning and committed to this work.
“We recognise this is a difficult time but our need to speak for those facing considerable and urgent challenges means we must make clear our concerns and urgent request that the Trustees revise their approach on this issue.”
As the proposed plan has been put into action, many employees have reportedly been offered voluntary redundancy, and the number of staff working for the NUS is expected to fall by half from the year of 2018/19.
The student union is reportedly under severe financial pressure after seeing a £3.6m loss in 2017. The organisation revealed in its last financial statement that it owed £1.8m in bank loans and that it faced a pensions liability of £12.2m.
Trans Officer for the Oxford SU LGBTQ Campaign Tori Mangan told Cherwell: “The Campaign is strongly opposed to the defunding of the NUS Trans Campaign. That this move has been made at a time when trans people are facing increasing vitriol in the mainstream press and individual activists have been targeted is also extremely concerning.
“The findings of our 2018 Trans Report demonstrated comprehensively that trans students are in dire need of support, and this move will significantly reduce the support offered by NUS.”
The financial troubles of the NUS have not been met with sympathy from all commentators. Right-wing political blog Guido Fawkes responded to the reports by writing: “The leftist students running the organisation are learning the lesson that profligate spending leads to both savage cuts AND more borrowing”.
At risk of deserving serious rebuke, I’ll confess I’ve always found it hard to care about the plot of Eugene Onegin: an arrogant nobleman rejects an infantile, infatuated teenage girl only to fall at her feet years later in her husband’s house. In the meantime, Onegin duels and kills her sister’s fiancé over a disagreement so minor it’s almost infuriating to witness. It’s hard not to feel as if the whole thing’s a bit unnecessary. Whilst Pushkin can draw you into such machinations over the time it takes to read 390 stanzas, a two and a half hour performance is far less of an investment, and thus demands a level of instant commitment that is not always easy to conjure up.
Once I’ve witnessed Onegin shoot his close friend in a duel that escalates from his own banal idiocies, as Act Three progresses I’m not so committed to his sudden passion for Tatiana. All these groanings and moanings, however, dwindle to total irrelevance amidst Tchaikovsky’s glorious score, which needs no elaudations from me. However grinch-like I am, it’s impossible to be irritated by Tatiana’s letter scene, or Lensky’s arioso in Act One, or the horrors of the duel scene. Jack Holton’s deep, rolling baritone carries Onegin’s melodies with warmth and ease, which beautifully plays off Alexandria Wreggelsworth’s mellifluous, soaring soprano voice that was delightfully centred and full. The two together are, gratifyingly, the nexus of the production.
The People’s Opera’s Eugene Onegin was a feat of achievement in challenging circumstances. The St John’s College Auditorium was no friend to the orchestra, which was crammed in with the timpani and harp placed on the edge of the stage itself for want of space; the fact that the opera simply stayed together was an achievement in itself, let alone that it produced a successful performance. The strings playing two to a part (difficult in any case) in that dry, concrete acoustic should have been an impossible task, but despite fortes being significantly easier than pianos they made a lovely sound expertly conducted by Hannah Schneider. The woodwind were particularly impressive, producing the most stunning warm, delicate and tender lines.
One of the most beautiful moments occurred when the singers moved into the aisles of the stalls to sing the chorus at the Larin ball; an inspired decision that allowed the voices to balance so well with the orchestra amidst the otherwise overly-zealous acoustic. Dominic Bevan really came into his own with Lensky’s aria ‘Куда, куда вы удалились…’ and Grace Lovelass’ Olga was gleefully easy in presence and vocal capacity. This semi-abridged version (running for 1 hour 45 minutes) was a little incoherent at times, occasionally involving extended orchestral passages accompanied by an empty stage (the polonaise that opens Act Three is such a gift to inventive, interesting direction on stage that I wondered whether something more could have been done with it). But as I said to begin with, it’s somewhat irrelevant whether or not the narrative makes sense when the score is so glorious. It’s an opera that draws rising joy and deep distress into conversation with each other, throwing both into relief, which The People’s Opera and Oxford Alternative Orchestra inhabited with powerful intelligence.
Magdalen, Oriel, and New spent less than half a percent of their college budgets on outreach in 2017/18, Cherwell can reveal.
Freedom of Information requests sent by Cherwell also revealed that Magdalen spent £47,000 on college organised outreach in 2017/2018, less than any other college except St Hugh’s. This is despite the fact that Magdalen is the third wealthiest college in Oxford, and boasts assets of £272 million.
On average, colleges spent 0.9% of their annual budgets on outreach. By comparison, New College spent 0.47% of their annual budget historically on outreach, although they have pledged to pay 1% from now on.
Several colleges also provided a breakdown of outreach spending. New College’s ‘Step Up’ programme (which is “designed to inspire and support state school students throughout
Year 11, 12 and 13”) supports 21 schools and colleges. 10 of these schools have been ranked ‘outstanding’ by Ofsted.
