Tuesday 14th October 2025
Blog Page 707

Bringing Doctor Who out of the past

-
0
Bringing Doctor Who out of the past

Regeneration, one of Doctor Who’s most iconic plot ideas, bakes the theme of rebirth in the show’s very DNA, yet it is important to remember that when the show first started back in 1963, this was far from the case.

Just as rebirth – relaunching – is engrained in the show’s 55 year history, so is the challenge that faces each new lead-writer when their time comes to tell the audience what Doctor Who should mean to them.

The difficulty that faced writers in convincing viewers of Patrick Troughton’s second Doctor undoubtedly faced Chibnall in the case of Whittaker’s thirteenth. Although one episode may not have convinced me, I am certainly intrigued, and more importantly excited.

Whilst many aspects of the episode felt distinctly new (at least in the show’s modern history), from the grungier, blue-lit aesthetic to the inclusion of up to four companions, there was much that honored the show’s history. Composer Segun Akinola’s reworking of Ron Grainer’s iconic theme music is a gorgeously deferential new composition. Indeed, his score proved much more evocative of the classic series – with its soundscape of discordant bells and whooshing wind – than Murray Gold’s more bombastic scores ever did.

The episode’s ending, which left our four heroes stranded in deepest space after a botched teleport job, was also wholly reminiscent of the cliffhangers of classic ‘Who’.

It came off as a neat tribute to Tom Baker’s early seasons, where each story would link up with the next through a cliff-hanger. These cliff-hangers usually left our heroes displaced to a new location, and drew on the tradition of the ending of 1963’s first ever episode, ‘An Unearthly Child’.

But tradition aside, the episode had to stand out as an entertaining piece of television in its own right, regardless of the show’s history and the loyalty of its fans.

It ultimately achieved this, even if the true direction of the series seems as-yet obscure. There’s room to explore each of our companions and their worlds further, but we still know little about them.

Ryan (Tosin Cole) proved the most compelling, perhaps because Chibnall gave him the most time to shine; his vlog acted as the structural focal point of the episode, itself a clever play on the expectations of the audience. Grace (Sharon D. Clarke) died early in the episode, but I imagine we will be feeling the repercussions of that particular incident as the series develops over the nine episodes still to come. Yaz (Mandip Gill) was likeable enough, even if the subtler nuances of her character remain to be seen, whilst Bradley Walsh’s Graham provided some well-placed comic relief without risking undermining the tone of the episode as a whole.

Jodie Whittaker’s performance was faultless. She was loveable, funny without being too silly or unbelievable, convincing when it came to the more moralizing lines, and ultimately
engaging in a way that Peter Capaldi’s Doctor struggled to achieve until a good few episodes into his tenure.

Her performance served as the moral and emotional anchor to the episode, fusing together its differing parts into a compelling and cohesive whole. Whittaker so completely filled the shoes of her predecessors that seeing her as the Doctor was unquestionable.

As far as the story is concerned, the data-gathering monster was a nice nod to contemporary anxieties, whilst the tooth-faced antagonist of the piece looked more as if he’d stepped of the set of a Hollywood film than the BBC’s studios in Cardiff…

On the whole, however, the episode was surely a success.

It wasn’t a masterpiece, and not nearly as exciting as Steven Moffatt and Matt Smith’s debut of 2010, ‘The Eleventh Hour’. But it did what it needed to do: portrayed a convincing
and exciting new universe for our new Doctor to inhabit (and made charity shopping for clothes just that little bit more epic too).

Atop a crane over darkest Sheffield, Whittaker’s Doctor describes regeneration as follows: ‘There’s this moment when you’re sure you’re about to die, and then you’re born.’

In the same way. the show has been re-born, reinvigorated before our very eyes.

It’s an exciting time, especially after a period of somewhat sporadic quality and hiatus that marred the latter part of Moffatt’s tenure. Here’s hoping it’ll be a good one.

Interview: OUDS President Francesca Amewudah-Rivers

Cesca Echlin
-
0
Interview: OUDS President Francesca Amewudah-Rivers

It’s 9am on a rather uninspiring, grey Tuesday morning in 0th week. But, as we begin the shoot in St John’s garden, our photographer, Laura, exclaims of our model in her hot orange metallic puffer jacket: “Wow, that’s amazing. As soon as you stepped into the shot the brightness rocketed.”

That’s how best to describe meeting Francesca Amewudah-Rivers for the first time. Her reputation certainly precedes her – as President of OUDS and director of the extremely successful all-BAME production of Medea at the Keble O’Reilly in Trinity, I expected to be intimidated at our first meeting. But Fran (as she is commonly known) has a way of making you feel really comfortable. Whilst she is clearly a talented person, she speaks about the issues we discuss with sensitivity, humility and real compassion.

Firstly, Fran explains how she became OUDS President. As she became more and more involved in the Oxford drama scene in her first and second year, friends began suggesting to her that she apply for the position. Initially, she was wary of the idea, but, reflecting on the problems within Oxford drama, she quickly began to realize how much she wanted to transform things. I am struck by how organic Fran’s path to leadership feels – it was without exaggerated presumption or ambition, but an intense desire to make the change she wanted to see.

An emphasis on access, diversity and representation feels central to Fran’s presidency, and this is a topic she speaks about with passion. Foundations for this kind of change were originally laid when Fran set up Oxford’s BAME Drama Society at the start of her second year with fellow students Riya Rana and Taiwo Oyebola, providing a space for people of colour to develop, explore and encourage dramatic ideas and impulses. From this society came the idea for the all-BAME production of Medea at the O’Reilly, which was met with critical acclaim.

This sensational production coincided with the publication of Oxford’s access statistics. These figures were disappointing to say the least – a shocking fact is that, in 2017, Oxford admitted more students from Westminster School than black students. As such, the representation of BAME people in Medea proved particularly poignant. Fran remembers seeing the effects of Medea, and insists that “the most rewarding thing” about the performances was “seeing diversity in the audience.” She recalls seeing people of colour, utterly enthusiastic, because normally “they’re not seeing their stories on stage.” Medea, with it’s all-BAME cast, references to the Windrush Scandal, and the consistent depiction of its protagonist as the “outsider”, brought into focus narratives that are too often pushed to the wayside when it comes to theatre.

Fran recalls the experience of putting on Medea joyfully, but also describes the feeling of immense pressure in the weeks before the performance. “It was terrifying…. It was literally like the inside of my head being put on stage for everyone to see.” But, the play, she says, took on a life of it’s own: “what was in my head”, she says, “wasn’t what it became. You can only imagine something to a certain extent in your head. That’s what’s so great about theatre.”

I find myself curious to ask her more about herself, and what she plans to do after university. She insists that, after university, she needs “to do what makes (her) happy” and that will not involve a “nine-to-five desk job.” Fran tells me that music is a central passion of hers – it is what she studies at St John’s College, and she used these skills to compose the beautiful music for Medea. Getting into the creative industry is inevitably difficult, and Fran explains the additional barriers for people of colour because, so often, “their parents have not had theatre empires” or perhaps because “most immigrant families don’t have the money to take their family to the theatre.” Thus, again we return to the problem of lack of diversity and representation both on the stage, and, crucially, in the audience.

So, as President, what does Fran want for the future of OUDS, and Oxford drama in general? First and foremost, she insists that “at the end of the day…it’s student theatre. It’s all about having fun… and taking risks.” She points out the potential for Oxford student drama to take itself too seriously, describing a “hierarchy” in the way venues are used. Students focus on a set path, starting with a BT (Burton-Taylor Studio) show and aiming eventually for a Playhouse show. Instead, Fran insists, we should do away with this, and think “what’s the best venue for this project?” Each project should be approached with as much respect and encouragement as the next. Crucially, Fran insists that Oxford drama should be an “inclusive” place, where we appreciate the “many blessings” we have. The drama community at our University should chiefly be “about supporting each other.”