Warden of New College, Miles Young told Cherwell: “One needs to be careful in highlighting data such as Ofsted in isolation. It’s just one data set a College should be looking at, and we look at many. For instance of our seven schools rated ‘excellent’ these are two schools with a higher than national average of FSM students (one is nearly double the national average). One of these schools also have over fifty percent of students classified as Black / Mixed Black Heritage
“[These schools also include:] Three schools in under-represented areas (the SW and NW of England), one school where roughly 80% of the school are non-White, and two schools for girls.
“If excluded, Oxford would miss out on these pupils. The lesson is that one should be as holistic as possible when selecting schools for sustained outreach. The willingness and the enthusiasm of the school is also important.”
St. Anne’s spent £93,000 on two five-day summer schools in Hong Kong and Singapore in 2017/2018. The summer schools helped fund around £120,000 of domestic outreach resources and activities overall.
Queen’s also cited a poetry translation exchange as one of their main access programmes. The exchange promised to host events “including an international literature book club, […] international writers visiting Oxford, and a residency for an international writer.”
However, some colleges have spent a consistently high amount on access and outreach. Of the 30 undergraduate colleges, Christ Church and Wadham have budgeted the most on outreach for the past three years. Both spent over five times as much as Magdalen in 2017/2018. Pembroke had the third highest level of spending at £217,000.
The majority of colleges are also set to increase their access budgets in 2018/2019. Trinity and Magdalen will more than double outreach spending in this period, while Jesus will increase spending by £56,000.
College outreach spending 2017-18
St. Hilda’s is the only college which expects to spend less in 2018/19.
Lord Adonis recently called for radical new access initiatives, encouraging the University to create new colleges for disadvantaged students. Speaking on Cherwell’s findings, Lord Adonis said: “It unfortunately does not surprise me that some Oxford and Cambridge colleges, particularly the richest ones, are not doing enough to ‘widening access’ since there is a deep seated culture of complacency.
“These findings show that incremental change at existing colleges is a limited solution, and we now need a new generation of “access” colleges with an exclusive focus on recruiting disadvantaged young people from the 3000 “non-Oxbridge” schools and colleges.
“This research shows that there is huge scope and resources at Oxford and Cambridge throughout to make this kind of transformational change on access happen – what is needed is the impetus colleges with a dedicated access mission would provide.”
The findings follow comments made by VC Louise Richardson in November 2018. She noted that as colleges are responsible for recruiting students, they should also be responsible for access and outreach initiatives.
These comments were met with frustration by students, including then Mansfield JCR president, Daria Lyskyakova, who said it was the role of the Vice Chancellor to “effectively encourage colleges to prioritise access and allocate their resources in ways which would best aid students in need”.
James Turner, CEO of the Sutton Trust, also spoke on Cherwell’s findings, noting: “Our research has found big variances in the proportion of state school students admitted to different Oxbridge colleges. We want very college to put widening access at the heart of their admissions policies, by investing in the most effective outreach activities and by setting ambitious plans to address social inequalities.
“While committing financial resources is an important part of this – and it is disappointing to see rich colleges spending a lower proportion of their budgets than their peers – what is also important is evaluating the impact of access activities to make sure every penny makes a difference.”
Lucas Bertholdi-Saad, VP Access & Academic Affairs at Oxford SU, added: “It is quite depressing to see such stark figures and the continued inaction to increase access across the University. Colleges should be leading the vanguard on access issues but they are sadly lacking behind.”
A spokesperson for Magdalen college told Cherwell that:“the combined total of Magdalen’s access and outreach including Student Support Fund grants was £456,000. The figure [quoted] of £47,000 for college organised outreach work in that year was lower than intended because of discontinuities in staffing. However, a comparative figure for 2018-2019 is expected to be over £115,000, and an overall spend on Access and Outreach
to be over £550,000.”
A spokesperson from St. Anne’s college said: “St Anne’s College is committed to being a diverse and inclusive community and works hard to encourage and support students from under-represented backgrounds to make successful applications to the University of Oxford.
“As a College with a comparatively small endowment, this work is only possible because of the support of donors and because of other income-generating activities run by the College.
These include our international summer schools, which have proved to be a means by which the College can generate income. No funding has been diverted from UK outreach to undertake international summer schools, which have all more than covered
their costs through charges to participants or by donations given specifically for this purpose.
“St Anne’s has always been and remains proud of its international relationships and we believe that these continue to be vital for our staff and students.”
On occasion where colleges did not provide expenditure for 2017-18, estimates and averages were calculated based on figures from the previous two years.St Hugh’s, Queen’s, Oriel, LMH and New were contacted for comment. Comments received from colleges will be updated online.
* In our printed copy of this article, a spokesperson from St. Anne’s is misquoted with comment that should be attributed to the Sutton Trust. Lord Adonis is also partially misquoted. We apologise for any confusion caused.