“So what can we do to get more involved and push for change?” I ask her. For freshers, or those new to drama, – “If you want to act, audition for things, if you want to create anything, write. Create your own narratives and put yourself out there… If you really do care about something and want to see it happen, and if you fail or if it’s bad, you’ve learnt from it. You’ve not lost anything.” For those further down the line, and more established in the Oxford drama world, “really think about how you audition” and about making those who audition “feel comfortable.”

As our interview draws to a close, I feel a warm and all-encompassing feeling that can only be described as optimism. If this is the effect of this year’s OUDS President one-to-one, I can’t wait to see more of what she achieves with the full support of Oxford’s dramatic community behind her.

Sign up to the OUDS Newsletter at www.ouds.org

Telethon calling leaves students and alumni cold

Anonymous
-
0
Telethon calling leaves students and alumni cold

The chances are that your college had a telethon this September. This form of fundraising is about as Oxford as punting or sub fusc.

I struggled to understand exactly why colleges with endowments larger than some hedge funds needed even more money, but I signed up anyway. Attempts were made early on to explain why the fundraising was necessary, and they were believable – if it were a poorer college with a smaller endowment. Why exactly colleges like Trinity College, Cambridge needed one, with an endowment of £1.1 billion, I’m not exactly sure. I didn’t question the ethics of it too much though (and I’m a sucker for free food). Telethons are sold to students as their feel-good nostalgia hit of the summer. An opportunity to reminisce with old alumni on their time there, and with any luck bag yourself an internship if they went into the city. The reality is far bleaker. Most evenings are spent essentially cold calling old members of the college, who are either in the pub or in bed.

Needless to say, most of them do not want to talk to you. After a day at work, the last thing people want to hear about are the new bike sheds behind the hall of a college they left 15 years ago. Many are also up to their eye-balls in student debt, so the thought of giving a monthly donation after having forked out over forty thousand on tuition fees already must feel a bit like a slap in the face.

I write not to moan about gripes of a soul-destroying job though, but rather shed some light on the industry that makes this level of fundraising possible. Yes, for all this complaining, telethons are phenomenally successful. They invariably raise six figure totals, and campaigns with targets of a quarter of a million are not uncommon. Not bad for a couple of students with headsets and notepads. Their success is not down to a deep affinity the alumni have for their college. While some loved their time there, many are at best indifferent, and the majority I believe would not give without prompt. Telethons are more than just a prompt, they are a big jab in your side, saying “give us some cash.” They’re the product of cleverly crafted, highly scripted phone calls, which aim to squeeze money out of you, say thank you and then do the same next year.

While the cause is always the college, the entire process is often outsourced to private fundraising companies who sometimes work on a commission basis. They have specially designed software and huge databases of individual’s donation history. Alumni are referred to as ‘prospects’ and commonly ranked by their earning capability and matched with students with similar interests.

Callers are essentially encouraged to bargain and maximise the amount they can get out of an individual. Charity is meant to be an active gesture, an individual showing they care enough about a cause to part with their money.

Telethons use scripts, guilt trips, and a refined formula to achieve this. While they are successful, incessant calling and bargaining can leave alumni with far fewer fond memories of their college.

So regardless of whether you think colleges are causes worthy of giving to, telethons are not the way to give to them. Save on the small talk, cut out the middle man, maximise your gift, and donate straight to the college.

In full: Vice Chancellor’s 90k expenses laid bare

Greg Ritchie
-
1
In full: Vice Chancellor’s 90k expenses laid bare

Oxford University have published the expenses records of Vice Chancellor Louise Richardson on its website, revealing how she has racked up over £90,000 in expenses since her appointment in 2016.

Cherwell analysis of the new data shows that this figure includes almost £25,000 in fees for private drivers escorting the Vice Chancellor to and from events – despite University commitments to refrain from using such transport arrangements.

It follows a widespread media campaign urging for transparency over the full levels of the Vice Chancellor’s remuneration. Richardson has repeatedly defended her pay against this popular backlash, once comparing her £350,000 salary to those of footballers and bankers.

Oxford is believed to be the first university in the UK to publish its vice chancellor’s expenses online in this manner. However, the published records do not divulge the full details and instead categorise individual claims under general headings.

Nonetheless, Freedom of Information (FoI) requests sent and seen by Cherwell do help paint a fuller picture of the expense claims – as well as the as the as yet unpublished records of the University’s Pro Vice Chancellors.

In total, the University has spent just over £92,000 on the vice chancellor’s expenses. The largest portion of this is made up of long-haul flights, for which the Vice Chancellor travels in business class. Over the two and a half years for which there is data, this figure totals at over £48,000, or approximately half of her total expenses.

Another major contributor is the cost of hired cars and drivers. In total, the University has spent approximately £24,000 on personal drivers for the Vice Chancellor since Louise Richardson started the role. Over the months of May and June 2017, driver costs were particularly high, with each month seeing over £2,000 spent.

The University’s website states: “The Vice Chancellor travels by train where possible. In circumstances where the VC is travelling under strict time constraints, is attending numerous business engagements in multiple locations and/or is travelling very late at night or early in the morning, she travels by car.”

The records do show that the Vice Chancellor’s office has made clear efforts to reduce her expenses over the course of her tenure, however, perhaps a result of public and media pressure. Richardson no longer buying first class tickets when travelling on rail. While the current year is not over, it is also likely that 2018 will see less University money spent on personal drivers and the Vice Chancellor’s expenses more generally.

Beyond these main contributors, there are also the smaller peculiarities.

Almost £300 was spent of corporate gifts, with a similar figure being splashed on stationery. Richardson also charged her subscription to Foreign Affairs’ newsletter to the University.

The University also covers Richardson’s quarterly subscription to the Harvard Club, an association for alumni of the American university, coming to around £125 each quarter. The University told Cherwell that this gave access to accommodation and to meeting and hosting facilities below New York market rates, making a net saving.

A Cherwell FoI request also revealed that she spent £1,262 for a stay in the luxury Mandarin Oriental hotel in Hong Kong, while also claiming £145 for a trip to Wimbledon to watch the tennis championships.

An Oxford SU spokesperson told Cherwell: “It is deeply worrying to see such high levels of students money being spent on the expenses of senior management staff. We are seeing worsening conditions for students, from the quality of accommodation to a lack of welfare services but our money is being funnelled into expenses for senior management.”

A University spokesperson told Cherwell: “Oxford University is ranked as the world’s strongest university, generating some £5.8 billion annually for the UK economy. To help deliver this, the Vice Chancellor forges global research and education partnerships, raises funds from international supporters and recruits the outstanding academics and students on whom Oxford depends.

“The demands of keeping the University as a world leader are continual, involving sustained engagement with current potential funders, donors and partners, and extensive worldwide travel.

“These are all legitimate expenses raised in the cause of keeping Oxford in the forefront of the worldwide advancement of learning.”

While there have been extensive investigations into the renumeration of the Vice Chancellor by this paper, there has been little interest in that of the University’s Pro Vice Chancellors.

However, an FoI request seen by Cherwell outlining the corporate credit card statements of the various Pro Vice Chancellors does shed some light.

Pro Vice-Chancellor with specific responsibility for external affairs and development, Professor Nick Rawlins, spent £304.25 over five trips to The Anchor Inn, in an expense listed as ‘Drinking places (alcohol bev.) – bars, taverns, nightclubs’.

In similar fashion, former Pro Vice Chancellor with responsibility for research, Professor Ian Walmsley, spent £144 at Be At One on 2nd December 2016, in a filing again listed under ‘Drinking places’.

When pressed on this, a University spokesperson told Cherwell: “Oxford’s team of Pro Vice Chancellors play an essential role in the University’s global pre-eminent position. Their respective portfolios requirethem to meet and establish partnerships with the world’s leading players in education, in research, in national and international policy-making, as well as with the donors who support our outstanding contribution to understanding and the international economy.

“They all host key guests from their respective fields at Oxford and travel frequently to build the links which a modern, constantly innovating University requires.

“In so doing, they incur expenses which are a legitimate part of their work maintaining and enhancing Oxford’s exceptional academic environment.”

The salaries of the Pro Vice-Chancellors are not published by Oxford. The annual Oxford accounts do give a figure for the total and average remuneration of ‘Key Management Personnel’ – including the PVCs, the Registrar, the Heads of Division, and the Director of Finance, but excluding the Vice Chancellor.

In 2016/17 a total of £2.4m was paid to this group, comprising of 12.5 post-holders.

Union members in vote to trial slate ban

Greg Ritchie
-
0
Union members in vote to trial slate ban

Oxford Union members have voted to abolish electoral slates on a temporary basis for the society’s Hilary and Trinity elections.

The trial period will be followed by a referendum of all members on the issue in Trinity, where it will be decided whether the move should be permanent.

The vote follows a long campaign throughout the last academic year, resulting in feisty exchanges and several inconclusive votes.

Last week’s late debate saw several experienced Union officials, who had benefitted from slates in their campaigns, voting in favour of the trial abolishment.

Anti-slate campaigner, Francesco Galvanetto, told Cherwell: “I’ve been working alongside Ray [Williams, fellow anti-slate campaigner] for a while now, many of us have put a lot of effort into trying to make the union a better place.

“It has been amazing to see those plans turn into reality tonight, the membership’s response to our plans has been fantastic and we cannot wait for the new trial period to begin.

“We believe that removing electoral pacts is the first step to allowing any member to take part in the Union’s administration through their merits and their passion.

“We can’t wait for next term, when such proposals will come into effect and we hope that many members will put forward their names now that unfair advantages to certain candidates have been removed.

“What an honour it was to share the debate with a cabinet minister, and to defeat him as well.”

The government’s Universities Minister, Sam Gyiamah, stayed behind after the annual ‘No Confidence’ debate to watch the procedural motion. Cherwell understands he voted against the abolishment of slates.

At the end of last term, a motion advocating the banning of slates provisionally passed but then failed to acquire the necessary 150 signatures to bind the ruling.

Prior to this, a proposal for debate was rejected on grounds of a ruling that any meeting at the Union can only take place if members have been given a few days’ notice.

From 1998 to 2015, slates and electoral-pacts were officially banned, though pro-slate campaigners make the point that they continued to exist informally regardless.

Vice chancellor says ‘majority’ of UK politicians believe Oxford admissions are unfair

-
0
Vice chancellor says ‘majority’ of UK politicians believe Oxford admissions are unfair

An Oxford University-sponsored public survey shows “most” Westminster politicians believe Oxford’s admissions are “very unfair”, according to Vice-Chancellor Louise Richardson, who disclosed the information during a panel discussion yesterday.

Richardson, speaking at a conference hosted by the University’s Bonavero Institute of Human Rights, said the survey indicated a “broad perception” of “deeply unfair” admissions procedures at Oxford.

She also alleged that it showed “most people” in the north of England believe more than 90% of Oxford students are privately educated. In reality, this group represents 41.8% of Oxford’s 2017 intake.

A spokesperson for the University confirmed the existence of the unpublished survey. During the conference, Richardson audibly questioned whether she “wanted to make this public, since it is so damming.”

On panel, Richardson also said that although “our admissions aren’t nearly as bad as they’re painted, [Oxford admission statistics] reflect the social inequalities outside the University.”  The results of the survey, she claimed, show that “most” UK politicians “don’t trust us [the University] to be fair with our admissions practices and have views of our admissions that are completely contrary to the reality.”

Stating, “this is our fault,” she placed the burden on the University to more effectively communicate Oxford’s admissions practices to the larger community. Improved communication of Oxford’s admissions, Richardson suggested, is both an ethical responsibility in attracting quality candidates and a pragmatic defense against political attacks.

Perception of unfairness in admissions, Richardson argued, “will make it so much easier for politicians to continue to attack us or use us as a whipping boy.” She also suggested that the University needs to “find a way to communicate [Oxford’s admission practices] much more effectively than we have done [in the past].”

Richardson made these comments during a panel discussion on ‘Universities and Illiberalism’, where she sat with five other global leaders in education. The discussion was part of the Bonavero Institute’s conference, ‘Confronting Illiberalism: The role of the Media, Civil Society and Universities,’ for which Secretary Hillary Clinton gave the keynote address.

During the talk, Richardson reiterated her belief in Brexit as a symptom of illiberalism and expressed concerns over it’s effects on the student body at Oxford. She emphasized the unknown but potential impact on the makeup of the student body and internationally-oriented or financed research.

The University have been contacted for further comment on Richardson’s statements.

OUCA introduces Bullingdon ban

Angus Brown
-
2
OUCA introduces Bullingdon ban

The Oxford University Conservative Association (OUCA) has added the Bullingdon Club to a list of “proscribed organisations” at a meeting held at Somerville College this evening.

This means that members of the club will no longer be able to hold any offices within the association.

OUCA’s President, Ben Etty, told Cherwell: “The banning of members of the Bullingdon club from holding office in the association – a club banned by the university and who’s values and activities have no place in the modern Conservative Party – will I hope show that we are moving towards a more open, welcoming, and tolerant environment for all.”

The meeting also saw OUCA adopt a new gender-neutral version of its constitution, in a move which its president said brought it “in line with almost every other university society”, and which he said he hoped “will symbolise our desire to become a more inclusive association”.

The Bullingdon Club is a men’s only dining society founded in 1780. It has become a symbol for Oxford’s excesses and elitism, with the 2014 film The Riot Club taking inspiration from it.

In June 2017, the club was barred from taking its traditional picture on the steps of Christ Church, much to the amusement of onlookers.

A previous attempt to ban Bullingdon members from OUCA came in Hilary term of this year, in the wake of negative coverage of the drunken behaviour of the Association’s members. However, the amendment was voted down by members.

At the time, then president and supporter of the amendment, Timothy Doyle, told Cherwell he believed some members “feared [a ban] would lead to maliciously-targeted prescriptions of student societies to prevent individual members’ holding office”.

Oxford SU backs ‘People’s Vote’ on Brexit deal

Cherwell News
-
1
Oxford SU backs ‘People’s Vote’ on Brexit deal

Oxford SU has passed a motion to back a ‘People’s Vote’ on the final Brexit deal at a meeting of Student Council this evening.

The vote commits Oxford SU to campaign for another referendum on the issue of Brexit and mandates Oxford SU president Joe Inwood to urge the two Oxford MPs to do similar.

Cherwell understands the motion passed with an overwhelming majority.

A ‘People’s Vote’ is the popular term used to describe a second referendum on the issue of Brexit, with the option to reject any proposed Brexit deal in favour of remaining in the European Union.

Proposer of the motion and chair of pro-remain campaign group Our Future Our Choice Oxford, Dominic Brind, told Cherwell: “I’m delighted that the SU has backed a People’s Vote on Brexit. Nearly two thirds of undergraduate students did not get a vote in 2016, and it’s outrageous that they could be denied a vote on an issue of such huge importance for their future.

“It’s become clear since 2016 that the University will be hit hard by by Brexit: the university has sounded the alarm on threats to research funding. Access to the Erasmus programme could be lost, and life will be made much harder for EU national students. So many SU policies on issues which students care deeply about – on air pollution, the NHS, and gender equality, for example – will be affected by Brexit, and it is great to see the SU campaigning for students to have an opportunity to reject a deal that could negatively damage their lives in so many ways.

“I’d encourage everyone to join us marching in London on the 20th October: free coaches will be leaving from Oxford. Let’s take back control of our futures and fight for our voice to be heard.”

 

 

Magdalen unveils new portraits celebrating diversity

-
2
Magdalen unveils new portraits celebrating diversity

Magdalen College has commissioned portraits of 25 of its staff and students to showcase the college’s diversity and “more accurately” represent the college community.

Featuring cooks, cleaners, teachers, and researchers, as well as members of the college’s student body, the new portraits were taken by award-winning photographer Jeremy Sutton-Hibbert and will hang in Magdalen’s hall until autumn 2019.

Of these portraits, half are of women – a stark contrast to before this project, when paintings of Elizabeth I and Elizabeth Fricker (the college’s first female fellow) were the only two portraits of women hanging in hall.

The vast majority of paintings in the college’s hall represent its mainly male founders and historic supporters.

JCR President Calla Randall emphasises that the exhibition aims to strike a “balance between the old and the new” and told the BBC: “I was elected on a mandate to expand the representation of Magdalen’s community in the most important central space.”

She added: “Magdalen’s undergraduates, graduates, and academics came together with the common purpose of ensuring that our portraiture more accurately reflects our community.”

The subjects of these portraits, including many LGBTQ+ and BME members of the college, were selected through an anonymous voting process.

With recent access reports reiterating concerns about diversity at Oxford, the college has opted to house the new portraits in its main hall, where it hopes they will inspired applicants from a diverse range of backgrounds.

JCR Access and Admissions Representative Mia Portman told Cherwell: “Outreach at Magdalen is often about giving prospective applicants a sense of daily life in College – people need to feel welcome and be able to picture themselves living here.

“On that basis, our dining hall should reflect the community of students who eat, chat, and relax there every day; the portrait exhibition achieves this by bringing warmth and immediacy to a very grand, traditional space.”

But Rhodes Must Fall Oxford’s Femi Nylander, though acknowledging that the project is a step in the right direction, has raised issue with the fact that the exhibition is likely to end in a year, suggesting: “Oxford still has a long way to go in terms of diversity and dealing with its own past.”

Council opens new hub to tackle homelessness

Amelia Horn
-
0
Council opens new hub to tackle homelessness

Oxford City Council have opened a new hub to reduce the number of people sleeping rough this winter.

Located at New Road Baptist Church, opposite the Westgate Shopping Centre, the hub is now open as a pilot between 10am and 4pm Monday through Wednesday.

It will provide a space for St Mungo’s, an Oxford-based homeless charity which runs the Oxford Street Population Outreach Team (OxSPOT), to assess the needs of and engage with rough sleepers they are in contact with.

The new hub aims to tackle homelessness in Oxford using a “multi-agency approach”, and will be used by other groups focused on the issue including Aspire, Crisis, and Turning Point. The Council hopes this will speed up the process of moving rough sleepers into accommodation.

The opening of the hub is a response to the cold temperatures of last winter, during which Cherwell reported that Oxford City Council had activated its Severe Weather Emergency Protocol (SWEP) for a total of 31 nights.

The protocol is activated when the Met Office forecasts sub-zero overnight temperatures for three or more consecutive nights, and the Council and charities subsequently provide extra shelter for rough sleepers in the city.

The project is being funded by central government, under its Rough Sleeper Initiative (RSI) Grant, which targets councils with high levels of homelessness. The Council made a successful application for £503,000 for 2018/19, and a further £511,000 for 2019/20 has been provisionally awarded by the government.

Deputy Leader of Oxford City Council, Councillor Linda Smith, said: “Oxford City Council is committed to working with partners to deliver our vision that nobody should have to sleep rough on the streets of Oxford.

“St Mungo’s will be working in the hub with our staff and other services to make sure rough sleepers get the accommodation and support they need to rebuild their lives.

“RSI funding is only temporary, and we need the government to make a commitment to fund desperately-needed services for longer than the next two winters if it is serious about ending homelessness.

“The RSI grant means we’re spending more than £2 million this year tackling rough sleeping, and it will make a real difference. But it is only a start.”

1...706707708...2,526Page 707 of 2,526

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